On Mar 9, 2:51=A0pm, "Nurk" wrote:
> Maybe Lohan will sue Lindsay Wagner, who stole the name nefore Lohan was
> born.
>
> ld
> (who writes about kids and knows dozens named "Lindsay.")
>
> "comadrejo" wrote in message
>
> news:comadrejoagua-DE6EB1.09463609032010@news.giganews.com...
>
>
>
> > In article ,
> > "JonesieCat" wrote:
>
> >> "comadrejo" wrote in message
> >>news:comadrejoagua-142ED2.06101409032010@news.giganews.com...
> >> > In article
> >> > <598dfd09-8923-4e4f-84f0-e70b5d83b...@q21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> >> > edonline wrote:
>
> >> >> Ovadia wants to force the spot off the air, claiming Lohan is owed =
$50
> >> >> million in exemplary damages and another $50 million in compensator=
y
> >> >> damages.
>
> >> > They should declare victory if the lawsuit isn't dismiss as frivolou=
s
> >> > in
> >> > the preliminary stages.
>
> >> That may well be. But I gotta admit, I hear "Lindsay" I think "Lohan".
>
> > =A0Ms. Lohan doesn't have a proprietary rights to the name "Lindsay".
> > "Milkaholic" is not libel per quod for "drug festering skany alcoholic"=
.
> > Even if "Lindsay" was intended as an indirect reference to Lindsay
> > Lohan, it has other defenses, mainly parody has some defenses, and
> > Lindsay's constant need for media attention is a bit of implied consent
> > to use her for parody.
>
> > =A0The commercial is stupid, but having the "Lindsay" appear in the
> > commercial eradicates an direct or indirect reference to Lindsay Lohan.
Lindsay Crouse has expressed outrage at the whole controversy... |
