J.Lo Sued Over Video In Flashdance Flap

Jennifer Lopez is being sued for copyright infringement with respect to J.Lo's Spring 2003 music video showcasing her song "I'm Glad." The video depicted scenes from the 1983 movie Flashdance. The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Los Angeles by Maureen Marder, claiming to be the real-life inspiration of the main character in Flashdance, a welder by day and dancer by night. Lopez referred to her video as an "homage" to the film.

"Flashdance owes both its story and its soul to Maureen Marder," said her lawyer, Robert Helfing. Marder allegedly only received $2,300, and has been unwilling to grant sequel rights or permit any further use of her identity or story. The complaint alleges that Marder "conferred at length" with Flashdance screenwriter Joe Eszterhas about her life and provided materials "with the express understanding that it would be included" in the screenplay. It goes on to allege that Paramount Pictures registered a copyright on the movie in 1983 without disclosing Marder's co-authorship.

Marder's lawsuit seeks damages for the music video's alleged unauthorized depiction of her life, for which Lopez did not seek her permission. Marder's lawyer said her lawsuit was to prevent his client again seeing her life depicted on the screen without compensation. He described his client as penniless, disabled with a spinal injury, and trying to raise a teenage daughter. The lawyer claims that Lopez ignored his attempts to resolve the claim without litigation.

Why This Matters: Unauthorized depictions of private figures is always controversial. In this instance, however, one question will ultimately be whether Ms. Marder is a public figure with few rights to control the commercial exploitation of her life. As far as advertising is concerned, this is an interesting case to follow as it relates to tribute ads for public figures who win a race or match or accomplish a record. If Marder has no rights to stop a video made in "homage" to her life, what rights does a celebrity have to stop an advertiser from publishing a one-time congratulatory ad when the celebrity wins an award? In all likelihood, advertisers will never see their rights rise to the level of music videos. Somehow, courts seem to think one is entertainment and the other only the peddling of wares.