Posted on 02/02/2006 11:51:54 AM PST by RKV
Picture puts a tear in my eye every time I see it.
The disclaimer covering intellectual property is a serious legal stretch. He will smoke the Army in any Federal court on this one. And the idea that him handing it out to some soldier represented an effective public domain of his work is laughable. Yon will have to start beating every single outlet he can find with the photo including Google. If you do not act to protect your copyrighted works, you are deemed to have given up your rights.
Me too. Yon is one of the good guys. The Army has ZERO to gain and much to lose if he decides to find another story. He obviously has talent and could do well elsewhere.
Reminds me of the Oklahoma City bombing pic of the fireman carrying an infant in his arms.
Hard for me to say where the ownership is. I don't know anything (outside of this article) about this case.
Was he there on his own dime (or that of an agency outside of the government)?
Are all of his photos property of the government or does he get to retain ownership of those photos he "doesn't share"?
I ask this because work for the government carries no copyright. There are very famous photos by famous photographers that belong to the Library of Congress (some under WPA programs). Same with NASA images.
I don't want to see the photographer done wrong. I just have no understanding on what the release said.
So the Army is admitting that Yon took the picture, but explaining that they are legally going to screw him out of his right to ownership? Wow.
Am I correct in my questioning?
That photo just makes me hate those terrorists mutants even more.
I didn't think that was possible
I think this is also quite a stretch to claim that this element of the release carries over to violation of his legal rights of copyright, etc..
He's not on Uncle Sam's payroll (anymore, seem to recall he was in the Army once). I only know what I read in the article and on Blackfive.
Those are the fundamentals as I understand them. There are SURE to be many more details. IANAL, but this sounds outrageous. Slimeyness of this order makes me wonder who put whom up to it and why? Maybe a leftover perfumed Pentagon prince from the Xlinton era?
If this trips your trigger, then you better not make a habit of looking at the 9/11 coverage that the MSM has held back from us for years.
There have been efforts by some public schools to get students to write to the US government to ask them to end this war.
I think that this is partisan and misfocused.
They should be shown this (and other) non-graphic photos of the young casualties of war. The students should consider writing OPEN letters to the terrorists in Iraq (who are not all Iraqis, BTW) begging them to stop the slaughter of innocent children. Same as is done with "ban landmines" campaigns. Send the letters to Al Jazeera; I hear that terrorists communicate with that network. The open letters would find their appropriate audience. After all, the American left claims that they support AJ because they are "balanced" even when it is controversial. Prove it.
ping
He may have lost his copyright by legal error. He could sue for damages but may never regain control of the image.
Another incompetent lawyer hiding in the military.
Clearly, to us mere mortals, the nature and purpose of the release is crystal clear.
And does not include intellectual property.
This loser must be kicked out of the military and banned from government work forever!
If stupidity is not a jail-time crime, it should be.
That's silly.
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.