Sydney Sweeney’s bra stunt atop the Hollywood Sign may have satisfied her PR team’s thirst for publicity, but it enraged Hollywood elites, activists, and regular Angelenos while inspiring scorn from the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce. Will it also land her in legal trouble? As nearly everyone asks when celebrities do very stupid things: Who let her do that?
By Allan R. Ellenberger
Sydney Sweeney on the Hollywood Sign / TMZ
TMZ obtained social media footage purporting to show Sweeney climbing the Hollywood Sign last weekend and hanging a series of bras over the landmark’s massive letters. Per the outlet, the whole thing was staged as part of an advertisement for her forthcoming lingerie line — sponsored, reportedly, by Jeff Bezos himself.
According to reports, Sweeney and a film crew made their way up Mount Lee, the hilltop home of the Hollywood Sign, under cover of darkness. Footage shows the actress gleefully arranging a clothesline of undergarments across the towering white letters — a stunt that stunned onlookers who later shared the video clips online.
Although the group had permission from FilmLA to shoot near the sign, several reports have noted they did not have permission to scale it, modify it, commercially exploit its image or attach items to it, which the sign's owners and regulators have stipulated.
An email obtained by TMZ and shared publicly reveals that the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, which manages the landmark and controls the intellectual property rights associated with its image, explicitly informed Sweeney’s production team that their permit did not extend to climbing or physically interacting with the letters. The Chamber’s chair told TMZ that “there was no permission granted to do this as is required.”
Legal experts and local authorities are now weighing whether the stunt constitutes more than just bad publicity. The unauthorized climb and decoration of one of the city’s most iconic symbols could expose Sweeney and her team to criminal trespass and vandalism charges, as well as potential civil action for unauthorized use of the sign’s protected image. Similar cases in the past — such as the 2017 “Hollyweed” alteration — led to arrests and legal penalties for those involved.
Public reaction has been swift and mixed, though largely critical. Many Angelenos and heritage advocates view the Hollywood Sign not as a mere backdrop for celebrity marketing but as a beloved cultural treasure with historical significance. Critics on social platforms have underscored the element of risk — the sign’s letters are perched atop a steep, treacherous hillside.
Commentary on social media ranges from indignation at what some call an act of vandalism dressed up as advertising, to amusement that the actress chose to adorn the sign with bras — ironic to some, given Sweeney’s public persona and past controversies surrounding marketing imagery in her career.
The Hollywood Chamber of Commerce’s statement — terse but stern — underscores the seriousness of the matter: licensing and use of the Hollywood Sign’s image are tightly regulated precisely because the landmark symbolizes not just the entertainment industry, but the city itself. Without clear permission, any commercial exploitation of the sign can trigger both intellectual property disputes and legal liabilities.
Photo Credit: TMZ
Representatives for Sweeney and her team have not publicly commented beyond what has been reported by entertainment outlets; neither has the actress herself addressed the fallout as of press time. It remains unclear whether formal charges will be pursued, though local law enforcement has been briefed on the matter and could act pending review.
For purists and preservationists, this episode is more than a tabloid moment — it is a stark reminder that Hollywood’s symbols are not props for celebrity self-promotion, but historic artifacts entrusted to the public. Many argue that there must be consequences commensurate with the stunt’s brazenness, both to protect the landmark and to set a precedent that respect for shared cultural icons cannot be waived for influencer marketing or star-driven publicity stunts.
As the bras come down and the dust settles, the real conversation emerging from this controversy is about where the line is drawn between promotion and preservation, and whether celebrity influence should ever grant exemptions from the rules that apply to everyone else.
What do you think—was this a harmless stunt or a line that should never have been crossed? Join the conversation and share your thoughts in the comments below.
Add comment
Comments
Its people like her that believe youth and being famous are an entitlement for them to do what they want and dam the consequences. No respect for the history or past. I doubt anything will happen.
I understand the frustration behind that reaction, and you’re not alone in feeling it. Whether consequences follow or not, the larger issue is the growing belief that visibility excuses behavior, and that’s a conversation worth having—because once cultural symbols lose meaning, they’re very hard to restore.