|
Verdict Creates Instant Millionaire
EFL. For some reason, this never happens to me...Nestle must pay a model $15.6 million for using his image without his consent. It will appeal. Russell Christoff was standing in line at a Home Depot in the spring of 2002 when a woman leaned over and said, "You look like the guy on my coffee jar." Christoff smiled. The Northern California model had been recognized before after appearing in corporate training films and landing a few movie and TV roles. He had even hosted his own program for public television, "Traveling California State Parks." But Christoff had never appeared on a coffee jar — or so he thought until several weeks later. That's when Christoff, shopping for bloody mary mix at a Rite-Aid store, happened to come face to face with himself on a label for Nestle's Taster's Choice. "What am I doing on this jar?" he thought as he looked at the picture of a clearly satisfied coffee drinker peering into his cup. Then he remembered: In 1986, he had posed for a photographer on assignment for Nestle. He was paid a modest amount for his time and assumed that nothing ever came of the two-hour shoot. How wrong he was. Last week, a Los Angeles County Superior Court jury in Glendale ordered Nestle USA to pay Christoff — now a 58-year-old kindergarten teacher in the Bay Area town of Antioch — $15.6 million for using his likeness without his permission and profiting from it. Nestle sold the freeze-dried coffee featuring Christoff's mug on the label for about six years, from 1997 to 2003, in the U.S., Mexico, South Korea, Japan, Israel and Kuwait. The company's Canadian arm used Christoff's image even longer, beginning in 1986. The jurors determined that Glendale-based Nestle should have paid Christoff $330,000 for the use of his likeness. They also voted to hand Christoff damages equal to 5% of the profit from Taster's Choice sales during the six-year period, or $15.3 million. Nestle USA executives declined to comment. Lawrence Heller, the company's lawyer, said the food and beverage giant would appeal the verdict."The employee that pulled the photo thought they had consent to use the picture," Heller said. Excuse me, the ex-employee... Posted by: tu3031 2005-02-02 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=55428 |