Lindsay Lohan: Why is she suing Grand Theft Auto V?

Lindsay Lohan has filed a lawsuit against the makers of the video game, Grand Theft Auto V. What are the grounds for the Lindsay Lohan/"Lacy Jonas" lawsuit?

Lohan: AP, 'Grand Theft Auto 5': PRNewsFoto
Actress Lindsay Lohan (l.) is seen in January. The character Lacey Jonas is pictured in promotional material for the video game 'Grand Theft Auto 5' (r.).

Lindsay Lohan filed a lawsuit in New York on Thursday against the companies that made the popular video game, “Grand Theft Auto V.”

A Hollywood actress, known for early career hits such as “Mean Girls” and “The Parent Trap,” (and more recently for rehab trips and legal problems) Lohan alleges that game makers Take-Two Interactive Software Inc. and Rockstar Games created the character "Lacy Jonas" with an “unequivocal” resemblance to Lohan and her clothing line.

“The portraits of the Plaintiff (Lohan) incorporated her image, likeness, clothing, outfits, Plaintiff’s clothing line products, ensemble in the form of hats, hair style, sunglasses, jean shorts worn by the Plaintiff that were for sale to the public at least two years,” the suit claims.

The suit was filed under the little known “right of publicity” legal doctrine, an evolving statute that prevents unauthorized commercial use of a person’s character traits and likeness, according to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School.

Unlike copyright law, which is written in federal statutes, rights of publicity are state-law based, according to Emily Billig, an attorney who specializes in trademark and copyright law at Ober|Kaler in Maryland. Only half of all American states expressly recognize a right of publicity.

Lohan’s case may constitute trademark infringement as well, as her persona represents a line of goods and services, Billig said.

Her suit comes on the heels of a class-action suit filed by National Football League and National Collegiate Athletic Association players against video games that modeled characters on their height, weight, jersey number, and position on field.

In the past two months, game maker Electronic Arts has settled suits representing thousands of professional and collegiate football and basketball players, according to the Associated Press, and the company agreed to pay $40 million in damages.

Unlike Lohan’s case, the NCAA players are not the typical well-known celebrities who file suits under a right of publicity. 

“This suit was pretty ground-breaking… an outlier,” said Billig. “Usually when someone’s image is used, the person has to be known enough to be profiled for commercial use. But these were students who simply played on a high-profile team,” Billig said.

The NCAA class-action suit shows that the application of the right to publicity can further evolve to encompass non-celebrities. Billig also acknowledged that the high profile lawsuit in the NCAA case might bring larger attention to filing other claims against video game makers.

“I’m not sure that the average person is well-versed in this area… this case might make them them more aware,” Billig said.

Both the Madden sport series and “Grand Theft Auto V” are best-selling video games with perennial sales.

To date, Electronic Arts has sold more than 100 million copies of Madden games, according to CNN. Grand Theft Auto V reported sales of $800 million on its first day and more than 33 million copies sold since then, the AP reported.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.