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:

[Pants]

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.

Or you could just let talent or fame do its thing...

For the record, I believe that any corporation should be able to hire any ****ing look-a-like they want. It's not Kim's looks that sold Sketchers to fat women, it's the fact that it was Kim endorsing them that did.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Pants

Or you could just let talent or fame do its thing...

For the record, I believe that any corporation should be able to hire any ****ing look-a-like they want. It's not Kim's looks that sold Sketchers to fat women, it's the fact that it was Kim endorsing them that did.

And you went to college?

[Pants]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

And you went to college?

Do you think endorsements work based on looks or the fact that the actual person is endorsing?

Or do you think the general populace can't tell a difference between the actual celebrity and the impersonator?

Maybe I'm just unaware of how good the impersonators are.

Would you buy a red can of soda that said "Koka Kola" on it and tasted like shit or the one that "Coca Cola" and tasted like the actual product you like?

[LoneWolf]

I think it should be required that you actually have talent to claim intellectual property rights. Being an annoying bitch with a fat ass and half a brain isn't a talent. Who gives a shit if Old Navy used a model that looks similar to Kim? They never claimed it was her. I'm ****ing sick of these "celebrities" whose only talent is having enough dumb ass people watch some mindless show about their hollow life. If Kim Kardashian, Paris Hilton, and the like all died tomorrow, the world would be a better place.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Pants

Do you think endorsements work based on looks or the fact that the actual person is endorsing?

Are you ****ing kidding me?

Originally Posted by Pants

Or do you think the general populace can't tell a difference between the actual celebrity and the impersonator?

I think that majority of Americans would watch that commercial and NOT know that it wasn't Kim.

Originally Posted by Pants

Maybe I'm just unaware of how good the impersonators are.

Maybe you're unaware of a lot of things, including but not limited to, intellectual property rights.

Originally Posted by Pants

Would you buy a red can of soda that said "Koka Kola" on it and tasted like shit or the one that "Coca Cola" and tasted like the actual product you like?

Beside the fact that Coco-Cola would file injunction against such a company, that's irrelevant.

You're missing the point here, clearly. There are two "Brands" at stake: The celebrity's brand and the corporation's brand.

If the laws were changed to reflect your stupid ****ing position (which thankfully, they never will be), the images of ANYONE could be used to promote ANY product or corporation.

Now, while that may not matter to you because you're a dumb**** without a brand, it matters to those whose living is based on their brand.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

I think it should be required that you actually have talent to claim intellectual property rights. Being an annoying bitch with a fat ass and half a brain isn't a talent. Who gives a shit if Old Navy used a model that looks similar to Kim? They never claimed it was her.

Good God.

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

I'm ****ing sick of these "celebrities" whose only talent is having enough dumb ass people watch some mindless show about their hollow life. If Kim Kardashian, Paris Hilton, and the like all died tomorrow, the world would be a better place.

So, the United States should change their I.P. laws because apparently, you don't like Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian?

I hope you're neutered.

[Hammock Parties]

The funny thing is that girl is a LOT more attractive than Kim's fat ass.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Good God.



So, the United States should change their I.P. laws because apparently, you don't like Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian?

I hope you're neutered.

I would expect a dumb ****ing prick working in the entertainment industry to stick up for pseudo celebrities. You sure didn't disappoint.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Good God.



So, the United States should change their I.P. laws because apparently, you don't like Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian?

I hope you're neutered.

The U.S. I.P. laws should protect those people with actual talent not every dumbass on television.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

I would expect a dumb ****ing prick working in the entertainment industry to stick up for pseudo celebrities. You sure didn't disappoint.

I couldn't give a rat's ass about either of those bimbos.

Intellectual Property laws exist to protect composers, screenwriters, actors, actresses, musicians, producers and so on.

