Lindsay Lohan Won't Put Her GTA5 Lawsuit Out Of Its Misery

from the game-not-over dept

Here is something you, the dear Techdirt reader, may not have known about me: I had always thought that there was only one proper spelling for the name “Lindsey.” I’m not sure why I thought that, but I was certain that name was only spelled with an “e” before the “y.” But, it turns out, spelling it as “Lindsay” is a perfectly common and accepted alternate spelling for the name. And the only reason that I now know that is because Linsday, with an “a,” Lohan will not let her lawsuit against Take-Two Interactive — for appropriating her likeness for several characters, which didn’t actually happen — die its final death.

First, a refresher. Lohan decided that a side quest character in Grand Theft Auto 5, which was actually an amalgam of several Hollywood starlet tropes, violated her publicity rights. She also claimed that an entirely different character that was used on some of the game’s marketing and packaging was also her and also violated her publicity rights. The case wove its way through the past half-decade, largely with the court and Take-Two casting narrow eyes at the mountains of paperwork Lohan’s legal team was able to produce while somehow maintaining an inability to come up with claims that were in any way credible, before the court finally tossed the lawsuit entirely. The court at the time made it clear that Take-Two’s characters weren’t direct appropriations of Lohan’s likeness and that the parody amalgam starlet it had created was clearly protected by the First Amendment.

But, for some reason, it appears that LiLo’s legal team was, like, “nuh uh!”

Lindsay Lohan has been granted an appeal in her lawsuit against the maker of the Grand Theft Auto video games. Last year, the Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State tossed the case, stating it was without merit. Her appeal was accepted by the New York Court of Appeals on 16 February.

It must be nice to have the kind of money required to keep the legal team going on a lawsuit that’s been a loser at every turn. Still, it’s perplexing that this lawsuit hasn’t been put out of its misery at this point. The nature of the characters and their status as protected speech seems as clear cut as it gets. And, perhaps more importantly, the character that Lohan is desperate to associate herself with for the purposes of this lawsuit is one that is depicted engaging in sex acts in a public setting and being photographed doing so. I’m struggling to understand why one would want to engage in this kind of legal reach under those circumstances.

Her legal staff should be informing her that it’s time to give this whole thing the Ol’ Yeller treatment. Why they aren’t doing so is beyond me.

Filed Under: , , ,
Companies: take two interactive

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Lindsay Lohan Won't Put Her GTA5 Lawsuit Out Of Its Misery”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
36 Comments
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Catastrophic removal of a likeness

I think it might be better if somebody, anybody appropriated Lindsay (with an a) Lohan’s likeness and did something destructive to it. Not that Lindsay (with an a) hasn’t already done many destructive things with her likeness. Lindsay (with an a) would be better off (well maybe not her bank account) and the world would be better off, (most certainly their bank accounts).

Before Lindsay (with an a) Lohan’s lawyers get all litigious on anyone else, this is an OPINION, no matter how much the target deserves like opinions.

TKnarr (profile) says:

Her legal staff should be informing her that it’s time to give this whole thing the Ol’ Yeller treatment. Why they aren’t doing so is beyond me.

Telling her it’s time to quit would mean the end of their being paid for the case. They’re confident the courts won’t penalize them for aiding in the pursuit of a meritless case, so they won’t put their paychecks at risk.

Anonymous Coward says:

Out of all topics in the world, your notions on spelling and update on Lindsay Lohan?

You’ve reached depths where can be fined for calling yourself a “writer”.

These few lame stories ain’t gonna cut the ketchup. Get out now, Geigner, Techdirt is sinking.

Here’s one infinitely more important off Drudge: GOOGLE SUES UBER OVER DRIVERLESS TECH!!! — OMFG! Masnick’s head is going to explode!

But it’s just another story to ignore. He/you are already busy ignoring that AdRoll this week broke contract with InfoWars specifically to suppress its political opinions. You only support “free speech” that you agree with.

Dark Helmet (profile) says:

Re: Out of all topics in the world, your notions on spelling and update on Lindsay Lohan?

“He/you are already busy ignoring that AdRoll this week broke contract with InfoWars specifically to suppress its political opinions.”

