Animals are man's best friend.
Lancome – the big French makeup firm – is suing Uma Thurman back, saying that she can't sue them for using old Lancome ads on Asian web sites and Canadian billboards.
Was she being naive when she thought they wouldn't use her face in advertisements online even after her contract with them ended?
I am not sure on what the terms of the contract that they have. For instance, was she licensing her image and endorsement, or just being paid for pictures taken of her. This will be the crux of the argument.
The search for people who can answer your question continues for as long as needed - until you find the answer you were looking for.
When an answer is posted by someone who was invited (byYedda or by yourself) to answer your question, their answer is marked with a yellow "invited by Yedda".
To be invited to answer other people's questions in your areas of knowledge and interest, be sure to list your favorite topics:
» My Settings › My Topics.
Of course, the more helpful your answers are, the more likely you are to be invited to future questions...
I don't think it has to do with her being naive. It all comes down to what the contract says. If Lancome are permitted to use her face after her contract ends then she has no claim and it's her problem she signed the contract. If on the other hand it doesn't state that fact in the contract then Lancome will have to compensate Thurman for using her face without permission.
Got an answer for HarrisF? Would you like to comment on the posted answers, or vote for the one which you think is the best?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
Other people asked questions on similar topics, check out the answers they received:
Other people asked questions on various topics, and are still waiting for answer. Would be great if you can take a sec and answer them
