Woody Allen sues American Apparel for $10 million for using unathorized image

woodyallenbillboardheader.jpg
Hipster anti-sweatshop clothing firm American Apparel is being sued by Woody Allen for billboards advertising their company that feature a photo of Allen dressed as a rabbi in a scene from the 1977 comedy Annie Hall. There was also Hebrew writing on the billboard, and commentor TedSez on Gawker notes that it “means something like ‘The Holy Rabbi,'” and could indicate that American Apparel owner Dov Charney is “praising Allen as the king of the Jews.”

The Jewish Daily Forward confirms that the writing means “der heyliker rebe” or “the holy rebbe,” and contacted American Apparel for comment when the billboards first came out. American Apparel spokesperson Alex Spunt said it meant that “Woody Allen is our spiritual leader.”

You can’t heap praise on Woody Allen and expect him to give you a free pass to use his image for advertising, and he’s predictably taking the firm to court over it:

woodyallenbillboard1.jpg

Woody Allen on Monday sued American Apparel Inc, claiming the U.S. clothing company used his image in advertising on billboards and the Internet without his consent.

The billboard ads, which depict Allen dressed as a rabbi, appeared in New York and California, according to the suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

Allen, an Oscar-winning U.S. director known for his work in films such as “Annie Hall” and “Crimes and Misdemeanors,” said in the suit he was neither contacted by the company, nor compensated for the use of his image.

“Allen does not engage in the commercial endorsement of products or services in the United States,” according to the lawsuit.

He is seeking damages in excess of $10 million, according to the suit.

[From Reuters]

38 year-old American Apparel founder and CEO Don Charney is a controversial figure and has been taken to court unsuccessfully four times for sexual harassment. He masturbated in front of a reporter for Jane Magazine multiple times, and former employees say that he created a hostile work environment in which he slept with employees and propositioned others. Charney admits having relationships with female employees and defends it by saying it was all consensual. He takes many of the sexy photos for the ads himself and The NY Times reports that he hires women he meets at parties.

Charney sold the company in December, 2006 for $360 million and remains on as CEO. As for how he built such a clothing empire in under ten years, Charney claims that “Everything we do is based on intuition.” And not common sense apparently. Why did they veer so far away from the sexy ads that are their trademark? If they wanted to use an image of a Jewish celebrity, they could have picked Natalie Portman instead. She seems to be a more natural progression.

Thanks to The Jewish Daily Forward for the header image taken in New York’s Lower East Side at Houston and Allen and to Curbed LA for the middle image, taken on Alvarado and Sunset.

American Apparel owner Dov Charney is shown below. Ad below via CherryFlava

americanapparalad.jpg

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

24 Responses to “Woody Allen sues American Apparel for $10 million for using unathorized image”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Kate says:

    I wouldn’t want to be publicly associated with American Apparel, either. I don’t buy their clothes. They’re designed for a very specific body type that I suspect corresponds to Dov Charney’s creepy view of women, and for me, their “we don’t use sweatshops” message is completely undone by the weird sexual politics in that company.

  2. AM says:

    I agree completely with Kate; Don Charney and American Apparel disgust me, and their anti-sweatshop stance is laughable because of their misogynistic and degrading ad campaigns. Come on fellow hipsters, embracing your sexual freedom is awesome and everything, but let’s not support blatantly sexist patriarchal capitalism.

  3. Bodhi says:

    There is an AA store here & they run the most offensive print ads sometimes. They seriously border on full-on porn & there has been kind of a backlash against them. Plus I don’t think I know anyone who can actually fit in those clothes

    And if I were Woddy Allen I’d sue the hell out of them too

  4. Syko says:

    Just the picture of the owner with no shirt and the sock in his tight white jeans is enough to turn me off.

  5. geronimo says:

    I’ve been given quite a lot of sports wear from AA by a friend (some of which is really nice) but had no idea about the sleazebag who runs it. When I had a look at the site online, I was really taken aback by the borderline porn imagery. Shit. In my defence, I didn’t buy it (and I’m not in the US). No wonder Woody’s pissed off.

  6. Anee says:

    I actually like AA tshirts, they are comfy and well made, I own quite a few. But the founder has seriously turned me off, I had no idea. This might explain the smarmy sales people and awful images used to advertise the clothes. I’ve never seen a print ad before now, just the website.

