Model Sues Over 'Mad Men' Title Image

[onehandle]

Last edited Mon Mar 4, 2013, 02:25 PM - Edit history (2)

Source: ABC



When millions of viewers tune into the hit drama "Mad Men" each week, one of the first faces they see in the show's iconic, award-winning title sequence is of a top fashion model of the 1950s and 1960s - only for years, she had didn't know it was her image.

Gita Hall, 79, says she had no idea she was part of the iconic title sequence for one of TV's most popular and lauded shows, which has aired on AMC since 2007. "I wished they had had the courtesy to get in touch with me," she told ABC News.

The former model has just filed a law suit with the Los Angeles Superior Court against Lionsgate Entertainment, which distributes the show, claiming her image was ripped off.

"I was surprised because nobody had checked with me about it- they must have thought I was dead," she said.

Read more: http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/model-sues-over-mad-men-title-image-142603008--abc-news-fashion-and-beauty.html

---

If the model signed a release form at the time with the photographer, then she has no case.

If Mad Men did their due diligence, they checked the rights of every third party image used in the credits.

On edit: Where is the image? It must not be the one shown in the article, because I just watched the opening credits five times, with lots of pauses, and could not spot it.

[siligut]

1. She should sue the photographer and ABC for this current picture of her

Could they have taken a less flattering pic?

[loudsue]

3. She looks like a 79 year old woman.

Sorry you think 79 year old women are not attractive enough for you.

[siligut]

4. Please, the expression on her face is unflattering on anyone

Lighten up, I am an old woman myself and not complaining.

[Bluenorthwest]

2. The photographer was Avedon, since his death in 2004 his work is owned and very protected

by the Richard Avedon Foundation. Sorting out who got what permission should be a breeze. People should check out his photos:
http://www.richardavedon.com/#s=0&mi=1&pt=0&pi=1&p=-1&a=-1&at=-1

[AnotherMcIntosh]

5. Where's the harm? How much are the damages?

[snooper2]

6. "she had didn't know it was her image"

:rolf:


Graduated 10th grade? You got the job

[Raine1967]

7. I didn't see the image in the credits either.

Could it be that ABC used another image?

If so, I hope they got permission!

[SemperEadem]

8. Did she sign a release back then?

Was an automatic release a part of the contract she signed with Avedon? Did she own the rights to the picture?

The answers to those questions will determine if she's got grounds for a lawsuit.

[Javaman]

9. She doesn't have a leg to stand on.

If she was a model back then and did work for any major publication of any sort, the photographer got a release.

She won't a get dime.

[onenote]

10. Maybe yes. Maybe no.

Sounds like she's pursuing a claim based on a violation of her "right to publicity." That right, as a legal matter, is relatively new. It was first used in the 1950s and only became widely recognized in the 1970s. Its entirely possible that a release form that she signed in the 1950s or 1960s did not contain language that would be considered sufficient to have waived that right. The cases are all over the place. Until the facts come out, its really not possible to know whether she has a case or not.

[cthulu2016]

11. F'ing idiot. (But got her second 15 mintues!)

[Nine]

12. Why? How could you possibly know whether her case has merit? (nt)