"Sad Beige" Influencer Lawsuit Ends in Dismissal After Year-Long Legal Battle

30 May 2025

Alyssa Sheil; Sydney Nicole Gifford. Credit : Alyssa Sheil/Instagram; Sydney Nicole Gifford/Instagram

A bizarre yet highly publicized lawsuit dubbed the “Sad Beige Case” centered around beige-toned Instagram aesthetics has finally reached a conclusion. More than a year after social media influencer Sydney Nicole Gifford filed a federal lawsuit against fellow influencer Alyssa Sheil, both parties have formally requested the court to dismiss the case.

The lawsuit originally made headlines for its unusual premise: Gifford accused Sheil of copying her signature online aesthetic, a soft, neutral-toned theme often referred to by fans as “sad beige.” According to the initial 2024 filing, Gifford claimed that Sheil’s content on Instagram, TikTok, and Pinterest infringed upon her brand identity, which was carefully curated around a specific color palette of beige, cream, and soft whites. She claimed that Sheil not only replicated her style but also promoted nearly identical Amazon affiliate products using similar poses, props, and hashtags.

The complaint included a laundry list of allegations, including copyright infringement, trade dress infringement, digital misappropriation, unfair competition, and violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Gifford's legal team argued that the aesthetic, while intangible, had become a core part of her online persona and income, making Sheil’s alleged imitation a threat to her livelihood.

However, as time progressed, the legal foundation of the case began to crumble. In December 2024, a federal judge dismissed three of Gifford’s main claims, stating that general visual style and color palettes especially something as broadly defined as "beige minimalism" did not qualify for copyright protection. The court emphasized that inspiration from publicly available content, especially on platforms like Instagram, often does not constitute infringement unless there’s direct evidence of plagiarism or a protected original work.

With much of the case already dismantled, both parties submitted a joint stipulation for dismissal on May 28, 2025. The document confirmed that all remaining claims and counterclaims were released and resolved with prejudice, meaning the case cannot be refiled.

In a statement to her followers, Alyssa Sheil celebrated the dismissal as a win not just for herself, but for independent content creators everywhere. “This wasn’t just about my photos,” she wrote. “It was about the message that no one owns a color scheme or a vibe. Young influencers need to know they can’t be bullied out of their space for being inspired by what’s trending.”

The lawsuit has since stirred wider conversations about aesthetic originality in the social media world. With millions of influencers crafting curated feeds using similar editing apps, presets, and lifestyle props, legal experts weighed in early on that Gifford’s case was unlikely to hold up under traditional intellectual property laws. Nonetheless, the lawsuit has become a case study in what some are calling "aesthetic ownership" in the age of content saturation.

As the case finally concludes, it leaves behind a trail of online debates, memes, and legal analysis. Though the lawsuit didn't redefine copyright law, it certainly added a surreal chapter to the world of influencer culture where even the color beige can spark a legal battle.