In This Section
TV Guide Spotlight
Also on TVGuide.com
|
« Today's News: Our Take
Isaiah "Surprised" By His "Appearance" on Grey's
Isaiah Washington by Craig Sjodin/ABC
You know, the moment I first saw the new promo I sensed trouble. Isaiah Washington, who is currently lensing a movie in New Orleans, reportedly was taken aback to see himself featured (via a newspaper clipping that raises Cristina's barely-there eyebrows) in the spot promoting the May 8 ep of Grey's Anatomy.
Noting that "Isaiah has no plans to go back" to the series, the actor's rep tells TMZ, "We were more than a little surprised that ABC used his likeness in a promo... and indeed advanced his character's storyline." (Dr. Burke is the recipient of an high honor that throws his former fiancée for a loop.) Adds the spokesman, "Mr. Washington's attorney has contacted the Screen Actors Guild and ABC as to the appropriateness of that action."
And just like that, folks, it's spring 2007 again. Let's get commenting! — MWM
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
May 8, 2008 3:28 PM
|
I'm with you, Matt -- I knew when they showed that picture in the promo that we'd hear something from this jackass.
The statement from the rep is hilarious.
"Isaiah has no plans to go back" -- uh, yeah, and the show has no plans to ask him back! The choice isn't really his to make.
"...and indeed advanced his character's storyline" -- talk about straining to put an Isaiah-centric spin on this! I would hardly call that an advancement of his storyline!
If I recall correctly, many shows in the past have used the likenesses of stars after their dismissals. As is often the case with Mr. Washington, I don't believe he has a leg to stand on legally.
|
|
May 8, 2008 3:43 PM
|
|
I do believe there are rules about using an actors likeness that shows are supposed to follow. I could be wrong but normally they have to seek permission from the actor or it could be written into their contract or something. He of course would make a big deal out of this since is he doing anything now? This is his only way to get attention.
|
|
May 8, 2008 4:00 PM
|
|
I can't feature that ABC and the show's producers would not have checked out the legality of this before doing it.
|
|
May 8, 2008 4:06 PM
|
Isaiah Who?
I can't for the life of me remember who this guy is.
|
|
May 8, 2008 4:12 PM
|
|
I think the show was very tacky for using his image. I would be very upset if someone used my image without my permission.
|
|
May 8, 2008 4:14 PM
|
I'm with you, Matt -- I knew when they showed that picture in the promo that we'd hear something from this jackass.
Jackass he may be, but legally he's got a right to be po'd. Trademark attorneys are normally all over this type of stuff when it comes to images of models such as Naomi Campbell or Gisele Bundchen (spelling?) for example. Actors that get written out of soaps typically sign a disclaimer permitting use of their image during flashbacks of other characters' storylines. Use of an image without permission is a HUGE no-no. Somebody at ABC dropped the ball big time on this one!
|
|
May 8, 2008 4:29 PM
|
bur why??
i mean, several shows use old clips from a character that no longer exist just to refresh viewers memory. In Charmed they even had a couple of episodes where you could see S.Doherty even when she was no longer part of the show (when they did time traveling things).
|
|
May 8, 2008 4:52 PM
|
NOT AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!! PLEASE NO!!!!!!!!!!!
Well if shows aren't allowed to advance the storylines of characters THEY created once the actor who originally PORTRAYED them (with a big sum of money attached) is no longer on the show, soap operas are in for some MAJOR legal trouble!
I didn't pay close attention to the promo, but did they actually use his picture or a picture of someone who looks like him? If they used his picture, that'd be the only reason I'd think he might get somewhere with the claim. Otherwise he has nothing.
|
|
May 8, 2008 4:53 PM
|
In Charmed they even had a couple of episodes where you could see S.Doherty
Ugh...no they didn't. When they did flashbacks they only showed the back of her head. She wouldn't let them use her image. Grey's shouldn't be able to use his image especially after what happened. If he was such a harbringer of illwill why would they even want to? It would of been just as easy to talk about him winning the award. After they lied and told him he wouldn't be fired and then fired him why would he give permission to use his image? It must of been already in the original contract.
|
|
May 8, 2008 5:21 PM
|
|
Hey, Isaiah was minding his own business, doing his work, and not bothering anybody. It was The Powers That Be at ABC or Grey's who made this an issue by using his image on air; they could have just as easily had a headline for the mock-newspaper article [and any viewers who didn't know who Dr. Burke was, well, tough luck]. And considering that the Actor's union is currently at the bargaining table with producers and negotiating issues over image & likeness and residuals, Mr. Washington was right to be surprised and to contact his attorney over this.
|
|
May 8, 2008 6:30 PM
|
|
Washington should count his blessings. I hear his performance was much better in that newspaper clipping photo than it was during the entire run of his stint on Bionic Woman.
|
|
May 8, 2008 6:38 PM
|
If a television program could not use or mention a fictional character after the original actor left the program then every soap opera style drama (both day and night) on television would have gone out of business long ago.
The way I understand it is they did not show Mr. Washington but instead the character he played who's image belongs, I would think, to the writers, director and/or production company. I realize some people may say its semantics but Actors are not their charachters,(no matter how method they may be). I will never walk up to Mr. Washington and ask him for pacemaker advice.
|
|
May 8, 2008 6:57 PM
|
The way I understand it is they did not show Mr. Washington but instead the character he played who's image belongs, I would think, to the writers, director and/or production company. I realize some people may say its semantics but Actors are not their charachters,(no matter how method they may be).
I respectfully disagree. I will even go so far as to say you are wrong. This is a copyright issue, even almost a trademark issue. As a performer, it's his face that's being used to portray the character. How many celebrities out there are paid millions of dollars to endorse a product? After the contract is over, the company doesn't have the right to use the person's image ever again. Same applies here. Unless he signed an agreement when he left the show specifically permitting this (as is always done on soap operas when a character is killed off/written out), then he has the right to consult his attorneys and file a suit if he so chooses. I'm really surprised that ABC let this one slip through the cracks, given the previous situation.
|
|
May 8, 2008 7:17 PM
|
Hey, Isaiah was minding his own business, doing his work, and not bothering anybody. It was The Powers That Be at ABC or Grey's who made this an issue by using his image on air; they could have just as easily had a headline for the mock-newspaper article [and any viewers who didn't know who Dr. Burke was, well, tough luck]. And considering that the Actor's union is currently at the bargaining table with producers and negotiating issues over image & likeness and residuals, Mr. Washington was right to be surprised and to contact his attorney over this.
Liz985, I did not read your post before I made mine a couple minutes ago. You are 100% correct.
Regardless of what we all think of Mr. Washington, he's NOT wrong in this situation.
|
|
May 8, 2008 7:21 PM
|
|
|
