This is the problem solutions of Hicks V PGA Tour

Question: please summarize and include

the following;

Judgment:

Issue:

Holding:

General Analysis

Applied Analysis:

4. A group of golf caddies for professional golfers on the PGA Tour sued the Tour for violations of their right of publicity, as well as antitrust and trademark violations. Their claim was based on a requirement that caddies wear \"bibs\" during golf tournaments sponsored by the Tour. These bibs display the name of the golf tournament; the name of the golfer for whom the cad- die works (on the back); and, often, corporate logos. The caddies are not compensated for the publicity they provided or the advertising revenues generated by the logos on the bibs, and because of the bibs they are not able to seek endorsements from companies who might otherwise pay them to wear patches or the like on their shirts. The caddies, however, have been required to wear the bibs for decades by the contracts they all sign with the Tour. Part of the caddies' suit was on a claim that the contracts were voidable due to duress. They alleged that the Tour \"threatened to and attempted to interfere with [the caddies'] business relationships with their respective players and indi- vidual sponsors\" if they would not agree to wear the bibs. The Tour also allegedly \"threatened to or did in fact preclude caddies from working for their golfers [at Tour events] if they refused to\" wear the bibs. The caddies assert that, because they \"lack viable alter- native employment,\" they had no choice but to agree to wear the bibs at the Tour's insistence. Should the caddies be able to avoid the contractual requirement to wear the bibs