Woody Allen Goes to Court

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

21

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
22,519
In an interesting 'Freedom of Expression' case, Woody goes to court today as a witness in his $10 million lawsuit against American Apparel, whom he is suing for the unauthorized use of his likeness in an ad campaign, featuring him as the Hasidic Jew in 'Annie Hall.'

The defense is claiming a first amendment right to freedom of expression.
Woody is claiming copyright infringement, and says the ad has damaged his reputation.
The defense says he has none to damaged, and will call Mia and Soon-Yi to prove it.


01_woody3_lgl.jpg


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/15/woody-allens-sex-life-sla_n_187125.html
 
According to TMZ, they just settled the case. Woody gets $5 million.
 
If Tom Waits can get money from Fritos for using a voice impression of him, you'd think it wouldn't take much to argue that stealing your image for commercial use is also not allowed.
 
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-woody-allen19-2009may19,0,639311.story

So basically, American Apparel paid $5 million for massive publicity, using the first amendment as a ridiculous excuse to justify blatant copyright infringement.

Actually, the insurance company--who insisted on the settlement--is paying 85% percent of the settlement, so AA is getting the publicity for almost free.

Sometimes I think the First Amendment needs its own litigators so it can sue every time someone takes its name in vain.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
21 said:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-woody-allen19-2009may19,0,639311.story

So basically, American Apparel paid $5 million for massive publicity, using the first amendment as a ridiculous excuse to justify blatant copyright infringement.

Actually, the insurance company--who insisted on the settlement--is paying 85% percent of the settlement, so AA is getting the publicity for almost free.

Sometimes I think the First Amendment needs its own litigators so it can sue every time someone takes its name in vain.

At this point in time, I think Woody could use the pub more.
 
Football_Bat said:
21 said:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-woody-allen19-2009may19,0,639311.story

So basically, American Apparel paid $5 million for massive publicity, using the first amendment as a ridiculous excuse to justify blatant copyright infringement.

Actually, the insurance company--who insisted on the settlement--is paying 85% percent of the settlement, so AA is getting the publicity for almost free.

Sometimes I think the First Amendment needs its own litigators so it can sue every time someone takes its name in vain.

At this point in time, I think Woody could use the pub more.

I don't know about that. His last movie, Vicky Christina Barcelona, was pretty good and the next one, Whatever Works, starring Larry David looks like it's going to be another critically acclaimed film.
 
dreunc1542 said:
Football_Bat said:
21 said:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-woody-allen19-2009may19,0,639311.story

So basically, American Apparel paid $5 million for massive publicity, using the first amendment as a ridiculous excuse to justify blatant copyright infringement.

Actually, the insurance company--who insisted on the settlement--is paying 85% percent of the settlement, so AA is getting the publicity for almost free.

Sometimes I think the First Amendment needs its own litigators so it can sue every time someone takes its name in vain.

At this point in time, I think Woody could use the pub more.

I don't know about that. His last movie, Vicky Christina Barcelona, was pretty good and the next one, Whatever Works, starring Larry David looks like it's going to be another critically acclaimed film.

Pretty much anything by Woody Allen will be critically acclaimed by default.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top