Lohan suing E-Trade for $100 million over baby ad


Recommended Posts

http://wonderwall.msn.com/movies/lohan-suing-for-100-million-over-baby-ad-1541882.story?GT1=28135

Lindsay Lohan has filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit over an ad which allegedly used her name and parodied her life for profit.

The "Mean Girls" actress is seeking $100 million in damages and compensation over the commercial for financial firm E-Trade, which depicts a baby girl called Lindsay as a boyfriend stealer and a "milkaholic", reports the New York Post.

The commercial shows a baby boy playing the stock market and apologizing to his girlfriend for not calling

her the night before.

The baby girl then gets suspicious about a rival female baby, referring to her as "that milkaholic Lindsay."

Lohan filed a lawsuit on Monday at Nassau County

Supreme Court over the ad, which debuted during the Super Bowl last month.

The actress' lawyer, Stephanie Ovadia, claims Lohan's first name is just as recognizable as other single-word monikers used by stars such as Madonna and Cher.

Ovadia says, "Many celebrities are known by one name only, and E-Trade is using that knowledge to profit. They used the name Lindsay. They're using her name as a parody of her life. Why didn't they use the name Susan? This is a subliminal message. Everybody's talking about it and saying it's Lindsay Lohan."

The lawyer alleges company bosses used Lohan's "name and characterization" without paying her or asking for her approval, thus violating her rights. Ovadia also insists the company has earned large profits from the promo because it would have been seen by millions of TV viewers watching the Super Bowl.

But chiefs at the advertising firm which created the commercial for E-Trade are dismissing the claims, insisting they chose the name Lindsay at random.

Chris Brown, a spokesperson for the Grey Group, says they "just used a popular baby name that happened to be the name of someone on the account team."

Lohan is seeking $50 million in exemplary damages, as well as $50 million in compensation.

Seriously? Lindsay Lohan is an idiot...I hope this case is dismissed immediately by the Judge. Madonna and Cher are iconic names not only because of the people behind them but because they are not common names. Sorry Lindsay Lohan, but Lindsay is a VERY common name and you can't sue everyone who uses it.

But while they're at it, I think Chris Brown (singer/wifebeater) should sue Chris Brown (Grey Group Spokesperson) for being quoted in this article and possibly confusing people. :)

I have seen this commercial and it wasn't all that funny to me...that is until now. I would never have depicted Lindsay Lohan as the "Linsday" on the commerical. Now I have and that sh*t is funny. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

But if I were Linsday, I would just be happy someone gave me publicity. :yes:

All you gals with the lindsay name'd better change your names or you'll be sued!

You know the worst thing about this is? In this day and age, I wouldn't put it past her if she'd win....

But chiefs at the advertising firm which created the commercial for E-Trade are dismissing the claims, insisting they chose the name Lindsay at random.

Then why add all that other stuff to make it seem like you were talking about Lindsay Lohan?

Some futher info

Internal documents obtained by an Esquire magazine reporter permitted to sit in on the strategy sessions at Grey Group, which produced the spot, reveal creators talked about words to describe a tot named "Deborah." A few weeks later, scribbled notes show "Deborah" scratched out and replaced with "Lindsay," according to Esquire.
Initial descriptions of "Deborah" included "cockadoodle" and "leaking diaper," whereas words written on the same page as Lindsay's name included names like "gutter hound" and "skanky cake," according to the Post.

Info: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35813874

All you gals with the lindsay name'd better change your names or you'll be sued!

You know the worst thing about this is? In this day and age, I wouldn't put it past her if she'd win....

I will not doubt about it, the whole justice system in this country is a joke. If she really win this stupid case I will be laughing at the judges and the whole justice system.

If a person feels that their character, which is their source of income, is being missprepresented, whether you like them or not - they surely have grounds...?

How sad is it that you think "every drunk slut named Lindsay" is a representation of your life? or as the ad implies milk-a-holic overly friendly baby named Lindsay that stayed all night with another's baby-friend?

Then why add all that other stuff to make it seem like you were talking about Lindsay Lohan?

What other stuff?

I will not doubt about it, the whole justice system in this country is a joke. If she really win this stupid case I will be laughing at the judges and the whole justice system.

I would actually not be that surprised if they settle out of court. :)

I'm not sure E*Trade should be the target. They didn't write all that stuff, the ad agency did, they approved the ad, but that doesn't mean they were following the same train of thought or saw the notes. They might have a Lindsay working for them as well, and thought the name was just a funny coincidence. To prove E*Trade did this intentionally and with malice or with intent to harm Lohan will be difficult.

What has that ad done to Lohan that she hasn't done to herself? Will she be suing herself next? Someone should look up "imply" and "infer" in the dictionary. Then that someone should also explain what a dictionary is to Lohan. Then I think all the other Lindsays of the world should sue Lohan for the exact same grounds she's suing.

I heard about this on a radio show on my way to work the other day. The sure fact she thinks cause of the name alone it's her? I guess the milkaholic really hits home :whistle:

Anyway, thats like Apple and their iFail lawsuite over the PODi name including an "i". She needs to get a damn grip and STFU already. :angry:

This is so ridiculous... I can't even imagine. And when I saw the commercial, I never for a second thought of Lindsay Lohan... First, Lindsay is a common name. Second, Lindsay Lohan is NOT anywhere in the class of a Madonna or something. She is NOT recognizable by first name only... lol Third, why is Lindsay Lohan still around? She needs to go away...

hehe, if she won the case, i would expect all the women named lindsay to either sue lohan for portraying their image poorly, or sue lohan for stealing their addiction habits and publicize it without their consent

LMAO!

