▁defend ants ▁argued ▁that ▁Stein berg ▁had ▁made ▁a ▁representation ▁of ▁his ▁acqu ies c ence ▁to ▁their ▁use ▁of ▁his ▁image ▁in ▁the ▁movie ▁poster ▁by ▁not ▁compla ining ▁about ▁the ▁ad s ▁in ▁the ▁newspaper , ▁the ▁judge ▁rejected ▁this ▁line ▁of ▁reasoning ▁and ▁noted ▁that ▁the ▁defend ants ▁had ▁continued ▁to ▁use ▁the ▁in fr ing ing ▁advert is ements ▁even ▁after ▁becoming ▁aware ▁of ▁Stein berg ' s ▁ob jections . ▁Further , ▁there ▁was ▁no ▁existing ▁relationship ▁between ▁the ▁parties ▁that ▁could ▁give ▁rise ▁to ▁est opp el . ▁ ▁Finally , ▁the ▁defend ants ▁claimed ▁the ▁aff irm ative ▁defense ▁of ▁la ches , ▁as ser ting ▁that ▁Stein berg ▁had ▁waited ▁over ▁six ▁months ▁to ▁comp lain ▁to ▁Columbia ▁Pictures ▁about ▁the ▁alleg ed ▁in fr ing ement ▁in ▁order ▁to ▁increase ▁his ▁award ▁in ▁the ▁event ual ▁law suit . ▁The ▁court ▁dismiss ed ▁this ▁alleg ation ▁on ▁the ▁grounds ▁that ▁Stein berg ▁had ▁registered ▁his ▁compla int ▁with ▁the ▁defend ants ▁within ▁weeks ▁of ▁beginning ▁their ▁advert ising ▁campaign , ▁and ▁that ▁a ▁six - month ▁delay ▁between ▁publication ▁of ▁the ▁alleg edly ▁in fr ing ing ▁work ▁and ▁inst ig ation ▁of ▁a ▁law suit ▁was ▁not ▁sufficient ▁to ▁establish ▁a ▁claim ▁of ▁la ches . ▁ ▁Test ▁for ▁copy right ▁in fr ing ement ▁The ▁court ▁states ▁the ▁test ▁for ▁copy right ▁in fr ing ement ▁as ▁copying ▁an ▁item ▁that ▁is ▁the ▁subject ▁of ▁a ▁valid ▁copy right , ▁making ▁no