Posted on 08/03/2007 11:54:49 AM PDT by Registered
Many of you are familiar with the images I have created. For those of you that might not be that familiar you can see a gallery of images at www.registeredmedia.com/gallery and an overview of some of the many images that have made it into the mainstream.
Since 1998 I have been expressing my political point of view mostly through the graphics I have created in the form of parody and satire. Many have been created from the direct suggestions by many of the readers of various conservative websites (including this one) and emails from people all over the world. I have created hundreds if not thousands of images posted at my site and others, some for humor, some for activists. Some of the images I have been involved with have been used to impact public opinion, such as the Sore-Loserman logo. This was a collabrative work developed by a team of forum participants which ultimately ended up being used by activists around the country during the 2000 Presidential Election recounts. I have been fortunate in the fact that many of the parody images holding my political point of view have been re-posted, emailed, published or displayed on the net, in magazines, talked about on radio and even displayed on television.
Since the middle of 2005 I have been involved in a copyright lawsuit that is attempting to shut me up and kill my Freedom of Speech when it comes to creating images. The image that prompted the lawsuit was a satire-parody I created involving John Kerry and Jane Fonda. This image was created without profit and for no commercial reasons. I did it very quickly in response to current events at the time. The image was created at a time when John Kerry was denying his linkage to Fonda (April '04 or thereabouts) to garner the veteran vote and hammering President Bush over his National Guard service. Around this time I was sent an actual speaking schedule that showed the two of them had indeed been on the same stage, on the same day speaking out against the war in Vietnam. It was obvious they knew each other and the direct linkage was true. I therefore created an image, a satire-parody retro image that looked like a newspaper article, showing them speaking on the same stage. It was a joke - he denied being on stage with Fonda, yet it was all over the "front page of the newspaper".
I posted this satire image for approximately 2 hours on FreeRepublic.com and then after seeing that some people were taking it in a way I had not intended, I became concerned and pulled it down and removed it. I did not email it out or send it anywhere else. It was simply posted on the internet for only 2 hours. When the image ended up in print it surprised me, and it confirmed the fact that major media rarely verifies their sources or checks the credibility of their information.
Like any satire I create, the finished image was comprised of a number of elements, a John Kerry portion, a Jane Fonda portion, and a Newspaper-like print that had a little blurb about them speaking together.
The John Kerry portion of the satire was from an image of Kerry speaking at an anti-war rally. This photo was taken by a photographer named Ken Light in the early 1970's. Mr. Light who is a UC Berkeley professor, did not appreciate his John Kerry image being used in the manner it was, which I partially understand because he is a photographer and liberal activist himself. However my free speech is my free speech and in satire, I felt I needed to illustrate an actual historical event the way I did. Of course, the fact that I did what I did can be debated endlessly (which it has), but the fact of the matter is, I did it to express my political view regarding the absurdity of Kerry denying that he and Fonda had worked together during the anti-War days.
After the image was posted, it "made the rounds", being picked up by many in the media, websites, blogs, etc, etc. I never intended this to happen. What occurs after an image is captured by people is outside of my control, so I sat and watched in horror as the image was used and manipulated in ways I never intended.
Apparently seeing an opportunity to gain a name and subsequently more income for himself, Ken Light began granting interviews, from CNN to print media, about the John Kerry parody image I created. Ken Light has given speeches and has even created his own college course curriculum based entirely on my parody image. In other words, he has benefited entirely from the parody I created, gaining notoriety and making money from something I created and posted on the internet for a few hours.
Mr. Light wasn't satisfied with my removing the image, he wasn't satisfied with the interviews he gave, or his new celebrity status and notoriety, or the huge additional income he was making from my satire-parody image. He decided, or someone suggested to him, to sue me for copyright infringement for $200,000. Not in Michigan where I live, but in New York. Now Mr. Light lives and works in California. Not in New York.
So why sue me in New York? Well, his side says I should be sued because Ken Light's photo agent is located in NY (which by the way, after my image "made the rounds", his agent moved the original Ken Light image into their "Premium Collection". This is an obvious indication that there was an increased demand for his original Kerry picture only AFTER I created my satire-parody thereby bringing him an increase in royalty fees.)
The second reason Light is suing me in NY is that the image I created was displayed and printed by a host of NY media. I have NEVER been in contact with ANY of them, and to think that I had control over their use of the image is an insane allegation to make.
It isn't a coincidence that Mr. Light is a liberal photojournalist/activist. Frankly, I feel that my Freedom of Speech is being threatened by Mr. Light and whatever "machinery" is behind this lawsuit. They want to shut me up and shut me down.
As this lawsuit is in New York and I am in Michigan, you can imagine the enormous expense (tens of thousands of dollars) to fight for my freedom of speech that this is taking. I am paying MI lawyers and NY lawyers. My attorney bills aren't being paid by John Kerry. They are being paid by me. I have made dime ZERO from this image, yet Light has been paid for interviews on TV and in print, has hugely incorporated my satire-parody image into his entire professional career, even to the extent of using my satire-parody image in his journalism classes at Berkeley - meanwhile continuing to make royalties off his dead image that is now sitting in a "premium collection", thanks to me.
