It’s been one of the longest ongoing stories 4-One Gaming has ever covered, and while we’ve enjoyed following the story all things eventually have to come to an end. Back in 2014 Lindsay Lohan filed against Grand Theft Auto V publisher Rockstar claiming they had ‘stolen’ her likeness and used it to create the character Lacey Jonas who appears in the game during multiple story missions.
It’s an interesting case and one that has sparked controversy across the gaming world with many fans of the game claiming that the character looks nothing like Lohan despite her desperate attempts to claim that the character is a depicting representation of herself. Lohan also believed that one of the games’ promotional images (as can be seen below) was created using the famous picture of her wearing a pink bikini, holding her mobile phone and making the peace sign as the camera snapped her:
“Lohan argues that defendants purposefully used Lohan’s bikini, shoulder-length blonde hair, jewelry, cell phone, and ‘signature peace sign’ pose’ in one image, and used Lohan’s likeness in another image by appropriating facial features, body type, physical appearance, hair, hat, sunglasses, jean shorts, and loose white top.”
However, Lohan wasn’t the only ‘celebrity’ suing Rockstar under these principles, Mob Wives star Karen Gravano also had an ongoing dispute with Rockstar claiming they had done the same with the character Andrea Bottino who was cast in the game portraying similar circumstances to that of an ongoing real life issue of herself in relation to the reality TV series. Gravano also believe Rockstar used her image, portrait, voice and likeliness to create the character.
Yesterday, the New York Supreme County Court dismissed both cases effectively ruling in Rockstar’s favor despite Rockstar applying to dismiss the case back in March. According to our source, the court did not find evidence damning enough to warrant either of the cases moving forward. More specifically, because Rockstar didn’t actually use either celebrities name, portrait or picture, i.e. they didn’t actually appear in the game.
Furthermore, the court stated that it wouldn’t have made a difference whether the characters were loosely based on Lohan and Gravano because a video game is a work of fiction and therefore falls outside of the statutory definition of “advertising” or “trade”. Meaning that the complaints of their likeness being used to sell the game wouldn’t hold up.