by Michael dEstries
Categories: Transport
Tags: .

daryl hannah izip

Back in June of 2007, we reported that Daryl Hannah had been spotted riding an iZip Hybrid Electric bike during the L.A. Bicycle Coalition LA River Ride. Digging a bit deeper, it turned out that Hannah had received the bike from Ed Begley Jr. — who couldn’t be at the race due to a cross-country trip in his Prius. Anyways, Begley enjoys a business relationship with Currie Technologies, makers of the iZip, and thought Hannah would love the opportunity to try one. The company agreed, sent her one, and then also allowed her to keep it after the race.

So now Hannah is suing the green bicycle maker for using “her name and photo to promote the product on its website and catalog, wrongly leading potential customers to think that she endorsed the product.”

Really? Didn’t she endorse the product by a.) using it in a race and b.) deciding to keep it when it was offered to her? Is suing an upstart green company like iZip for $1 million dollars in damages the right move here? I understand that people do not want to be misrepresented — but it seems to me that companies promote celebs using their products all the time; even if they only spot them with the swag in paparazzi pics.

What do you think? The offending photo is above.

[UPDATE: Please read our new post on this development here...]

About Michael dEstries

Michael has been blogging since 2005 on issues such as sustainability, renewable energy, philanthropy, and healthy living. He regularly contributes to a slew of publications, as well as consulting with companies looking to make an impact using the web and social media. He lives in Ithaca, NY with his family on an apple farm.

View all posts by Michael dEstries →
  • seeing green

    My guess is that it’s some greedy lawyer looking to cash in. Hopefully Ms. Hannah will come to her senses and stop this nonsense. It’s really a bad reflection on her image as a green celeb!

  • VeggieTart

    Did Begley give her the bike or just loan it to her? If it was a loan, and she was just using it in a race, then she can very well politely ask the company to refrain from using her image.

    But if she’s keeping the bike, well, that’s as good as an endorsement.

    Besides, taking part in a public bicycle ride to promote green transportation is good publicity. Suing an upstart company is bad publicity.

    • http://cyclesantamonica.blogspot.com Cycle Santa Monica!

      I saw one beverage company offer free cans of thier product at event and then asked for them to pose for pictures with the product in their hand or somewher in the picture. It appears that the photographer was instructed to get photos of particular people consuming thier drink (or apparently consuming) their drink, to be used in promotional material. Kind of sly… and indicates that seeing a picture of someone with a particular products does not mean that that person endorsing the product has any virtue to them… they may be merely a kind of paid (or persuaded) actor playing a role for the chance for a free soda… or in the case of hannah the opportunity for a test ride on an electric bicycle.

  • http://www.ecorazzi.com michael

    According to the iZip folks — and this was last year — she kept the bike. So far, as it appears, this is a ridiculous lawsuit.

  • david todd III

    She asked the company to take her image off the product awhile back and they did not do so. Now she is suing. Why is this a problem.

  • jfm77

    She must have too much time on her hands … pretty sad, Hannah. I know it’s been 20 years since splash and the money’s running out, but this is sad.

  • seeing green

    I have not seen her picture on the izip website for months and I check it out all the time to read the news links and see what Ed Begley has been up to.

  • http://www.odograph.com odograph

    They’re lucky she didn’t put on her eyepatch and go down to kick their ass.

    (Seriously, actors own their image and those guys should have respected and licensed that.)

  • Susie

    She does so much good, lets all not be quick to judge her. Her image is hers to do with as she chooses. She should choose who she endorses and why. Did they have a signed agreement to post her image when she accepted the bike? I think they tried to pull a fast one and cash in on her..

  • Pingback: Hannah Lawsuit Shows She’s After Damages AND Profits From iZip // Archives // ecorazzi.com :: the latest in green gossip

  • david todd III

    I agree she does so much good. So why jump on her back so fast? The suit is not about the money… she comes from money. Just because they give her a bike that gives them the right to use her image? It is quite a bit more having a celeb endorse a product than the price tag on that bike. ECORAZZI you sure are jumping on Daryl’s back quickly. Your website knows how much good she does and still you cut her down?

  • http://www.ecorazzi.com michael

    You’re right — Currie appears to be clearly in the wrong here. After reading the lawsuit, the details are much stronger. But I do wish more had been done behind the scenes to come to a resolution before the lawsuit had been filed.

  • http://www.fairgift.co.uk/ Fair Trade

    I suspect that Ms Hannah will drop the lawsuit after she’s utilised the publicity… no publicity is bad publicity.
    I hope she does – it would be bad to think a celeb wanted to kill green initiatives even before they get going.

    • http://cyclesantamonica.blogspot.com Cycle Santa Monica!

      I think you may be right. And I think Currie can also benefit from the free publicity that the story of this lawsuit generates.

  • http://cyclesantamonica.blogspot.com Michael

    From what I understand, this report of her lawsuit is merely regarding Currie inaccurately implying she endorses the Izip bike because she road it and that they gave her the bike to keep. It seems that is a legitimate issue regardless of whether a person is a celeb or not.

    Besides that Currie izip have some design flaws that need their attention, IMHO.

    I encourage Hannah to continue trying out different electric bicycles. And perhaps the issue with the endorsement issue is just merely a misunderstanding and will be resolved out of court without any need for money being changed hands… Perhaps the issue of the lawsuit is actually good for Currie, because it gets them more free publicity..