« Fly Pushpin | Home | MP3 USB Car Adapter »
April 28, 2009
Woody Allen v American Apparel: For such a smart guy he sure does some dumb things
No need to dredge up the past here, let's stay focused on the here and now, shall we?
Long story short: Last year he sued American Apparel for using his image on billboards in New York and Los Angeles (above) without permission.
Now comes Stuart Slotnick, a lawyer for American Apparel, promising a "scorched earth" cross-examination of Allen that will lift the rock on Allen's messy past personal life.
Said Slotnick to the Associated Press, "Certainly, our believe 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."
Slotnick's got a point: I must say I see a lot more TV commercials featuring LeBron than ones with Allen.
Of course, you're prolly not gonna see a Woody Allen commercial during ESPN's coverage of the NFL Draft or during the Stanley Cup playoffs.
Jeez, Allen's 73 years old.
Doesn't he realize he's got much better things to do with his remaining time than respond to interrogatories and appear at depositions?
He needs to go to his library and dust off his Voltaire.
If he takes my advice (and why shouldn't he? I'm not using it...) he'll find this wonderful observation from the Frenchman:
"I was never ruined but twice in my life: once, when I lost a lawsuit — and once, when I won one."
I fear Allen's instead taking the path of his geriatric fellow-travelers Carl Icahn and Kirk Kerkorian, in what will inevitably be yet another confirmation of the truth of a Buddhist saying, to wit:
"Those who live by the water, die by the water."
I mean, if Allen hadn't had a hissy fit I'd never have searched Google for a good picture of the billboard that caused the kerfuffle and happened on the far more amusing ad below.
Just like "it's not the crime, it's the cover-up," it's not the act but, rather, the response that makes something like this go viral.
April 28, 2009 at 10:01 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c5dea53ef01156f5fec48970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Woody Allen v American Apparel: For such a smart guy he sure does some dumb things:
Comments
I don't get it. American Apparel are in the wrong and yet their response to the lawsuit is completely shameful. First, they want Woody to provide personal details of "scandals" which is harrassment, then they reverse themselves and say that it wasn't really an advertisement but social commentary and a parody out of adoration. I don't get it. They harrass the man they adore? Dov Charney must have some ego that will allow him to repeatedly harm someone, then take the company through a lawsuit, which I think he will lose on behalf of the shareholders, and all because of ego. Shouldn't the stockholders lose confidence in management?
Posted by: John | May 1, 2009 4:25:55 PM
seems to be that they are doing the abercrombie method of stirring up some controversy. from what i remember they would do something ridiculous and yet for some reason due to the media exposure or for whatever reason their sales go through the roof
Posted by: poopface | Apr 29, 2009 4:39:14 PM
I'm really just not sure what his personal life has to do with someone misappropriating his image.
Posted by: Rocketboy | Apr 29, 2009 11:48:48 AM
Screw American Apparel. They screwed up and are in the wrong, seriously anyone knows not to use an image for a major advertisement without permission.
Weak defense that's completely unrelated to the lawsuit. Besides American Apparel advertises by showing underage looking girls in pornographic shots, Woody Allen is the perfect fit for them! Also, their CEO is a class-A scumbag, I've heard plenty of stories of him sexually harassing employees.
Posted by: cb | Apr 29, 2009 1:09:50 AM
I just read the ABC news "scorched-earth" article, and I can see not wanting to be involved with the advertising of cigarettes, but what's wrong with deodorant? So a deodorant ad can't be "clever, kind of witty or intellectual-style"? Says who? In fact, the more I think about it, a Woody Allen-deodorant connection already has a certain ingenious, ummm, irony? right out of the gate, even before any striving for wit and cleverness. I mean, it could only get better!
Posted by: Flautist | Apr 28, 2009 11:43:56 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.

