Model suing after Taiwanese cosmetic surgery clinic’s ad turns into a cruel meme on, claims it ruined her life

Model Heidi Yeh posed for this image which was to be used in an ad campaign for a cosmetic surgery clinic. However, an internet user gave it a different caption and turned it into a meme which spread like wildfire

Daily Mail UK (by Siofra Brennan):

A model who starred in an advert for plastic surgery says her life has been ruined after her image was turned into a notorious internet meme that went global.

Heidi Yeh, from Taiwan, is suing the clinic for damages after she posed alongside a male model as the beautiful parents of three aesthetically-challenged children. Their features were digitally altered to make their eyes look small and their noses flat, and the original caption read: ‘The only thing you’ll ever have to worry about is how to explain it to the kids.’

However, the photo made its way onto the internet where it was turned into a meme with the caption, ‘Plastic Surgery: You can’t hide it forever.

In an emotional interview with the BBC’s Cindy Sui, Heidi said that losing control of the image has ruined her career and her personal life.

A boyfriend split up with her because of the constant embarrassing rumors about her, and she had to endure people gossiping about her in the street.

I’ve broken down many times crying and I haven’t been able to sleep,’ she confessed.

The biggest loss for me is I don’t want to be a model anymore. Just because I’m a model, people can hurt me like this and I can’t fight back. I just want to hide.

Heidi, who had previously modeled for fast food chain KFC and Japanese beauty brands, originally posed for the shoot back in 2012.

It was intended to be used as part of a campaign for a Taiwanese cosmetic surgery clinic.

Heidi insists that her modeling agency signed a contract with US-based international advertising agency J Walter Thompson (JWT), stating that the image would only be used by one clinic in Taiwan. The agreement also allegedly ensured that her photograph could only be reproduced in newspapers and magazines. However, JWT subsequently allowed another plastic surgery provider called Simple Beauty to use the image.

They also posted it on their Facebook page, and it quickly spread across the internet. The image was turned into various memes all poking fun at the people featured.

To make matters worse, a Chinese newspaper then used it to illustrate a fake story about a man who became suspicious about his wife’s looks after she gave birth to ugly children. He then discovered she’d had cosmetic surgery before they met and decided to sue her for deceiving him.

When I first heard about this from a friend, I thought it was just a one-off rumor,’ said Ms Yeh.

Then I realised the whole world was spreading it and in different languages. People actually thought it was real. Even my then-boyfriend’s friends would ask about it.

As well as the impact on her personal life, she said her modeling career went downhill because of her notoriety.

People refused to believe that I had never had plastic surgery,’ she said.

Clients would ask me if I was the woman in the picture. After this, I only got small roles in advertisements.’

She says she’s lost around $4million new Taiwan dollars – the equivalent of £80,000 or $150,000 US dollars – in earnings because of the meme. Despite repeated attempts by Heidi and her modeling agency, she only recently managed to get the clinic and JWT to remove the image from their websites.

She says they only acted after she made a threat to sue both companies at a press conference. Now, she’s pressing ahead with her claim and is demanding $5million new Taiwan dollars in damages. However she insists that money is not her priority, and that she just wants people to know the truth about the image.

A spokesperson for JWT told FEMAIL the campaign was created to ‘promote plastic surgery services in a humorous manner.

He said the company own all the rights to the photo including copyright, giving them full rights to edit, modify and use the image.

Our campaign was created for print publication in the Taiwan market. With technology, smart phone cameras and social media, however, even a print ad can go viral,’ he said.

We can’t anticipate what degree an impact it will have, how people will view it, and what they will do with it.’

But Heidi’s lawyer Chang Yu-chi said: ‘

We gave you the copyright and the right to edit it, but we didn’t give you the right to let another company use it, and to use it online.’

Massachusetts dumpling restaurants face off in federal court

WESTON, MA- 01/06/15 --Steamed Pork and chive dumplings For sunday Arts and Cheap Eats (in Food section): pls go to Dumpling Daughter in Weston (globe staff photo :Joanne Rathe section:arts food quick bite reporter: topic: 14cheap)
Steamed pork and chive dumplings from Dumpling Daughter is just one of 41 dishes its owner says a former employee stole for the menu of her restaurant.

