Inspiring and Innovating our way.


Marilyn Monroe fraud lawsuit victory: how an American legend defends himself from his crypt

Marilyn Monroe’s legacy has experienced many victories in the past week, including one scheduled for today, May 7, 2007.

Today would have been the day the lawsuit was scheduled to be filed against defendants Robert W. Otto of Chicago, Mark Roesler of CMG Worldwide, and The Queen Mary Corporation by expert witnesses and plaintiffs from The Bellinghaus Team, including Mark Bellinghaus, Ernest Cunningham and Emily Sadjady. to be heard. Mark Bellinghaus and Ernest Cunningham entered with the intent to sue and Mr. Bellinghaus purported to be a plaintiff, however attorneys George G. Braunstein and Timothy D. McGonigle requested that Mark Bellinghaus serve as an expert witness due to his status as a “collector “. It turns out that the lawyers for both parties decided to settle this matter last week out of court. No further details were disclosed. Despite the agreement, it remains a great victory for the Bellinghaus team for the memory of Marilyn Monroe in the present and in the future.

In November 2005, “Marilyn Monroe The Exhibit” was presented aboard the Queen Mary in Long Beach. The exhibit featured items said to have belonged to the late actress. Included in the exhibit were dresses, jewelry, and other memorabilia and personal items, which were later found by Mark Bellinghaus, the owner of the world’s largest collection of authentic Marilyn Monroe, to be 99% of the items featured were fake. He recognized these fake items immediately when he attended the opening of the exhibition. He especially singled out the Clairol curlers, a so-called “highlight” of the Robert Otto collection, as Mr. Bellinghaus owns the authentic Marilyn Monroe wire curlers. Mark Bellinghaus’s findings were published on his blog expo and diminished the credibility of this expo so dramatically that it began as an event that would tour 39 cities and 6 continents with anticipated gross proceeds exceeding $100 million (including funds). of sponsors and merchandise sales) over the next 12 years to become an embarrassment that was subsequently closed.

In all seriousness, why would the public want to see a Victoria’s Secret dress (which is actually one of them), presented as Marilyn Monroe’s, and furthermore displayed with the copyrighted signature of the immortal Hollywood icon? And if that wasn’t enough, this exhibit claims that this dress was designed by famed costume designer William Travilla, especially for Monroe. Victoria’s Secret was established many decades after the death of Marilyn Monroe. And even more demeaning to her memory, 100% fake briefs, which had her name handwritten on the inside of the disgusting piece with a modern Sharpie marker, as well as looking huge and too big to have fit. Astute fans know that Marilyn Monroe avoided underwear to begin with, let alone a pair taken from Grandma’s underwear drawer.

These are just a few of the scandalous items that went on display for seven months in the biggest exhibition scandal to ever hit the US, and was about to go around the world. What a shame this would have brought to our country. If it hadn’t been for the persistence of Mark Bellinghaus, how many more innocent fans and attendees would have lost their $22.95 gate fees because they were duped by a fraudulent display?

To read Mark Bellinghaus’s blog post:

Please see the attached link for the initial news report on this Marilyn Monroe fraud exposure:

For more information on Mark Bellinghaus’ Authentic Marilyn Monroe Collection:

The victory that Marilyn Monroe’s image has been protected from fraud goes hand in hand with another victory regarding the late superstar’s image. In New York last Thursday, federal judge Colleen McMahon ruled that Marilyn Monroe’s licensees and licensees do not have postmortem advertising property rights to her, who died with her in 1962 since she did not leave this right in her will. her. This decision was part of a counterclaim by The Shaw Family Archives LLC, which was sued for its violation of Marilyn Monroe LLC’s publicity rights from its sales of images of Miss Monroe without her consent. However, Marilyn Monroe LLC had misinterpreted the Celebrity Rights Act, which was passed in 1985 and extends a celebrity’s publicity and image rights 70 years after death, and does not apply to Ms. Monroe’s circumstances. , since she did not give her consent in her will.

The leaps and bounds achieved in the memory of Marilyn Monroe have been tremendous this past week. Unfortunately, even years after her death, the abuse of Marilyn Monroe has continued worse than in her lifetime by those who didn’t know her as well as some who did. Anna Strasberg is a prime example of someone who has never met her, but has made money off of the late actress’s legacy. Robert Otto is another who has sold fictional ‘bling’, said to have belonged to her in her charlatan displays. Bebe Goddard (Marilyn Monroe’s own adoptive sister) and Dolores Hope Masi have also generated counterfeit items for sale that they claim to have been owned by or inspired by Marilyn Monroe. Sherry Lea Laird profits from Marilyn Monroe through her stories of the actress being reincarnated within her. And storytellers like Jeanne Carmen and June DiMaggio have spun webs of stories about her friendship with the late actress, but none can come up with evidence like personal photos with her to validate her stories. June Alpino, aka June DiMaggio, has also served as the sole authenticating connection to the Robert Otto/Queen Mary exhibit items, which as the world now knows, are fake.

May the actions of The Bellinghaus Team, as well as the success in court of The Shaw Family Archives LLC, set a precedent for the future protection of the memory of Marilyn Monroe. Part of the success of the right of publicity lawsuit can also be attributed to Mark Bellinghaus, who provided lawyers for The Shaw Family Archives LLC with information from Marilyn Monroe’s will. He was able to share this as he is the owner of this authentic document that he bought at auction in 2005. His copy belonged to May Reis, the second beneficiary in Marilyn Monroe’s will, while Lee Strasberg was only named in the fourth. place. Please see this attached link for more information on this groundbreaking ruling:

The public now recognizes that wrongdoing against the late actress will no longer be tolerated. It is as if Marilyn Monroe herself had spoken out to declare to the world that enough is enough.


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *