By now you have probably seen the E-Trade commercial in which the star spokesbaby is e-chatting with his girlfriend and apologizes for not calling last night. His girlfriend then asks him if that "milkaholic" Lindsay was over. Then Lindsay appears and says "Milk-a-what?"
The commercial was first run during the Super Bowl. It can be seen on YouTube here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEXZ2hfD3bU.
Now Lindsay Lohan has sued E-Trade to the tune of $100 Million for profiting of off her persona. Lohan's lawyer, Stephanie Ovadia, says that her client has first name recognition status along with the likes of Oprah and Madonna. Apparently Lohan thinks quite highly of herself, and her lawyer does, too. Here's the Fox News article on the lawsuit: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/03/09/lindsay-lohan-wants-m-e-trade-milkaholic-ad/
That last sentence hints at my take on the case, but here's my analysis. While there is a valid cause of action for using a public personality's likeness without his or her approval for commercial gain, it must be obvious that the advertiser intended for the public to associate the public figure with their portrayal. Here I simply don't get it. I've seen that commercial air at least 10 times, and I haven't once associated it with Lindsay Lohan. I highly doubt the general public associates Lohan with the commercial either.
Sorry, Lindsay Lohan, but the likeness just isn't that obvious if it is even there at all. Furthermore, you just don't have first name status. You are more commonly known as "LiLo". I would even say Britney Spears has a better shot at first name recognition than you do, but if the baby's name was Britney, would she sue over it? I doubt it.
In my expert legal opinion, this case is a bunch of fluff. I don't think Lohan has a chance in this one. Hopefully, E-Trade's legal team will be able to have this thing dismissed quickly before having to spend time and money on it because it simply shouldn't even be filed.
No comments:
Post a Comment