There’s a restaurant battle heating up outside Boston.

Nadia Liu Spellman, owner of Dumpling Daughter in Weston, is up in arms over the opening of a restaurant in central Massachusetts that she says is “virtually identical.”

Dumpling Daughter opened in 2014 on Center Street in Weston. In 2015, the suit alleges, two of its employees left and promptly opened their own restaurant, Dumpling Girl, in Millbury.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Boston, accuses Dumpling Girl’s owners “of several civil infractions, including misappropriation of trade secrets, unjust enrichment, trademark infringement, unfair competition, and false advertising,” according to The Boston Globe.

Spellman told the Globe:

“Pretty much everything you see in the restaurant and on the menu, I put together with my mom … It’s a very personal venture for me. It’s not just me, it’s my family — this restaurant carries on my family’s name. This concept, this food we serve, it’s been a longtime dream of mine. So I felt very strongly about it.”

Of the 52 of the items on Dumpling Girl’s menu, “41 are identical or virtually identical to menu items from Dumpling Daughter,” according to legal filings in the case.

The design of the menus is strikingly similar:

Takeout menu at the Dumpling Daughter:

10/07/15: Weston, MA: One side of the takeout menu at the Dumpling Daughter restaurant in Weston Is pictured. (Globe Staff Photo/Jim Davis) section:metro topic:08dumplings

Dumpling Girl’s takeout menu:

A Dumpling Girl employee denied the accusations, telling the Globe: “We are totally different” before hanging up.

Apple’s $930 Million lawsuit against Samsung gets partially reversed

The never-ending saga between Apple and Samsung gets another chapter in its books, as the Korean mobile communications giant has just received a partial reversal on its 2012 lawsuit loss.

For a refresher, back in 2012, Apple sued Samsung over violating intellectual property, resulting in a whopping $930 million USD settlement. During the height of the trial, Apple presented several examples of unregistered trade dress which they claimed Samsung infringed upon for its Galaxy S and Nexus S devices. Trade dress protection applies to design elements that are nonfunctional, with Apple citing examples such as ”a rectangular product with four evenly rounded corners” and “a flat, clear surface covering the front of the product” as instances that were purely just for aesthetics and have no impact on usability for the suit.

However, a Federal Circuit Court of Appeals revisited the trial earlier today and ruled that while Samsung did indeed infringe upon Apple’s design patents, it did not with Apple’s trade dress. According to the court, “the requirement that the unregistered trade dress ‘serves no purpose other than identification’ cannot be reasonably inferred from the evidence.

Therefore, the court has asked for an update on the damages to be awarded, which should come out to around a $382 million USD discount for Samsung.

Lawsuit: Chef at ritzy NY Asian-Fusion restaurant served the worst meat to Asians, routinely referring to them as “sh*t people”

NY Post:

The chef at a three-Michelin-star eatery in Brooklyn dictated that lesser pieces of meat be given to Asian customers and Upper West Siders, a new lawsuit charges.

César Ramirez of Chef’s Table at Brooklyn Fare — which charges a flat $255 per person plus a $50 “service charge” each — was blatant about his biases, according to the suit filed by some of his former sous chefs and servers.

He openly prohibited Asian customers from being placed too close to him at his section of the Downtown Brooklyn restaurant’s chichi counter, routinely referring to them as “s- -t people,” ex-server Emi Howard alleges in the suit.

And when it came time to distribute cuts of meat during the fusion French-Asian meal service, Asians — along with suspected Upper West Siders — were given inferior scraps, while preferred diners were given choice chunks, the suit says.

When a large piece of meat was cut into many pieces for the guests, Defendant Ramirez instructed Ms. Howard to give the worst pieces of meat to the ‘s- -t people,’ i.e. Asian people, and to Upper West Siders,” the suit states.

When an Asian patron was once placed close to Ramirez during one of his culinary cabarets, the chef boiled over with rage at Howard, who is Asian, the document states.

