At the very least, if I were this restaurant owner, I would ignore the letter from Clinton’s lawyers.
I would at least make them go through the expense of filing a formal complaint. I doubt it would come to that, since it is hard to see how Chelsea suffered any damages of any sort.
In any event, I doubt the law suit would survive a motion to dismiss anyway.
If it were me, I would fight it pro se just for the pure joy of unleashing against the Clintons my well practiced “pro se defendant from Hell” barrage of tactics proven to embarrass the other side and run up their expenses without incurring any of my own.
But since the restaurant owner probably doesn’t have the stomach for the fight, he should just decide to take it down when he’s ready and inform the judge — but only after he has caused the Clinton’s some legal expenses and bad PR.
“In any event, I doubt the law suit would survive a motion to dismiss anyway.”
The restaurant owner would have to show a written release of all rights to Chelsea’s image, signed by her.
You can’t simply use someone’s photo in an environment like that as an implied endorsement. To push the point in a legal proceeding, the restaurant owner would lose, and he know’s it, but he’s milking this for more publicity.
Can’t blame him for that.