Charlize Theron sued by well-known watchmaker

Print the article

This entry was posted on 2/7/2007 9:12 AM and is filed under Java Jargon.

The famous actress was sued in a New York court recently for breach of contract and fraud. Raymond Weil entered into an endorsement deal with Ms. Theron, for which she made several million dollars just to wear their watches and other jewelry. Allegedly, she formed other relationships with other jewelers during the term of the contract and simultaneously sported their products as well, in contravention of the contract. I took a look at the suit and I have to say that the language from the agreement itself was extremely restrictive and probably should have included language excusing her from inadvertently donning the jewels of others, likely a common problem among the elite Hollywood set....Should she have to give it all back and then some for allegedly inducing the jeweler to enter into the deal in the first place if she had no intention of construing the contract strictly. Did the public really even notice or care?

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • No trackbacks exist for this entry.
Comments

    • 2/8/2007 2:22 PM Pat wrote:
      I'm generally of the opinion that she should have to give it back, and possibly more. If you're going to sign yourself away for millions of dollars, especially for something as petty as what jewelry you can or cannot don, then you should follow through. It's similar to when Britney Spears had the Coke/Pepsi deal for millions, and was found drinking the competitor's product. If you receive millions of dollars to avoid drinking X, then don't be stupid: just avoid drinking X. As for the public, I don't see why they care about these things anyhow... besides, most of us can't afford Theron's rocks.
      Reply to this
      1. 2/8/2007 2:35 PM Harper Dimmerman wrote:
        so you feel sorry for the company?
        Reply to this
        1. 2/8/2007 3:26 PM Pat wrote:
          It's not so much that I feel sorry for the company; it's just that I'm not about to sympathize with Theron or any other celebrity when they are paid millions to perform a simple task, namely wearing product X and not wearing product Y. It's not as if the restrictive language in the contract were violating any of her 1st amendment rights (I assume at least). So she ought to follow through with the deal.
          Reply to this
          1. 2/8/2007 3:29 PM Harper Dimmerman wrote:
            good point...contracts don't apply because I'm a celebrity type of thing. I'll draw up a contract for you to wear a Harper t-shirt...
            Reply to this
    Leave a comment

     Enter the above security code (required)

     Name

     Email (will not be published)

     Website

    Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.