Beetlejuice (left) and Thicke (Right) perform in their rightful roles. Tricked you! That’s actually singer Robin Thicke at the VMAs on the left and Beetlejuice from the 1988 classic on the right. Who’s plagiarizing whom?

LOS ANGELES, CA — Litigation, litigation, litigation! Looks like Robin Thicke has said that magic word a few too many times and conjured up another lawsuit.

Thicke, who was found guilty yesterday of infringement for his and Pharrell Williams’ 2013 hit song ’Blurred Lines’, is back in court for a new lawsuit brought on by writer and director Tim Burton over an outfit that Thicke wore during a 2013 performance at the MTV Video Music Awards (VMAs).

This time the suit is black-and-white.

Burton claims that Thicke’s black-and-white-striped suit was a willful infringement on the wardrobe of the titular character of his 1988 film “Beetlejuice”. He is suing Thicke for $10 million in damages.

It’s showtime!

Thicke gave personal testimony in front of the jury while Burton brought in a team of color and pattern experts to highlight the scientific reasons why the suits are a match.

“We found a constellation of three similar elements between the original Beetlejuice costume and Mr. Thicke’s outfit,” said patternologist Daniel Wexler in his testimony. “Namely the black stripes, the white stripes, and, of course, the repeated combination of the two.”

“There are similarities in every aspect of the suit, save for two of the striped bars,” he concluded.

Thicke’s testimony involved putting on the offending suit, performing a repeat of his bizarre dance from the VMAs in an attempt to prove its uniqueness, and explaining that if he had wanted to look like Betelgeuse (aka Beetlejuice), he would have at the very least put on the bleached, frazzled wig worn by the rambunctious poltergeist in the film.

“Honestly, I was going for more of a sexy zebra vibe,” claimed the pop singer.

Burton’s attorney was quick to remind the jury that Thicke had made comments in a 2013 GQ interview all but confirming the infringement.

Thick was quoted in the interview as saying, “[The performance] was great! I looked exactly like Beetlejuice. I was actually pretending that I was Beetlejuice. As I was dancing on stage all I could think was, ‘wow, I’m Beetlejuice right now!’ If only I could have gotten my hands on that wig it would have been perfect!”

Damning? Maybe not.

Thicke assured the jury that he was under the influence of a potent cocktail of pharmaceuticals and other illegal drugs when he made those statements and that they could not possibly be held against him in the court of law.

“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I think we all know what it’s like when you’ve been up all night poppin’ Vicodin and gummin’ Molly and you just want to promote your big VMA performance,” said Thicke in the courtroom. “I was blown out of my mind when I made those comments! I’m blown out of my mind right now! What was the question?”

Entertainment lawyer Madeline Prole is worried that these infringement verdicts could be setting a dangerous precedent for creative license.

“There is no one in the industry who doesn’t rip off older songs. It’s how the entire business works,” said an exasperated Prole. “It takes a lot of work and creativity to figure out which old songs will be the best to steal. People outside the industry take that for granted.”

“If the juries catch on and start ruling against my clients and their creative theft, then I’m not going to make any money. We cannot let that happen.”

So why is Burton throwing a lawsuit at Thicke now? Burton’s answer makes a lot of sense.

“For years I’ve been looking to make as much money as possible with the least amount of effort,” explains Burton. “This is a no-brainer. Plus, it’s free publicity for the “Beetlejuice” sequel I’m working on.”

“You won’t believe which role I managed to shoe-horn Johnny Depp into this time,” said the director of such remakes as “Dark Shadows”, “Alice In Wonderland”, “Sweeney Todd”, and “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory”.

A verdict is expected by tomorrow morning, at which point it is likely that no one will ever have to write another news report about Robin Thicke until his inevitable drug overdose.