Court tosses out Lindsay Lohan’s lawsuit against ‘Grand Theft Auto V’

Court tosses out Lindsay Lohan’s lawsuit against ‘Grand Theft Auto V’

PoliticsSeptember 02, 2016 By Simon Berger

Everyone’s favorite train wreck is back in the news and it’s not for an abusive Greek boyfriend or bumping lines of cocaine up in da club.

Lindsay Lohan’s lawyers are accusing GTA V developer Rockstar Games and parent company Take-Two interactive Software of violating New York’s right-of-publicity law, the Wall Street Journal reports. In short, you can’t use someone’s name, portrait or picture for advertising or trade purposes without having them put some ink on paper.

It’s not hard to imagine how Lindsay’s image could mesh with the image of GTA V, given the abundance of drugs, hookers and domestic abuse in the game. But Lindsay doesn’t care about that stuff. She has her panties in a twist over the use of images on the game box and disc that look exactly like her.  

First Claim:
The first image in question is the “red bikini woman” on the game’s box cover who’s flashing a peace sign. According to the claims, it looks just like Lindsay in a red bikini and the actress has been known to flash the peace sign quite often. Remember Paris Hilton trying to copyright the saying “That's hot?”

As stated in the claim, “The Plaintiff has been using the peace sign hand gesture for years before and after its use in the video game.”

You can’t argue with logic. 

Second Claim:
The second photo in question is the image on the actual game disc showcasing a sexy woman being frisked by an angry police officer. Lawyers argue the photo “capitalized on the use of [Lohan’s] clothes style…by using plaintiff’s fedora, sunglasses, jeans, white shirt, and jewelry.” What’s more, she’s wearing a shirt with the letter “L” “prominently displayed” on it, as well as a skull-shaped letter “O,” which, you know, Lohan.

Again, you can’t argue with logic.

Just when the dots were connecting, lawyers dropped the hammer claiming a celebrity avatar in the game which players must save from the overzealous paparazzi  is a direct depiction of Lindsay and events in the mission “contain identical events to the plaintiff’s life.”

Again, you can’t argue with logic.

Unfortunately, the judge in the case can argue with logic and ruled that none of the bullshit thrown at him was logical or acceptable.

“Even if we accept plaintiffs’ contentions that the video game depictions are close enough to be considered representations of the respective plaintiffs, plaintiffs’ claims should be dismissed because this video game does not fall under the statutory definitions of ‘advertising’ or ‘trade,’” the decision reads. “This video game’s unique story, characters, dialogue, and environment, combined with the player’s ability to choose how to proceed in the game, render it a work of fiction and satire.”

The images in the advertising or trade materials were of the avatar in the game and not Lindsay herself, meaning this case is a done deal.    

Maybe it’s time for Lindsay to go back to making movies.