On January 29th, 2007, the US District Court, Southern District of New York granted me a motion to dismiss. Now, over 6 months after that court decision, Ken Light's attorney, David B. Rigney (who attended Yale at the same time as John Kerry), has filed an appeal on behalf of Ken Light even though the Appeals process apparently only allows for up to 30 days to file.
My intent is not to perform fundraising here, though this lawsuit has had an enormous financial impact, costing a crippling tens of thousands of dollars that I will be paying for years to come. Of course if I got a dollar for every time that image was forwarded or if I had a dollar for every time Ken Light used or was paid to use my image the ability to afford a defense would be moot. Rather, I think it is important to be aware that YOU are at a huge legal and financial risk when you exercise your free speech in your posts or graphics, here or anywhere on the internet.
I appreciate the many of you that have let me know over the years that you enjoy what I do.
To all of you that believe in freedom of speech, or may have seen this image and have enjoyed my parodies and satire, please feel free to share this with others.
Be careful. According to our current legal system, free speech is anything but free. That goes for people on the Right and on the Left.
Eh, he’s gone now, and good riddance.
First, if components of the parody are protected by copyright then, as much as I hate to say it, you had no right to use the components in your work.That is incorrect. Parody clearly falls under "fair use" in copyright law.
The MSM creates it's own fake images and prints them. Recall Reuters in Beruit. Yours was "fake but accurate" too.
It’s called Karma bud...
= P
Kerry was a loser with plenty of legitimate faults.
How can we complain about fake news photos from Reuters when conservatives put out fake news pictures of Kerry?
That picture doesn’t have the attempt to present it as a legitimate news story with the AP byline.
I was always impressed by your talent, sorry it has come to this.
Good luck, and I hope the legal difficulties sort themselves out to your benefit.
Oh... well that’s Freedom of speech lol
I am so sorry things turned out this way. Unpleasant things can be said in the heat of the moment.
Everyone should know that Registered’s work had a profound mark on the 2000 election.
I am just sorry there cannot be a healing.
Sorry for the outcome of this thread. I see your point in wanting to point out liability.
I also want to thank you for many, many laughs. And I am greatful for the work you created for myself and my Business.
Bobby
Petronski,
I can’t believe you’d say that. Whatever your recent disagreements might be, we’re all still on the same side - that is, against the leftist scourge that is the Democrat Party. Registered and his parodies were an important contribution during the recount in 2000. WHen, before, that, did any shadow of humor or satire come to be connected in a way that spoke well of us and rightfully poorly of the Democrats and Clinton/Gore?
We here on FR owe Registered a debt of gratitude for that.
Obviously Jim Rob allowed Registered to post this thread and that reconciliation was a possiblity. But it turns out the Registered was not really interested in any kind of reconciliation. Apparently all he wanted to do was to troll the forum for contributions and maybe some legal help with his current legal woes.
I don't know what compelled Registered to burn his bridges, but he did. There is a rule in life that when you burn a bridge, you should not expect that you can ever return from whence you came.
I have deliberately burned some bridges in my life. If you do that, you don't look back. And when you find yourself drowning in the river, you don't look to the other side for a lifeline.
It is odd that within just a few posts of posting this thread, Registered lashed out in anger at those whom he burned before and called them "pigs" and accused Jim Rob of being a "pig farmer".
Perhaps Registered should read a chapter or two of this book:
Registered did not come here with a contrite heart. He should have apologized for whatever it was the caused the rift between Jim Rob and him and the other freepers here, and accepted whatever criticism that was dished out as pennance for his past transgressions. But instead he took the opportunity to show us all why it was that he was previously suspended and why it is that he is now banned.
The lesson is that you ought not to burn your bridges and when you do, there is no looking back.
Parody only gets a "fair use" exemption if it is being used to comment upon the copyrighted work being used. A parody of "Les Miserables" using music reminiscent of the show would be protected. A parody of "Cats" using copyrighted music from "Oklahoma!" would not be so protected.
There is an enormous fuzzy area, especially in cases where one is producing works in the style of another work. If one were trying to parody something in "Cats" one could get by with music much closer to that of "Oklahoma!" than if one were trying to write an original musical about rural living. In the former case, even if the primary target of the parody was "Cats", one could argue that making a caricature of "Oklahoma!"'s music (instead of merely reproducing it) also served a legitimate parody purpose for the latter.
I think this case is pretty clear: Registered was in the wrong. Nonetheless, the facts that (1) he ceased distributing the image well before a C&D letter was sent, much less received, and (2) the copyright holder has in fact profited substantially from the infringement, should both severely limit damages.
Good luck to you. Hope it all works out in the end.
Just seeing and reading this for the first time now. WOW!
I'm no Lawyer... but if no money was attached to it, then to me it's a slam dunk in your favor. Best of luck!
I had no idea this had happened until today! I originally wanted to find out if this graphic is the inspiration that eventually led to the Sore Loserman sticker.I wonder if I'm next!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.