If you decide to eradicate those laws because of a few bimbos, everyone in the entire business is harmed. Any corporation could use music and the image of anyone famous (or non-famous, for that matter), without paying a penny. Screenplays and TV shows could be ripped off in order to promote a car or a fragrance or kitty litter.

I'm sorry, that's not a world in which I want to live and thankfully, I don't have to, DUMB****.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

The U.S. I.P. laws should protect those people with actual talent not every dumbass on television.

Nice of you to decide who has talent and who doesn't.

Which artist/actors do you currently represent? Which agency are you employed?

[Pants]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Are you ****ing kidding me?



I think that majority of Americans would watch that commercial and NOT know that it wasn't Kim.



Maybe you're unaware of a lot of things, including but not limited to, intellectual property rights.



Beside the fact that Coco-Cola would file injunction against such a company, that's irrelevant.

You're missing the point here, clearly. There are two "Brands" at stake: The celebrity's brand and the corporation's brand.

If the laws were changed to reflect your stupid ****ing position (which thankfully, they never will be), the images of ANYONE could be used to promote ANY product or corporation.

Now, while that may not matter to you because you're a dumb**** without a brand, it matters to those whose living is based on their brand.

I'm aware of IP laws, my dude. You don't need to get all angry. Just because a law has been written doesn't make it a good, just or wise.

I think the image of anyone should be legal to use by any corporation as long the person whose image is being used gets the agreed upon compensation. Now, obviously it's not black and white. An image of something that is unique and iconic, that's a different story altogether.

You and I both know that GAP has used other models in the past. Just because this one happened to look somewhat like a famous person, should not get GAP into legal trouble. Why would you doom Melissa Molinaro's career just because someone who looks like her became famous in the middle of it?

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I couldn't give a rat's ass about either of those bimbos.

Intellectual Property laws exist to protect composers, screenwriters, actors, actresses, musicians, producers and so on.

If you decide to eradicate those laws because of a few bimbos, everyone in the entire business is harmed. Any corporation could use music and the image of anyone famous (or non-famous, for that matter), without paying a penny. Screenplays and TV shows could be ripped off in order to promote a car or a fragrance or kitty litter.

I'm sorry, that's not a world in which I want to live and thankfully, I don't have to, DUMB****.

Who said anything about eradicating those laws? Name one talent that Kim Kardashian has that you can't find on any beach in the U.S. she can't sing, dance, compose, act, play an instrument, or probably read a book.

You are the only person in this thread defending this lawsuit, and its not because your smarter than everyone else.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Pants

I'm aware of IP laws, my dude. You don't need to get all angry. Just because a law has been written doesn't make it a good, just or wise.

I'm still angry with you for threatening to beat me up in the John Goodman thread.

Originally Posted by Pants

I think the image of anyone should be legal to use by any corporation as long the person whose image is being used gets the agreed upon compensation. Now, obviously it's not black and white. Now, the image of something that is unique and iconic, that's a different story altogether.

But that's an entirely different subject altogether. If something is legally licensed, then there are no issues. And it doesn't matter if it's iconic or not: Generally speaking, there are foundations and heirs that control iconic images, whether it's Marilyn Monroe or Humphrey Bogart, etc.

Originally Posted by Pants

You and I both know that GAP has used other models in the past. Just because this one happened to look somewhat like a famous person, should not get GAP into legal trouble. Why would you doom Melissa Molinaro's career just because someone who looks like her became famous in the middle of it?

As I detailed earlier, it was absolutely no coincidence that they cast this girl. Please read my earlier statement.

[Pants]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

Who said anything about eradicating those laws? Name one talent that Kim Kardashian has that you can't find on any beach in the U.S. she can't sing, dance, compose, act, play an instrument, or probably read a book.

You are the only person in this thread defending this lawsuit, and its not because your smarter than everyone else.

Well, it's not really about talent as much as it is about fame. Kim Kardashian's talent is that she is able to draw the attention of millions of women to her TV show. That's the only talent that counts, man. Anyone is welcome to try their hand at what Kim does.