Kim Kardashian should be on your shit list.

[Hammock Parties]

What a dumb bitch.

http://news-briefs.ew.com/2011/07/21...sues-old-navy/

Kim Kardashian has filed a lawsuit against Old Navy for using a look-alike in a series of ads this past February, reports The Washington Post. Kardashian, who does not have a deal with the national brand, hopes to recover as much as $20 million from the Gap Inc. brand for using Melissa Molinaro as her stand-in, says TMZ. Kardashian issued a statement, saying, “I’ve worked hard to support the products I’m personally involved with and that I believe in.”

UPDATE: In a statement released by Kardashian’s spokesperson, her attorney Gary Hecker affirmed his clients’ right to lodge this suit, saying, “Kim Kardashian is immediately recognizable, and is known for her look and style. Her identity and persona are valuable. When her intellectual property rights are violated, she intends to enforce them.” A spokesperson for Gap Inc. offered “No comment.” Molinaro’s spokesperson has not yet responded to requests for comment.

Girl:

[Donger]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

As I stated earlier, I.P. is a difficult concept at a glance.

I'm so glad that we have lawyers who stand ready to make it clear.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

So what you're saying is, if you happen to be born with the same features as some celeb, then you are immediately ineligible for any high profile modeling gig.

And is that this girl's schtick? A Celebrity Impersonator? Or is she simply just a model that happened to look like Kim K?

Is she running around trying to be Kim K?

If not, then that's a bullshit law.

Like i said, this isn't movies or music. This is someone's face. They didn't choose to born that way, and she shouldn't have to take a back seat to some other woman simply because that woman "claimed that face" first.

If you wanna argue I.P rights on stuff like music, movies or anything else that is designed by someone, fine. But a face? Really? That's silly.

It does seem pretty clear that they intentionally made the gal look like this Kim person. Even the hair style is exactly the same.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Donger

I'm so glad that we have lawyers who stand ready to make it clear.

This is what is so ridiculous about this particular case. The GAP has IP lawyers, as did whichever ad firm that came up with the concept. They didn't care.

There was probably more attention brought to the GAP than if they had hired Kardashian herself and everyone involved knew it.

There are lawyers on every set, regardless of the shoot. Hell, there are lawyers on Ellen!

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Donger

It does seem pretty clear that they intentionally made the gal look like this Kim person. Even the hair style is exactly the same.

Exactly.

This girl would not have been hired had she not looked like Kardashian and to argue otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

[ModSocks]

Originally Posted by Donger

It does seem pretty clear that they intentionally made the gal look like this Kim person. Even the hair style is exactly the same.

Eh.

I understand what you and Dane Are saying, i just don't like it. It seems like it can get out of hand.

There is nothing unique about Kim's look. Her hair, her makeup or even the way she dresses.

How many women have you seen with hair like hers? I've seen plenty. It's pretty common.

[ModSocks]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Exactly.

This girl would not have been hired had she not looked like Kardashian and to argue otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

I guess this is where i have the problem. She naturally looks like Kim. So does that now mean that no company will hire her without risk of being sued?

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Eh.

I understand what you and Dane Are saying, i just don't like it. It seems like it can get out of hand.

There is nothing unique about Kim's look. Her hair, her makeup or even the way she dresses.

How many women have you seen with hair like hers? I've seen plenty. It's pretty common.

I guess. But how many of them are being used by the Gap in commercials?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

I guess this where i have the problem. She naturally looks like Kim. So does that now mean that no company will hire her without risk of being sued?

I'm sorry that you're having difficulty understanding this issue.

This girl would have not have been hired had she not looked like Kardashian. They further made her up as Kardashian in hair and make up.

Are we to believe that the ad agency came up with this idea, pitched it to The GAP and gained approval, given a budget and just accidentally cast a woman with the same exact build, complexion and hair, only to have the makeup and hair people accidentally make her appear even more like Kardashian?

Seriously?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

I guess this is where i have the problem. She naturally looks like Kim. So does that now mean that no company will hire her without risk of being sued?

It's one thing to look like Kim Kardashian.

It's another altogether to hire a actor, whose made up to look identical to a celebrity, and endorse any product.

As I stated earlier, this is why you don't see "Celebrity Look-A-Likes" all over television. It's illegal. Their image is their brand and that image is protected under the laws of the United States (and just about every other country in the world).

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Eh.

I understand what you and Dane Are saying, i just don't like it. It seems like it can get out of hand.

There is nothing unique about Kim's look. Her hair, her makeup or even the way she dresses.

How many women have you seen with hair like hers? I've seen plenty. It's pretty common.

It got out of hand a long time ago. As evidenced by absurd bullshit like this.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Fish

It got out of hand a long time ago. As evidenced by absurd bullshit like this.

So, you believe that any corporation should be able to hire celebrity look-a-likes to endorse their products?

Maybe everyone that creates music or film or is an actor, actress or comedian, anyone in the public spotlight, should pack up, quit and allow their image and art to be used without their consent?

Is that what you want?

That's ****ing absurdly STUPID and I thought you were smarter than this.

[MMXcalibur]

The offspring of Kanye West and Kim Kardashian has to be the dumbest mother****er on the planet.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

So, you believe that any corporation should be able to hire celebrity look-a-likes to endorse their products?

Maybe everyone that creates music or film or is an actor, actress or comedian, anyone in the public spotlight, should pack up, quit and allow their image and art to be used without their consent?

Is that what you want?

That's ****ing absurdly STUPID and I thought you were smarter than this.

I don't see the big deal about music or movies. It's just a stream of ones and zeroes.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Donger

I don't see the big deal about music or movies. It's just a stream of ones and zeroes.

[ModSocks]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

It's one thing to look like Kim Kardashian.

It's another altogether to hire a actor, whose made up to look identical to a celebrity, and endorse any product.

As I stated earlier, this is why you don't see "Celebrity Look-A-Likes" all over television. It's illegal. Their image is their brand and that image is protected under the laws of the United States (and just about every other country in the world).

I understand what you're saying just fine, i just think it's an incredibly fine line to walk. How do we determine now whether or not a woman was hired because people think she looks like (X) actress, or if she was hired because she was the right face for the job?

We're putting I.P rights on faces now.....seems so finicky.

Look at this Girl:



She looks like Kim because of her Hair (which is a style that was introduced by Farrah Fawcett?) her eyeliner (Thick eyeliner is so commonly used by women, like i said, my wife does her eyes the same way) and her god given skin tone.

Just seems crazy to think that the company who produced this video can be sued for basically those three reasons.