Judge wonders: would more promotion from Paris Hilton have had an impact on Pledge This!’s success?

Reported and written by Home Media Magazine (Chris Tribbey)

A lawsuit against Paris Hilton for allegedly failing to promote a direct-to-DVD release will go forward as planned June 8, after the judge in the case refused to dismiss it May 18.

First filed in August 2008, the suit brought by Miami-based Worldwide Entertainment Group alleged that Hilton broke her contract after she was paid $1 million to appear in the film National Lampoon’s Pledge This and promote it, but failed to do the latter. Vivendi Visual Entertainment distributed the DVD in 2006.

“The record evinces triable issues of fact as to whether Ms. Hilton was unavailable to promote the DVD release of the movie and whether any failure to promote the DVD release prevented a recovery of costs on the film,” U.S. District Judge Federico Moreno wrote in his refusal to dismiss the case against Paris Hilton Entertainment.

In the agreement between Hilton and Worldwide, the hotel heiress was required to perform “reasonable promotion and publicity services, with respect to the Picture subject to Artist’s professional availability.” But the judge wrote that he has been unable “to ascertain whether Ms. Hilton was actually unavailable to fulfill the promotion requests, or if she merely determined to ignore those requests based on personal distaste for the outcome of the film.”

“Assuming Ms. Hilton failed to promote the DVD release of the film, as required by the Agreement, [Worldwide] still must prove that her breach caused damages. The Court concludes that the parties factually dispute the impact of Ms. Hilton’s lack of promotion for the DVD,” the judge concluded.

Lawyers for Worldwide, which is now defunct, claim Hilton’s failure to promote Pledge This cost investors of the film more than $8 million. Original damages sought against Hilton in the Aug. 12, 2008 filing were more than $75,000.

From: admin
Time: May 19, 2009, 8:48 pm

This is crazy! It’s so obvious that it would have had no major impact.

I hope these people don’t think that Paris Hilton = instant major success. This is only a fantasy.

Anyhow, it would be COMPLETELY unfair if she is sued for $8 million.

From: Sabrinia
Time: May 20, 2009, 4:48 am

Enkil, I completely agree with you. I can’t believe the judge didn’t toss the case out. There IS no case. Just b/c she’s “Paris Hilton” does NOT in ANY way guarantee that a project will automatically be successful. Sometimes something just isn’t good enough. And she did promote the crap out of the movie. I am going to be so mad if they find her guilty. They just want to get money out of her and are using her as a scapegoat for a horrible movie. The ONLY reason the movie did bad is b/c it’s not that great of a movie. So dumb. These judges are all so biased against Paris (just like Michael T. Sauer was)…Ridiculous.

From: juju
Time: May 21, 2009, 12:47 am

sorry to say i told you so, but….

the matters before the court are exactly as i described; was there a material breach of contract and if so, what if any damages were caused by the breach. it’s possible to find a breach but no damages. yeah it was a bad movie, but plenty if bad movies make money. so we’ll still have to wait and see if any contract breech on paris’ part is found to be partially or completely the cause. of any or all of the monetary loss. In which case, she’d be liable for that money.

paris really needs to begin taking legal issues seriously. what she thinks isn’t important. what is important is what the law is. and what a motivated plaintiff can successfully argue.

and after her woefully lacking answers to the earlier procedures, the judge really had no choice but to proceed to trial. again, not about what fans think is “fair.” could end up being another case of paris and her team not really knowing what they are doing when they enter contracts. and yes, the plaintiffs are out for money. it’s a civil case (not criminal, so “guilty” is not a relevent or possible finding in this procedure.) and money damages is what happens in civil suits.

i hope paris beefs up her legal team and wises up about how to anser questions in a legal procedure. playing cute or dumb only works in the movies… no pun intended.

good luck with this.

and paris. please start paying attention to your money. you can’t spend like it’s going out of style, assuming your earning power or money supply will last forever. it won’t.

call dad. now.

From: Dawn
Time: May 24, 2009, 8:30 am

I don’t think Paris is “playing” anything.
Her answers simply reflect her life style.

It would be hard to believe that Paris Hilton refused to promote something, since that’s what she does .
People often accuse her of attention-seeking behavior when, in fact, she is promoting.

It will boil down to what the contract spelled out and how the grey areas in it are interpreted.
We can also be quite certain that any guilty verdict will be appealed.

From: Dawn
Time: May 24, 2009, 8:37 am

P.S.

Please read carefully what the judge wrote –

He lets the case go to trial but it is up to WWE to prove that any failure by Paris to promote caused damages.