Bettr
Betr isn't backing down to HBO's legal demands
Jake Paul’s betting app Betr isn’t backing down to HBO after the network sent a cease-and-desist letter over the company’s Entourage rip-off ad.
Betr, the sports betting platform that Jake Paul co-founded, released a commercial this month reuniting Entourage stars Jeremy Piven and Adrian Grenier in a clear rip-off of their HBO series — the ad features a mansion party, a yacht pitch meeting, and both Piven and Grenier both clearly playing their characters from the show.
Betr isn’t backing down to HBO’s cease-and-desist letter over its blatant Entourage spin-off ad
HBO subsequently sent a cease-and-desist demanding the ad be deleted, while Entourage creator Doug Ellin called it “trash and theft.”
“Everything about the Infringing Advertisement, from its setting, to the actors’ clothing, dialogue, and manner of speech, is evocative, if not duplicative, of Entourage,“ HBO’s letter, in which they accused Betr of trying to “evoke Entourage and to exploit the show’s popularity, read.
Betr, however, isn’t backing down from HBO’s legal demands and has issued a defiant response.
“HBO owns Entourage. It does not own Jeremy Piven and Adrian Grenier. When HBO was sued over Ballers and Six Feet Under, it told the courts that Miami parties, celebrity lifestyles, and fast-talking characters belong to everyone. It won that argument,” Betr said in a statement to Variety.
“Now that it is the one complaining, those same elements have become HBO’s sole and exclusive property. Doug Ellin’s own comment that it was ‘pretty damn obvious’ he did not write the commercial confirms what everyone already knew: this is a Betr ad, made by Betr, with two actors playing themselves. We are proud of this campaign, and we stand with Jeremy and Adrian and their right to their own names, faces, and voices. Nobody needs HBO’s permission to hire two great actors.”
Betr has also challenged HBO to “please identify” the “specific protectable expression from Entourage” that was allegedly reproduced, in addition to evidence that “consumers were confused about who produced or sponsored” the commercial.