Oh, I see: you’re a crazy person. A crazy person that doesn’t understand what and to whom the First Amendment and free speech protections actually apply. Hint: an ad agency can conduct business with whomever it wants, and it can certainly exclude a bunch of whiny, sycophantic tin-pot wearing conspiracy theorists that cannot even come up with good fake conspiracies and mostly hide under their mother’s bed from its customer roll if it so chooses.

And you’re here WHINING about that in the name of free speech? Dingus, the business has free speech rights to, and not doing business with your favorite bullshit-peddler is one of them. So you’re not only crazy and ignorant, you’re a hypocrite to boot. Go away. I’ll enjoy my “sinking ship”. I’m sure you Ron Paul video to watch or something….

Dark Helmet (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Out of all topics in the world, your notions on spelling and update on Lindsay Lohan?

“as long as they are NOT LGBQT xyz what ever… Right? You are being a Hypocrite Tim. and You are my hero on here.”

What in the sweet hell are you talking about?!??! I’m someone who has screamed to the sky that businesses should be allowed to discriminate against the LGBT community as loudly as I can. I’m in no way a hypocrite on that topic. I’ve even written about in these very pages and addressed why I think they should be allowed to do so, specifically back when Mike Pence was mincing around his state thinking he was being Jesus-y….

I.T. Guy says:

Re: Re: Out of all topics in the world, your notions on spelling and update on Lindsay Lohan?

“I’m sure you Ron Paul video to watch or something”
Calm down there little fellah. [Pictures DH frantically typing on the keyboard to quickly post his childish insults.]

“it can certainly exclude a bunch of whiny, sycophantic tin-pot wearing conspiracy theorists that cannot even come up with good fake conspiracies and mostly hide under their mother’s bed from its customer roll if it so chooses.”

C’mon DH… you had help with this one; Didn’t ya bruh? Is Whatever on the payroll now?

Who hacked the DH account?

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Out of all topics in the world, your notions on spelling and update on Lindsay Lohan?

“Here’s one infinitely more important off Drudge”

“Stop writing what you want to write about on your blog!!!! Write about exactly what I’m reading on other blogs!!! You should not have original ideas, you must copy others!!!!!!!!”

You guys are reliably insane, as ever.

“OMFG! Masnick’s head is going to explode! “

You’re hallucinating again – Masnick did not write this article.

“You only support “free speech” that you agree with.”

The only person opposing free speech is you, whining about how others are exercising it. The article you’re having a breakdown over is actually in defence of free speech, which is under attack from Lohan. So, not only insane but actually living in a different reality. Always entertaining.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

I’m still somebody!!!
Pay attention to me!!!
My whole they made me remove my headscarf makes me a posterchild for muslim intolerance!!!
Oh that didn’t work??
Fire up that lawsuit again!!!

While her entire suit is pretty much meritless, it pretty much sums up the uncontrolled IP rights expansion.
Someone might think this is me, so I have the right to get paid for it.
I have the right to control anything that I imagine has to do with me, despite all of the evidence to the contrary.

Anonymous Coward says:

Compare to Vanna White

I can’t find the Lohan court documents, but there is a distinction between likeness and publicity, as shown in the case of Vanna White.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/White_v._Samsung_Electronics_America,_Inc./En_banc_Opinion

The district judge quite reasonably held that, because Samsung didn’t use White’s name, likeness, voice or signature, it didn’t violate her right of publicity.

Not so, says the panel majority: The California right of publicity can’t possibly be limited to name and likeness. If it were, the majority reasons, a “clever advertising strategist” could avoid using White’s name or likeness but nevertheless remind people of her with impunity,
“effectively eviscerat[ing]” her rights. To prevent this “evisceration,” the panel majority holds that the right of publicity must extend beyond name and likeness, to any “appropriation” of White’s “identity”—anything that “evoke[s]” her personality.

That One Guy (profile) says:

"That's is me, that is absolutely me! ... wait, why are you saying that I would ever do that?!"

And, perhaps more importantly, the character that Lohan is desperate to associate herself with for the purposes of this lawsuit is one that is depicted engaging in sex acts in a public setting and being photographed doing so. I’m struggling to understand why one would want to engage in this kind of legal reach under those circumstances.

The funny thing is, while people may not have associated her with those sorts of things before this lawsuit, after spending years telling the courts how similar the character is with her she really has no grounds to complain if people make that connection now.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...