On one occasion, Ms. Howard ‘violated’ Defendant Ramirez’s discriminatory rule by seating Asian individuals close to his spot at the center of kitchen counter,” the suit states.

In response, Defendant Ramirez subjected Ms. Howard to a wild verbal tirade.”

Mr. Ramirez from then on took control of the seating, so that he could ensure that no Asians be sat next to his place.”

Howard and four other former employees also accuse Ramirez and owner Moe Issa of cutting them out of tips and bilking them out of overtime pay.

The plaintiffs claim in the suit that the restaurant automatically charged a 20 percent gratuity for each bill but that servers never saw a dime of those $50 tips.

They also say Issa and Ramirez refused to pay staffers overtime, even when they worked more than 70 hours a week.

Howard and fellow axed staffers Kyle McMahon, Loren Mash and Santos Hernandez are seeking unspecified back pay and damages.

Ramirez refused to comment Monday night.

Issa said in a statement that the restaurant was an equal-opportunity environment.

We pride ourselves on the diversity of our staff,” the statement read. “And we welcome everyone who comes through our doors.”

Link

Samsung looks to Google for help in its latest legal battle with Apple

Engadget:

 

No matter how much we hope and pray, the legal wrangling between Apple and Samsung never seems to end. The latest court battle has Apple seeking up to $2 billion in damages from the Korean manufacturer for infringing on five patents, including tap to search and slide to unlock. This time around though, Samsung is looking to drag Google engineers into the courtroom to testify about the creation of Android — including, potentially, Andy Rubin.

The hope is that their testimony and the evidence they provide would prove once and for all that the mobile operating system was developed independently of iOS and put to bed the back and forth over patent battles.

While Mountain View has successfully stayed above the fray for the most part, it makes sense for Seoul to drag the company into this particular battle. Apple is seeking up to $40 per device sold in royalties — far more than it ever has before. As part of its counter offensive Samsung is countersuing, claiming that Cupertino stole two of its technologies for use in the iPhone and iPad. Like other cases in the war, this will probably take some time to settle. And jury selection starts this week.

 

Check out this link:

Samsung looks to Google for help in its latest legal battle with Apple

Link

M.I.A. caught in legal war with NFL over Super Bowl middle finger

It seems like ages since M.I.A. flashed her middle finger while performing “Give Me All Your Luvin‘” alongside Madonna and Nicki Minaj at the 2012 Super Bowl halftime show. The rapper has been engaged in a legal battle over the incident ever since. For the past 18 months, the NFL has been demanding that M.I.A. pay $1.5 million and issue a public apology after she gave the middle finger and mouthed “I don’t give a shit” during her performance, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

The Hollywood Reporter obtained documents filed at the American Arbitration Association that indicate the NFL pursued legal action to the noisy tune of $1.5 million in damages, arguing M.I.A. allegedly breached her contract with the organization and damaged its reputation. The proceedings were reportedly filed on March 13, 2012 — slightly more than one month after the performance in question.

A hush-hush legal war between M.I.A. and the NFL has therefore been going on for well over a year now. Just last week, lawyers associated with the NFL sought to have the 38-year-old rapper deemed liable, according to THR. If successful, the case will move on to a trial. If the battle gets that far, M.I.A. reportedly plans to make the goings-on more widely known.

M.I.A. still hopes to settle the dispute out of the public spotlight, but her lawyer, Howard King, made it clear that the singer won’t back down if the situation escalates. King mocked the attention the NFL has given to M.I.A.’s actions “in light of the weekly felonies committed by its stars, the bounties placed by coaches on opposing players, the homophobic and racist comments uttered by its players, the complete disregard for the health of players and the premature deaths that have resulted from same, and the raping of public entities ready to sacrifice public funds to attract teams.”

In the wake of the Super Bowl, Madonna called M.I.A.’s move “a teenage thing to do”and said she found it an “irrelevant” action.

Check out this link:

M.I.A. caught in legal war with NFL over Super Bowl middle finger

MIA during the Super Bowl XLVI half-time show