# Bill Clinton threatens to sue restaurant for showing picture of Chelsea **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 26, 2007, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584 "2007-09-26T19:05:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Mikemike2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikemike2/32/305_2.png) [@Mikemike2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mikemike2)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/1 "2007-09-26T19:05:49Z")
From the Smoking Gun: [Bill Clinton threatens to sue over picture](http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0926071ninos1.html) > [@](#): > > Bill Clinton is threatening legal action against a Manhattan restaurant if it does not immediately yank a photo of the former president’s daughter Chelsea from the eatery’s front window. This seems pretty heavy handed to me. Most celebrities would want to see their photos at cool NYC restaurants. If this is an issue, shouldn’t the letter be coming from Chelsea, who is an adult? Did she not imply permission when she posed for a photo with the restaurant owner? What should the restaurant owner do? I would just ignore the threatening letter, or maybe display it in my window. ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/2 "2007-09-26T19:10:41Z")
I agree that most celebrities would love the publicity but they did not get her permission and so they should not show off the photo. I also agree that it is weird that Bill’s lawyer’s are sending them the letter instead of Chelsea. Maybe she doesn’t have her own lawyer and is using her dad’s but then I would think the letter would say “Counselor to Chelsea Clinton.” ---
**Author:** ![zamboniracer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e9a140/32.png) [@zamboniracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zamboniracer)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/3 "2007-09-26T19:11:17Z")
As Chelsea Clinton is now an adult it seems that her daddy doesn’t have any right to protect her. Chelsea may (or may not) have a case for unlawful use of her image, but her daddy doesn’t have any claim whatsoever, IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![ArizonaTeach](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/45deac/32.png) [@ArizonaTeach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ArizonaTeach)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/4 "2007-09-26T19:25:26Z")
It’s censorship! First Amendment rights! Or something, I don’t know. On the one hand, she’s a private citizen. If she wants the photo taken down, it should be taken down. On the other hand, I have no idea why she called Daddy in on this (if indeed she did). That puts her squarely in the public figure domain, it seems. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/5 "2007-09-26T19:41:28Z")
She’s a public figure, but she’s generally been given a lot of privacy. I suspect the Clintons sent this letter as a way to tell the press ‘you still have to leave her alone.’ ---
**Author:** ![lieu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c2a13f/32.png) [@lieu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lieu)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/6 "2007-09-26T19:50:34Z")
I reckon that pic was taken before she started Chelsea Street Pub. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/7 "2007-09-26T19:56:16Z")
If the pic has been on public display for five years, why the outrage now? ---
**Author:** ![Mikemike2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikemike2/32/305_2.png) [@Mikemike2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mikemike2)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/8 "2007-09-26T20:10:19Z")
I would really hate to get a threatening letter from a former president as the first indication that there is a problem. If Chelsea wanted the photo to be taken down, then how about a polite handwritten note from her making the request? Then if the restaurant owner made a stink about removing the photo, he would be acting like a jerk. As it is the restaurant owner probably has the good fortune of trading a photo of a fading celebrity for a ton of new publicity. ---
**Author:** ![Astroboy14](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/df705f/32.png) [@Astroboy14](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astroboy14)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/9 "2007-09-26T20:32:42Z")
Isn’t there a section of London named after her as well? Where’s the outrage over that, I ask? ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/10 "2007-09-26T20:50:01Z")
_Are_ the children of _ex_ presidents public figures? For example, [Tricia Nixon](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricia_Nixon) has a wikipedia article and her wedding made big news at the time and, as with Abraham Van Buren and Chester A. Arthur, Jr., you’ll find her in a variety of reference books, but she’d have to open fire on Guatemalan orphans or arrange her son’s marriage to Paris Hilton to get any press mention- would she still count as a public figure? ETA that either way, _if this is all there is to the story_ then Clinton’s being a dick. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/11 "2007-09-26T20:52:55Z")
