Community Chat

[my oh my]

The great grandchildren of Anna Short Harrington, the face of the Aunt Jemima brand, are suing Quaker Oats, their parent company Pepsi Co, and Pinnacle Foods Group for $2 billion.

D.W. Hunter and Larnell Evans, Harrington’s great grandsons, filed the class action suit claiming the companies, who all sell different forms of Aunt Jemima products, have refused to pay an “equitable fair share of royalties” to their family for more than 60 years. Court documents say that Harrington portrayed the character in commercials and other public appearances for 15 years. It also says that Quaker Oats used her pancake recipes and trademarked her likeness as Aunt Jemima in 1937.

Hunter and Evans are accusing the companies of conspiring together to deny Harrington ever worked for them, telling her family that they couldn’t find any pictures or record of her employment. The defendants say they now have the proof they need to prove the companies’ claims to be false, including Harrington’s death certificate that lists Quaker Oats as her employer and an image on file at the United States Patent and Trademark.

The suit also accuses Quaker Oats of using industrial spies to wrongfully take Harrington’s pancake recipes.

PepsiCo has not commented on the suit, according to CNN Money.

http://www.essence.com/2014/08/12/aunt-jemimas-family-sue-quaker-oats-2-billion-royalties?lXFv&xid=...

[NoelSeven]

I hope the family wins. Numerous celebrities have sued because their image and their input was used with no share for them, even after death.

[KathyPet]

Anyone can file a suit and claim anything they want. Whether they can prove their claim in court is another story completely.

[cody2]

I suppose I would need more history on the contract in place to use her likeness on their products. I am a little suspicious as to why this is just coming up after 60 years.

[NoelSeven]

On 11/7/2014 KathyPet said: Anyone can file a suit and claim anything they want. Whether they can prove their claim in court is another story completely.

This claim would be very easy to verify. We all know the image was used, over and over. It would be up to the company to prove they paid for its continuing use, which I suspect they did not.

[raven-blackbird]

On 11/7/2014 NoelSeven said:

On 11/7/2014 KathyPet said: Anyone can file a suit and claim anything they want. Whether they can prove their claim in court is another story completely.

This claim would be very easy to verify. We all know the image was used, over and over. It would be up to the company to prove they paid for its continuing use, which I suspect they did not.

not quite.............since the family is the one that filed the suit........THEY bear the burden of proving she was not paid, that she was an employee and/or she was not paid the agreed amount to use her image.........not the company.........they have the right to refute what is presented as fact/truth, but it's the families burden to prove the case..................................................raven

[brii]

I'm suspect of the family. Why after 60 years?

[NoelSeven]

On 11/7/2014 raven-blackbird said:

On 11/7/2014 NoelSeven said:

On 11/7/2014 KathyPet said: Anyone can file a suit and claim anything they want. Whether they can prove their claim in court is another story completely.

This claim would be very easy to verify. We all know the image was used, over and over. It would be up to the company to prove they paid for its continuing use, which I suspect they did not.

not quite.............since the family is the one that filed the suit........THEY bear the burden of proving she was not paid, that she was an employee and/or she was not paid the agreed amount to use her image.........not the company.........they have the right to refute what is presented as fact/truth, but it's the families burden to prove the case..................................................raven

No, they don't. You can't prove a negative. Her image has been in use for a long time, they obviously haven't paid for that, either.

[scotttie]

Come on. Give the grandchildren some money . I suspect they have at least some merit to their case. Quaker can well afford it.

[brii]

She may have given up her right to use her image or there might have been a one time payment made for that right.