The 2023-2024 production and release of “It Ends With Us,” starring Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, offers an instructive case study in the complex intersection of fashion, intellectual property law, and celebrity image rights. While much public attention focused on the aesthetic impact of Lively’s suit collection, the legal framework underlying these wardrobe choices represents a fascinating web of contracts, rights management, and potential liabilities that merits closer examination.
Fashion and Intellectual Property: The Limited Protections
From a legal standpoint, the suits worn by Lively in her portrayal of Lily Bloom occupy a unique position in intellectual property law. Unlike other creative works, fashion design receives notably limited protection under U.S. copyright law. The “useful article” doctrine has historically prevented designers from claiming broad copyright protection for clothing, based on the principle that apparel serves a utilitarian function beyond aesthetic expression.
This legal reality shapes the contractual relationships between studios, designers, and retailers in significant ways. When costume designer Denise Wingate created Lily Bloom’s signature suits, her work product became the property of the production company through the standard “work-for-hire” provisions in her employment contract. This arrangement means that the studio, not Wingate, holds whatever limited copyright interests might exist in the costume designs.
Product Placement and Promotional Considerations
The legal arrangements become more complex when considering the origin of the suits themselves. Sources familiar with the production indicate that several of Lively’s most prominent suits were obtained through carefully negotiated promotional arrangements with fashion houses, though the specifics remain protected by non-disclosure agreements.
Such contracts may also address post-production marketing limitations. For instance, while a designer might gain the right to advertise that their suit was worn by Lively in the film, they would likely be prohibited from implying a personal endorsement from the actress herself without a separate agreement.
The Publicity Rights Question
Perhaps more significant than the intellectual property considerations are the publicity rights implicated by the film’s marketing strategy. Both Lively and Baldoni possess valuable publicity rights the legal entitlement to control commercial use of one’s name, image, and likeness.
When paparazzi photos of Lively in character began circulating online in May 2023, they triggered a cascade of legal considerations. While the production company likely welcomed the free publicity, these images existed in a legal gray area. Paparazzi photographers generally own the copyright to their images, but the commercial exploitation of these photos can potentially infringe on the subject’s publicity rights depending on the jurisdiction and specific use.
Lively’s contract, like most A-list talent agreements, likely included specific provisions governing how her image could be used in marketing materials. These provisions would detail approval processes, contexts in which her likeness could appear, and possibly even stylistic guidelines to protect her personal brand.
Merchandising Rights and Retail Replicas
The popularity of Lively’s suits quickly led to retail replicas raising another set of legal considerations. Under standard film contracts, studios retain merchandising rights that allow them to license official products based on elements from the film. However, the limited protection for fashion designs creates opportunities for retailers to produce “inspired by” clothing that doesn’t technically infringe on intellectual property.
The production company behind “It Ends With Us” could have pursued licensing agreements with retailers for official replicas, but public records indicate they did not extensively exercise this option. This decision may reflect the challenges of enforcing merchandise rights for apparel that lacks strong intellectual property protection.
Social Media Complications
The viral social media conversation around #LilyBloomSuit presented yet another layer of legal complexity. User-generated content featuring comparison photos, styling suggestions, and shopping links exists in a nebulous area of copyright and publicity law.
Several documented cases emerged of influencers receiving cease-and-desist notices for implying official connections to the film or Lively personally while promoting “dupe” versions of the suits. These enforcement actions highlight the ongoing tension between viral marketing benefits and unauthorized commercial exploitation.
The Contractual Dimension of Co-Star Relations
Reports of tension between Lively and Baldoni during the press tour also implicate contract law principles. Modern talent agreements for major films typically include detailed publicity requirements specifying the nature and extent of promotional activities.
Industry sources suggest that both actors’ publicity commitments were fulfilled despite the reported awkwardness, avoiding potential breach of contract issues. The situation underscores the increasingly detailed nature of promotional obligations in modern entertainment contracts, which attempt to anticipate and mitigate potential conflicts.
International Rights Considerations
The global release of “It Ends With Us” introduced international legal considerations regarding the suit designs. While U.S. law provides limited protection for fashion, the European Union offers more robust safeguards through registered and unregistered design rights.
Several European luxury brands reportedly issued enforcement actions against continental retailers producing close replicas of suits featured in the film, leveraging the stronger protections available under EU design regulations.
Current Legal Status and Precedential Value
As of April 2025, no major litigation has emerged directly related to the costume designs in “It Ends With Us.” However, the case study offers valuable precedential guidance for entertainment and fashion attorneys navigating similar territory.
The legal framework surrounding Blake Lively’s suits in “It Ends With Us” ultimately demonstrates the sophisticated contractual infrastructure that undergirds seemingly simple costume choices in modern filmmaking. Behind each carefully tailored jacket and precisely fitted trouser lies a complex web of intellectual property limitations, publicity rights considerations, and contractual obligations that shape both the creative process and the commercial exploitation of fashion in entertainment.