My area of practice is not sending letter of outrage, but I’d appreciate it if any of the Dope barristers could explain to me this language in the letter: **Please confirm this understanding by written, return correspondence.** I’ve read it a couple of times, and I’m not sure who is supposed to understand exactly what, that the recipient of the letter is supposed to confirm. Is **understanding** some sort of “term of art” of which I am unaware? And is TSG (and our esteemed OPer) jumping to conclusions by suggesting that Clinton is threatening legal action? The letter simply says he reserves the right to exercise any and all options available to him. Perhaps he simply intends to fart in the restaurant’s general direction? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/12 "2007-09-26T21:00:43Z")
I think it means that the restaurant owner will agree to take down the picture. IANAL, but I don’t think Clinton has a legal leg to stand on. The picture wasn’t coerced, it isn’t being used as advertising, there is no “Chelsea Clinton loves my food!” statement being made. It’s just a picture of Chelsea and the owner. If I were the owner, I’d have my lawyer send a letter back telling Bill to stick it. Let him sue. See what \*\*that \*\* does to Hillary’s public opinion numbers. ---
**Author:** ![back\_before\_irony](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eb9ed0/32.png) [@back\_before\_irony](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/back_before_irony)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/13 "2007-09-26T21:02:18Z")
To me it’s simple: If I asked for my daughter’s picture to be removed and it was still there 10 seconds later, I would be steamed. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/14 "2007-09-26T21:21:52Z")
Yes, but you wouldn’t have a legal leg to stand on. Especially since she is/was a public figure and agreed to the photo. Be steamed all you want. I t won’t make a bit of difference. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/15 "2007-09-26T21:25:32Z")
She was an adult when the picture was taken, she was aware it was taken, and a willing participant in the shot. If she wants it taken down, she can damn well go over there herself and ask nicely, instead of having Daddy President send a ham fisted threatening letter. Not to mention, this lawyer isn’t even her lawyer, and the letter is not on her letterhead. My response would be first to mention that neither Bill, nor his counsel are authorized to decide for Cheslea whether or not she objects to a picture being displayed. Second, I’d also mention that any future correspondence is going to take the place of the picture in my front window. ---
**Author:** ![An\_Arky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/87869e/32.png) [@An\_Arky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/An_Arky)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/16 "2007-09-26T21:39:20Z")
I have no idea Bill even knows about it. He didn’t sign it. Could it be that Chelsea wanted it taken down, so she used her dad’s lawyer to dash off a lawyer letter? Plus, how do we know that Chelsea’s not going to be Red Lobster’s next spokesperson and wants to clear out any possible conflicts of interest? Without more info, it’s hard to draw any serious conclusions… ---
**Author:** ![Mikemike2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikemike2/32/305_2.png) [@Mikemike2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mikemike2)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/17 "2007-09-26T21:41:28Z")
[QUOTE=Dinsdale] And is TSG (and our esteemed OPer) jumping to conclusions by suggesting that Clinton is threatening legal action? The letter simply says he reserves the right to exercise any and all options available to him. Perhaps he simply intends to fart in the restaurant’s general direction? 😉 [/QUOTE] Cool, I’ve never been esteemed on the Dope before. 🙂 I don’t know about you, but if I get a letter from an expensive law firm indicating that if I don’t comply, they will (possibly) exercise all options available to them, I’m thinking - this is a legal threat. Not to mention the cost of defending myself if the next letter is a supeona or some such. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/18 "2007-09-26T21:43:09Z")
[QUOTE=Mikemike2] Not to mention the cost of defending myself if the next letter is a supeona or some such. [/QUOTE] What cost? Do you have any idea how many Republican lawyers would do this case pro bono? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/19 "2007-09-26T21:44:29Z")
[QUOTE=Cheesesteak] She was an adult when the picture was taken, she was aware it was taken, and a willing participant in the shot. If she wants it taken down, she can damn well go over there herself and ask nicely. . . [/quote] How do you know (and why do you presume) that she didn’t? > [@](#): > > Not to mention, this lawyer isn’t even her lawyer. . . How do you know that? > [@](#): > > . . . and the letter is not on her letterhead. Why does it have to be? If my father was an attorney, and his office had a staff of attorneys, and I wanted to have an attorney write a letter on my behalf, I would certainly have my father’s office’s attorney draft the letter, and they wouldn’t do it on my personal stationery. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2007, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584/20 "2007-09-26T21:54:21Z")
Shouldn’t the signature at the end of the letter say “Counselor to _former_ President Clinton”? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bill-clinton-threatens-to-sue-restaurant-for-showing-picture-of-chelsea/420584.md?page=2)