I'm not sure E*Trade should be the target. They didn't write all that stuff, the ad agency did, they approved the ad, but that doesn't mean they were following the same train of thought or saw the notes. They might have a Lindsay working for them as well, and thought the name was just a funny coincidence. To prove E*Trade did this intentionally and with malice or with intent to harm Lohan will be difficult.

That's an interesting point, but it seems like the buck stops with the company actually doing the advertising... Because they have a larger bank account perhaps? But I don't think I've ever seen a marketing company pulled into something like this...

I'm not sure E*Trade should be the target. They didn't write all that stuff, the ad agency did, they approved the ad, but that doesn't mean they were following the same train of thought or saw the notes. They might have a Lindsay working for them as well, and thought the name was just a funny coincidence. To prove E*Trade did this intentionally and with malice or with intent to harm Lohan will be difficult.

The radio show I heard this on mentioned that supposedly there was a claim that there really is Lindsay on the marketing team...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • After I installed KB5095093, the volume on my ARM laptop won't go above 20%. It's stuck on the hearing protection level, which is pretty much useless if you want to listen to anything. I rolled back.
    • Amazon Prime Day slashes Samsung's newest Galaxy Watch Ultra by 45 percent by Karthik Mudaliar Samsung’s flagship Android smartwatch has received one of its steepest Prime Day cuts. Amazon has dropped the 2025 Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra in Titanium Blue to $357.24, saving buyers around $292 from its $649.99 list price. That's a 45 percent discount (purchase link below). The 47mm Galaxy Watch Ultra uses a titanium casing and a 1.5-inch Super AMOLED display with a resolution of 480 x 480 and peak brightness of 3,000 nits. It includes LTE connectivity, Bluetooth 5.3, Wi-Fi, NFC, and dual-frequency L1+L5 GPS for more accurate outdoor route tracking. The 2025 model has 64GB of storage, a 590mAh battery, sapphire crystal glass, 10ATM water resistance, IP68 protection, and MIL-STD-810H durability testing. Its health and fitness tools include heart rate monitoring, sleep coaching, Energy Score, Running Coach, body composition analysis, temperature sensing, and ECG support, where available. This model is best suited to Android users who regularly run, hike, cycle, or train outdoors and want cellular access without carrying a phone. The larger battery, rugged construction, bright display, and dedicated Quick Button also make it a stronger option than Samsung’s regular Galaxy Watch models for extended workouts and demanding environments. Grab the Titanium Blue Galaxy Watch Ultra before the Prime Day price resets: Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra (2025) [Sold and Shipped by Amazon] Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Google begins rolling out its post-Epic Play Store billing model next week by Karthik Mudaliar Google has confirmed that its redesigned Play Store billing and fee structure will take effect on June 30, 2026, in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Economic Area. The changes will let eligible developers offer their own payment systems or send users to an external website for purchases, while separating Google’s platform service fee from the cost of using Google Play Billing. The rollout puts concrete dates and detailed rate cards behind the broader Android policy overhaul Google announced in March. That announcement followed a proposed settlement with Epic Games intended to resolve their long-running disputes over app distribution and payments, although the U.S. portion of the agreement still requires court approval. Under the new billing choice program, developers selling digital content or services can display an alternative payment option alongside Google Play Billing. They may also direct users to their own websites to complete a purchase. Developers can use Google’s standard payment-choice screen or design one that complies with the company’s user-interface rules. Choosing another payment processor does not eliminate Google’s cut altogether. The company will continue charging a service fee for transactions associated with apps distributed through Google Play, regardless of whether payment is handled by Google, an alternative provider, or a developer’s website. Google argues that this fee covers the value and infrastructure provided by Android and the Play Store. For developers earning up to $1 million annually, the service fee will generally be 10 percent. That rate also applies to auto-renewing subscriptions. When Google Play Billing is used in the U.S., U.K., or EEA, Google will add a separate 5 percent billing fee, and developers processing payments elsewhere will not pay that additional charge. This means Google’s familiar flat 30 percent commission is disappearing, but developers will not necessarily see a dramatic reduction on every transaction. An in-app purchase from an existing user processed through Google Play Billing can still reach a combined 30 percent. The biggest savings are likely to come from subscriptions, smaller developers covered by the $1 million tier, and companies able to move customers to their own payment infrastructure. Google is also offering lower rates through its Apps Experience and revamped Games Level Up programs. Apps and games that satisfy the company’s requirements can qualify for 15 percent service fees on new-install transactions and 20 percent on existing-install transactions. The criteria include performance and reliability standards, support for additional Android device categories, and selected platform features. Those program rates are scheduled to become available in the initial markets and Australia on September 30. For consumers, the immediate effect will depend on whether developers adopt alternative payments and pass any savings on through lower prices. For developers, however, June 30 begins a more flexible but considerably more complicated Play Store economy in which distribution, billing, install dates, revenue thresholds, and program participation can each affect Google’s final cut. Google is also separately developing a Registered App Stores program designed to simplify the installation of qualifying third-party stores. That initiative is expected to arrive with a major Android release later in 2026 and will launch outside the U.S. first. Google says the rest of the world will receive the changes by September 30, 2027, although billing rates for markets outside the US, UK, and EEA have not yet been announced.
    • 38% off a super insane price is still an INSANE price.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      464
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!