Remember last April when hipster clothing company of dubious employment practices, American Apparel, was sued by filmmaker Woody Allen for using an unauthorized image of a Hasidim-looking Allen from “Annie Hall” on Allen Street (get it? see image) in downtown New York?
They apparently thought it was funny, but the nebbish director thought otherwise and sued the company to the tune of $10 million dollars.
At the time, Allen seemed to be suing because the image was unlicensed and the company had no rights to use it. His lawsuit stated, “Allen does not engage in the commercial endorsement of products or services in the United States.”
But American Apparel are apparently now using a smokescreen argument, claiming the company and ads couldn’t have damaged Allen’s reputation by using his image because the film director has already ruined it himself, according to the AP.
A convenient rebuttal, but Allen is not suing because the ad damaged his reputation. Still, American Apparel is insisting. In what seems like a fairly transparent and desperate attempt to not lose $10 million dollars, the company is apparently dragging the whole Mia Farrow/her then-adopted daughter, Allen’s now-wife Soon-Yi Previn scandal from the early 90s into the mix in what seems like a crystal clear copyright infringement case.
“Woody Allen expects $10 million for use of his image on billboards that were up and down in less than one week. I think Woody Allen overestimates the value of his image,” American Apparel’s lawyer Stuart Slotnick told the AP. “Certainly, our belief is that after the various sex scandals that Woody Allen has been associated with, corporate America’s desire to have Woody Allen endorse their product is not what he may believe it is.”
We’re not lawyers, but this seems like a paper thin argument to us. Good luck with that.