  7. urgh says:

    I like their clothes but I find they are way overpriced, you’re basically paying for the brand name…like, who wants to pay $60 for a frigging plain tank top?
    At first I thought they were kinda cool because of the no sweatshop thing, but I still feel like their ads are degrading. Exploitation is exploitation whether it’s in a sweatshop or in the media.
    Oh and Lauren Phoenix? Way to start off that fabulous “Actress. Director.” career. There’s nothing like starring in a creepy ad that implies you did it with the photographer to get people to take you seriously.

  8. JaeMae says:

    Their clothes are poorly made and are way over-priced if ya ask me!

  9. AC says:

    they’re “over priced” because they dont make their clothes in sweatshopes. Something that made me want to purchase their things but I have never because i don’t want to be associated with the company. I hate the ads (with few exceptions) and the owner is so creepy. That sock ad is gratuitous at BEST.

  10. Breederina says:

    I agree their print ads are skeezy but am I the only one who sees the poetic justice here in Woody
    Allen’s image being co-opted to market a brand known for using underage appearing models in borderline soft core ads?

  11. AC says:

    i do like-though- that he doesn’t always use stick figures. But still … the skeevy porn overtones take away from it.

  12. mollination says:

    The woody allen ad is on “Allen St.”

    Is that an coincidence? I just woke up, so I don’t know.

  13. mollination says:

    *a* coincident. not *an*

  14. Kate says:

    Here’s the thing about their pricing: yes, they don’t use sweatshops. But why do their sizes run so small? That’s the point at which I have an issue with their prices. And I don’t think they’re all that well-made; while tissue-thin fabric is great for layering, it also warps and shrinks really quickly, even when air-dried.

  15. Gia says:

    I thought the image was from the movie “Take the Money and Run”…?

  16. Bellatrix says:

    American Apparel must run very different ads in Europe as I have a rather positive opinion about them.
    Actually, I can only remember ads with girls posing in colourful leggings.
    Very “Benetton of the eighties meets Fame”.

    I must say that I don’t owe many clothes from their range. Only a few pairs of metallic leggings (which I’m very happy with) and a few T-shirts and skirts.

    I’m still trying to see why they would use more shocking and offensive campaings to promote their brand. It would seem more “normal” in Europe to see such ads but we get the soft versions.
    Mmm, very odd publicity strategy.

  17. celebitchy says:

    I googled that Lauren Phoenix chick and she’s a porn star. So I guess we can assume those lip biting photos are authentic, given the CEO’s reputation.

  18. Wow, this guys seems just as sleazy as Woody Allen, they should partner up.

  19. Anonymous says:

    Was there a scandal about one of the owners of AA about getting involved with an under age young girl? I never heard about this brand before only until today were I read on TMZ about this and some of the other bloggers commented on this.

  20. headache says:

    I’ve never seen their ads until today with the exception of internet ones and whenever I clicked on their site there was something off putting about their online catalog that I could never put my finger on. I just felt uncomfortable browsing the site. Now I know why.

  21. Just thinkin' says:

    Woody Allen used the rabbi image in contextual reference. The AA ad not only exploits another artist without permission but is insulting to those who do value the rebbe as a spiritual person. The context is shock at another group’s expense. This is wrong.
    Usually I don’t like Mr. Allen’s personal choices as reported in the news but this time, I think he is
    totally on the mark.

  22. Hi, just wandered by. I have a Benetton website. Amazing the amount of information on the web. Wasn’t exactly what I was looking for, but nice site. Cya later.

  23. I cherished up to you’ll receive performed right here. The sketch is attractive, your authored material stylish. however, you command get bought an shakiness over that you would like be delivering the following. unwell surely come further beforehand again since exactly the same nearly very regularly inside of case you shield this hike.

  24. Alec Buchert says:

    A form of government that has the power to govern without consent of those being governed. Time to register to vote and sign the petition.Need to get a petition to get rid of HB-391 also. I know there are some impatient pens waiting to put a pencil whipping on these dictators. Is’nt that what caused an uprising in other countries? Until all this political abuse of power ends there will be no justice or peace. A few perfect examples of this abuse are :the so called federal raids during a marijuana legislative debate,the msla police chief and this Hb-391 introduced by are prosecutor.Perfect timing for this bill I might add. I know that if any type of marijuana arrest are made We The People need to protest that they be freed and not prosecuted.A civil rights uprising is a good example of the power of the people. What is a shame is I for one went to some of the protest and there were not that many people.But every other car honked in support. Please get out of those cars and stand for this cause.Are We The People going to just honk as a solution.No! WE need a strong uprising! To demonstrate that we are not giong to live under a dictatorship ruling.The laws to protect this country should not be processed like this anymore.A democratic way is what America is about. Americans please stand up and let your voice be heard!