Clint Eastwood and his representative company, Garrapata, have recently won 6.1 million after the actor and director took a Lithuanian company to court for falsely claiming he endorsed CBD products.
The ninety-one-year-old was not in the slightest bit pleased after a Lithuanian company used his images as well as a fake interview claiming that he endorsed products containing cannabidiol.
So after the news surfaced in 2020, he filed 2 lawsuits against 3 CBD manufacturers, as well as 10 online retailers who were accused of exploiting search results to fit their fabricated narrative.
According to the first suit, Eastwood was seeking to sue for a published article that contained a fake interview as well as photographs of the actor to give the impression that he had consented to it. The article also contained direct "buy" links to the products.
However, after Mediatonas UAB, the company that published the false interview failed to respond to a summons in March, they were forced to face the repercussions.
R. Gary Klausner of United States District Court for the Central District of California, the judge for the case, ruled in favor of Eastwood and Garrapata, stating in the court documents: "Mr. Eastwood has no connection of any kind whatsoever to any CBD products and never gave such an interview."
Not only that but the actor was then awarded $6 million for the use of his name and association as well as $95,000 in attorneys' fees.
The company was also blocked from all future use of his name and likeness.
However, the court did deny the request to sue for defamation, as it requires a deeper investigation into the issue.
"It requires additional context to understand what CBD products are and why a person like Clint Eastwood would not endorse a marijuana-based product," the judge wrote, also adding that the language used in the published piece was not defamatory on the surface.
Later, Jordan Susman, Eastwood's lawyer gave a statement in light of their victory.
"My client is not one to sit idly by as the defendants use his good name to dupe customers into purchasing products with which he has no affiliation," he said. "In pursuing this case, and obtaining this judgment, Mr. Eastwood has again demonstrated a willingness to confront wrongdoing and hold accountable those who try to illegally profit off his name, likeness, and goodwill."