Model Sues Victoria's Secret Over Alleged Breach of 'Unrecognizable' Contract

Model Sydney Roper has filed a lawsuit against Victoria's Secret, alleging the company breached their contract by using nearly her entire face in an Instagram perfume advertisement despite agreeing to portray her as "Unrecognizable/Parts Model."

Roper was hired for a campaign in 2026 with the explicit agreement that any partial view of her face would not exceed 30% of its visibility, according to the complaint filed in Los Angeles federal court. However, the lawsuit claims an Instagram video posted by Victoria's Secret showed approximately 95% of Roper's face, including one eye, her nose, and lips, rendering her recognizable.

According to documents attached to the complaint, Roper's agency, Closeup Models Agency, booked her for a photoshoot on April 3. The agreement stipulated a rate of $1,000 for four hours, plus a 20% agency fee. The deal memo specified covered body parts as hands, legs, lips, and abs/torso, while leaving boxes for "Face" and "Eyes" unchecked. In a separate email, a Victoria's Secret representative confirmed to the agency that Roper would "remain unrecognizable" and specified "Partial face (less than 30%)" along with other body parts.

Roper's agency contacted Victoria's Secret on September 4 after she discovered the advertisement. An email included as an exhibit states the agency demanded an additional recognizable talent fee of $2,500 plus a 20% agency fee, totaling $3,000. The agency also noted that such usage should be flagged before posting in the future.

Victoria's Secret reportedly did not respond to the demand and subsequently removed the Instagram video. Roper claims she did not receive any additional compensation for the use of her recognizable likeness. She asserts that the commercial value of her recognizable face is distinct from the body parts modeling work she agreed to perform.

Roper, who has also modeled for Peter Millar's G/FORE brand for approximately six years, is suing Victoria's Secret for alleged violation of California's right-of-publicity statute, common-law misappropriation of likeness, and breach of contract.

Victoria's Secret's campaign deal memo includes an arbitration provision that designates New York as the location for resolving certain disputes. However, Roper contends that she did not personally sign this memo or an accompanying inducement, and she disputes her agency's authority to bind her to every clause. Her attorney, Perry Wander, stated that Victoria's Secret had an opportunity to settle the matter for around $3,000 before the lawsuit was filed but opted to remove the advertisement without paying the requested additional compensation. Wander anticipates the case could result in six-figure damages after discovery.