Lancome should probably pay but maybe not that much.

Yeah, that's a bit steep, but they should pay her something.

I agree: there's no way she made $20 mil on those photos to begin with! She should be compensated, but not THAT much!!

Accidentally done 4 times? Hmmmmm...

Ordinarily I'd think that was a large amount of money for Uma to ask for, but this is a celebrity endorsement dispute wherein her face and image is of enormous value to both parties. The fact that Lancome sued her first seems a bit odd. Is there a gap in the story, or did I miss the part where it says what Lancome sued Uma for? They obviously aren't denying her claim since their spokesperson says the use of her image was unintentional.

According to Fox News, she was only asking for $1 million, as stated here: "The company asked for a ruling against the actress, who it says is demanding $1 million for unauthorized use of her name and face on Canadian billboards and Asian Web sites after her contract expired."

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008May08/0,4670,UmaThurmanLancome,00.html

Perhaps it is $1 million per incident, but that seems fair enough as salary plus a penalty to Lancome, considering that her contract was expired.

I agree with AParker.

Going by 'any publicity is good publicity', Uma is actually helping them become even more famous! And that too, for free!

Really I don't think she's even pretty,so why would they market her to sell makeup. She's just average.

what she should be suing about is how photoshopped that picture is and how fake her beautiful face looks in this picture...

I think Lancome should pay... before they used the images.... even though it has expired the contract, the use of the image has to be talk about it, she could lose other contracts because of the ilegal use of her image... if they thought before use, maybe it wouldn't have to came to this value.

pywacket, that's actually what Lancome is asking of Uma.

She should be compensated for those images being used after the contract expired, but 20 million is ridiculous. I doubt any judge would award her that much, especially because her original contract couldn't have been more than a million? Plus, I agree with pywacket that it is odd that Lancome preemptively sued her...

the company is wrong. let the courts figure out the amount.

WOW, I've lost respect for Uma Thurman...$20 million is ridiculous! She got paid for taking a few pictures, and so what if they had pictures left over that they reused. That seems fair that they would keep the old pictures and leave them on advertisements until a new spokesmodel takes new ones. I understand that she should get paid SOMETHING, but she's such a sue-happy American, it's disgusting. She wants to get paid the amount of what, five movies??? Yeah, get over yourself!

she should get some money but not as much as she's asking for

I'm on Uma's side.

Okay, I read up on this because some of the details sounded odd to me. I've worked in the cosmetic industry for years and the idea some are proposing that she made way less than she is asking for seemed unlikely. Cosmetics contracts are extraordinarily lucrative and she apparently was making quite a bit. Around $17.8 MILLION DOLLARS between 2000-2004!!!!, the exact amount depending on them month the contract ended.

According to AP/Reuters, her contract stated she was to make $5.8 million per year for 2 years and $3.1 million for each additional year.

They also state that Lancome is not suing in the sense most of us think of. They are suing to have the judge drop her suit against them, which is a common first step in these matters.

These news sites all quote Uma's lawsuit against Lancome as asking for $15 million from Lancome. A lot of money, yes, but in line with what she made from them, especially if her image was used numerous times on several continents as claimed.

P.S. Thanks for the info Bellasugar+!

As if Lancome's only excuse is that they didn't mean to use her image, that's so lame! Regardless, they used it, they should pay, whatever reason is behind it. $20,000,000 is a bit steep though.

A contract is a contract and they had no right to use her image after the contract had expired [period].

Should they be forgiven their "mistake" in using her image? Ah -- No.

She should be paid, but definitely not that much.

Funny thing is ... most pictures taken like this are the property of the company - why shouldn't they be allowed to use them again?

Doll112 has a good point. What if Uma was soliciting other cosmetics endorsement deals following the conclusion of the Lancome contract? These unexpected and unauthorized uses could have derailed other agreements.

I think that Lancome was definitely wrong for doing that. And I certainly don't believe they were "accidents". Please. I doubt that Uma will get the 20 million she's asking for, but she should be compensated.

I agree with emalove. Please, Lancome is a huge company they don't just have accidents. They didn't think they would get caught so they used Uma's ads.

she shd be paid, but not that much...

well i think that her asking price is a little ridiculous, but i think she should be compensated if they were using her face in advertisements...

I highly doubt they were making $20 million of profits from using her image...
She's known, but not that well known throughout the world.

I'm on Uma's side with this one.

I can't decide... I feel like I would need to know more info about what happened before I take a side. It sounds like she should just let it go, but who knows what really happened.

just because she's ASKING for 20 doesn't mean she'll get it-- almost every lawsuit starts with a big price tag b/c claimants sue on every ground they have. the end result is usually a lot more fair and reasonable as the claims that aren't that strong get cut.

It's the principle here that counts. Lancome is a very, very rich company. How do you "accidentally" use someone's image on a billboard ad? While Uma is no poor model off the street, there's a reason why contracts exist in the first place and a big company like Lancome should know better than to "accidentally" abuse a contractual agreement. Besides, if they wanted to continue using her a spokes model, why not just renew her contract? Oh wait, that would cost money and they'd rather just get her endorsement for free.

AllaWallaBalla (cute kitty!) has summed it up well. This is a legal issue and the fact that some people find the amount of money she's asking for offensive, is understandable, but beside the point.

First according to every respected news site on the web (I adore bellasugar, but it's not exactly my go-to site for news), she is asking for around $15 million, which is basically the amount of her four-year contract with Lancome and therefore, a rather obvious starting figure to ask for. This is public record, not conjecture.

Second, Lancome's worldwide revenues in 2005 alone were 2.81 BILLION DOLLARS! That's BILLION with a B. Obviously, Uma's celebrity endoresment generated far more than $20 million.

In our celebrity-obsessed culture, the value of celebrity endorsements can not be overstated. Celebrities are paid exorbitant (to some) amounts of money for their likeness and image because it generates exorbitant amounts of income for the company. Obviously, the company gains much more monetarily than the celebrity or they wouldn't hire celebrities to endorse their products. That's just simple business practice.

While it's ludicrous to think that Lancome accidentally used her image multiple times on several continents after her contract had expired, it is even more ludicrous to think she should "just let it go."

Pywacket is on a roll. Ms. Thurman makes money on her likeness and she has to protect that valuable asset. That includes making sure that she has control over who uses that asset and how much money they're paying to use it.

I see Uma's point, but only because she could lose other contracts because of these photos.
I also think this is a sue high/settle low situation, so I seriously doubt that she is going to actually receive 20 million from this suit.

I see Uma's point, but only because she could lose other contracts because of these photos.
I also think this is a sue high/settle low situation, so I seriously doubt that she is going to actually receive 20 million from this suit.

I think that Lancome and Therman are using each other...

If Uma does happen to win any money, I hope she gives it to charity

It seems like a lot of money, but then, that's what celebs get paid for these things.

If Uma had violated HER part of the contract, you can bet Lancome would have been all over her.

If they accidently used her image four time, they need to pay her.

How does a company like Lancome expect anyone to believe something as big as a billboard could have been an "oversight"??? Please...