Results tagged “dovcharney”

Last week an anonymous employee of the American Apparel empire spoke out against Dov Charney's lookist views, saying that recently the CEO was demanding staff photos from each branch and firing the uglies. As the anonymous employee told it, he thought it was hurting his bottom line. Meanwhile, another employee agreed with this statement in our comments, saying that the incident didn't even "grasp the magnitude of the company's dehumanizing policies." Soon after, an HR flack seemed to have searched his last name in the company database, replying to his comment with a first name he never revealed, and seemingly scaremongering him into saying that maybe this wasn't true after all. What a deep-v meshed web of confusion that's being weaved in the sweatshop-free company! But now Charney speaks out himself, saying, "At American Apparel, we strive to hire salespeople who have an enthusiasm for fashion and retail and who themselves have good fashion sense. But this does not necessarily mean they have to be physically attractive." Well, he did use Woody Allen on a billboard. [via Gawker]

While it's probably not too unbelievable that American Apparel has a certain aesthetic they like to portray to their legions of customers donning mesh v-necks, it may be more surprising to hear that... actually this isn't that surprising either. According to a Gawker tipster, Dov Charney "is demanding the firing of employees he deems unattractive and thus detrimental" to said aesthetic.

Okay, so this isn't the real Dov Charney, but we're going to assume it's pretty close. The parody was written and directed by UCB's Todd Bieber—be sure to watch the whole video for whispered lexical gems like, "I want you to know that you can trust me, okay?"

Following yesterday's announcement that American Apparel settled the lawsuit Woody Allen filed against them for $5 million, the director now speaks out about Dov Charney & Co. Upon leaving the courthouse yesterday he said, "It's, of course, possible by going through the trial a jury might have awarded me more money, but this is not how I make my living" (the NY Post points out it is, however, more money than Vicky Cristina Barcelona made during it's opening weekend, by about $1.5 million more). He's hoping the big payout will discourage other companies from illegally using his image, even though Charney has insisted he wasn't using him to sell product. While American Apparel's head honcho would like to meet the director on friendlier terms, it's unlikely Allen would ever allow it. He told the press yesterday, "Threats and press leaks by American Apparel designed to smear me did not work, and a scheme to call a long list of witnesses who had absolutely nothing to do with the case was also disallowed by the court. I suspect this dose of legal reality led to their 11th-hour settlement." Aaaaand scene.

Sadly, the world won't see Woody Allen face off with Dov Charney in a courtroom. Not today, at least. American Apparel has posted the following statement on their website: "Today the lawsuit filed against American Apparel by Woody Allen will settle whereby he will receive a $5M payment. The vast majority of this payment will be paid by our insurance carrier who is responsible for the decision to settle this case and has controlled the defense of this case since its inception. Naturally there is some relief of not having to go through a trial but I also harbor a sense of remorse and sadness for not arguing an important issue regarding the First Amendment, particularly the ability of an individual or corporation to invoke the likeness of a public figure in a satiric and social statement."

In Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, The Supreme Court of the United States unanimously proclaimed: "At the heart of the First Amendment is the recognition of the fundamental importance of the free flow of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest and concern. The freedom to speak one's mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty - and thus a good unto itself - but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole. We have therefore been particularly vigilant to ensure that individual expressions of ideas remain free from governmentally imposed sanctions."Of course, using Hustler as an example when you're trying to prove you aren't a barely legal loving perv isn't exactly the way to go (nor is flooding the internet with images like the above), but we do agree with this whole First Amendment thing. However, is it really possible that Mr. Charney was using Woody Allen as a way to draw parallels to his own public image, and not to, like, sell things? It's sort of an outdated comparison, and Charney's mesh tanks aren't exactly on par with cinematic classics like Annie Hall. What do you think?

Chalk one up for Woody Allen, a judge ruled that he doesn't have to justify his opinion that American Apparel ads are "sleazy," the NY Post reports. The company had wanted the director to back up his accusations by identifying specific ads he found distasteful, and as much as we'd love to picture a scenario in which Woody Allen brings in stacks of past Micro-Mesh campaigns into a courtroom, that request was ridiculous. (American Apparel, need we remind you of the 40-foot beaver shot or the giant rape ad?) As such, Manhattan federal Judge Thomas Griesa ruled that Allen has clearly shown "he would not have voluntarily agreed to endorse" the company's products. The case goes to court on May 18th, and last week we received an internal memo from an employee at American Apparel that attempted to express the company's point of view on all this.

Yesterday more court papers were filed for the upcoming American Apparel/Woody Allen showdown, and the NY Post's Cindy Adams thinks it's going to get uglier than a Nylon Spandex Micro-Mesh Bodysuit.

Last year Woody Allen filed a $10 million suit against American Apparel after they used his image (taken from Annie Hall) on their billboards in 2007, explaining at the time that he doesn't promote products in the U.S. This has now pit creepy underage-girl-loving Dov Charney against Allen, who clearly cannot relate to anything remotely, um, unconventional. He is calling the company, amongst other things, "sleazy, adolescent, and infantile," according to the NY Post. The tabloid also reports that yesterday American Apparel verbally retaliated "by demanding records showing whether his 'highly publicized sex scandal and custody battle' involving ex-girlfriend Mia Farrow and her adopted daughter Soon-Yi—Woody's current wife—had affected his earnings." Can there even be any winners in this case? (Besides Rupert Murdoch, of course.)

Last night's episode of Saturday Night Live is not likely to get people talking nearly as much as last week's heavily hyped season premiere that opened with Tina Fey as Sarah Palin. The McCain ticket was again the satirical target of the opening sketch with Darrell Hammond playing McCain as reluctant but desperate to go along with any and all untruthful claims about Barack Obama in his ads, including one that made Charles Barkley the butt of an SNL joke for the second straight week.

Staring down the barrel of a $10 million lawsuit, American Apparel has spoken out about their billboard displaying Woody Allen's image (circa Annie Hall). Chances are the law will find them about as innocent as their barely-dressed teen models.

Last year Woody Allen kicked off the scantily clad teen models usually draped over American Apparel billboards, and seemingly made himself the new face of Dov Charney's clothing empire. In both LA and NYC, his image (taken from Annie Hall) hung above city streets along with Yiddish writing paired up with their logo.

Could American Apparel have a better location for their advertising than the corner of Allen and Houston? Their ads in the location has made some members of the community upset and may have caused The Splasher to return from hibernation. And they have the echo-chamber that is the NY blog community talking about their "racy" ads all the time. Indeed, any publicity is good publicity.

If you like butts and you cannot lie, Allen and Houston might be the place for you. Then again, maybe the butt and legs pictured in American Apparel's new billboard aren't your cup of tea. Astute readers (or LES residents) may remember the "beaver shot" that previously adorned the corner.

Is Dov Charney more than the perverted genius behind American Apparel? Imnotsayin came close to catching the Splasher in action in Williamsburg, when he found what seemed like a freshly pasted Splasher manifesto with paint splashed on it. When he closely inspected the pasted signs, Imnotsayin found that the paint was actually pre-printed on the manifesto and there's an American Apparel ad with a half-naked guy and a paint splash printed onto the poster as well. Here's his theory, which actually makes some sense:

American Apparel IS the Splasher. Their clever marketing department cooked up the original Manifesto and began posting it and splashing prominent Faile, Obey, Banksy, etc works in key AA neighborhoods - the Lower East Side and Williamsburg, knowing it would spark a controversy among hipsters and artists.

Continue reading "Is The Splasher Really American Apparel?"