Iconic photo is at center of dispute

Daily Southtown ^ | 29 January 2006 | Dan Lavoie

[RKV]

Its been way too long since I had a year of contract law (and never intellectual property law), but this just seems absurd.

[edgrimly78]

Followup links:
first link
second link

[Publius6961]

Picture puts a tear in my eye every time I see it.

Regardless of how strongly and uncompromising we feel about other issues, this picture is the simplest and ultimate humanity test.
I would avoid anyone, male or female, who fails to react.

Another Dad

[TheDon]

Agreed. Although I think both of them are acting badly. What's done is done. Since Yon wants compensation though, the gov't should pay it.

[Skooz]

I saw every second as it happened.

The MSM may refuse to show it, but it is all recorded in my noggin.

[tallhappy]

"The claimant asserts he was injured by the distribution of his copyrighted works to the news media. This release absolves the Army of any liability for that injury."

The Army needs to fire this IP lawyer, Klein, as his word games won't stand up in court and are ludicrous. What a waste of taxpayer money to pay this buffoon.

[RKV]

Please do also check out http://www.punditreview.com/2006/02/02/bloggers-unite-to-support-michael-yon/
and http://business.bostonherald.com/technologyNews/view.bg?articleid=123749&format=text

[RKV]

It also appears that Kevin at Pundit Review has posted the appropriate contact emails - Brigadier General Vincent K. Brooks: Vincent.brooks@us.army.mil and Alan P. Klein: Alan.klein@hqda.army.mil

[Gordongekko909]

I took Common Law Contracts about a year ago, and I do recall something about ambiguity being construed against the drafter. Which, in this case, would be the military.

I know jack about copyright law, though.

[olrtex]

Maybe their are special common law or statutory rules for governments, but language like "release the (military) of any liability from and hold them harmless for any injuries I may suffer or any equipment that may be damaged as a result of my covering combat" should not be interpreted to cover damage from intentional misconduct, or even negligence for that matter. If a unit commander ordered a soldier to shoot Yon in the leg just for fun, surely the government could not escape liability because of this "release."

[BurbankKarl]

I am sure he signed his rights away by becoming embedded....and if he put the photo on his blog, how can he expect to for it to remain his property. Once you publish it to the internet, it is gone.

Now, if he released a tiny image, with the words NOT FOR PUBLICATION like all the photos you see on AFP or AP wire.....that is another story. Sometimes you see NOT FOR PUBLICATION BY THE LOS ANGELES TIMES on the photowire, because the photographer has been jerked by them before.

[BurbankKarl]

You can buy the photo for $125 on the photographer's website.

No profit motive there.

[PAR35]

Another incompetent lawyer hiding in the military.

I disagree. He's zealously representing a client that has a very weak case.

Based on what's written here, he's going to lose, but he's got just enough that he should be able to avoid sanctions. Can you come up with a better legal theory for him to use?

[Lady Jag]

The fact is, he can't win.

The question is, why does the gov want to do this?

This is what I did to the photo:

[lepton]

I took Common Law Contracts about a year ago, and I do recall something about ambiguity being construed against the drafter. Which, in this case, would be the military.

Yup.

[onedoug]

Too bad the names of those actually in the photo seem forgotten.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Copyright Dispute Resolved

[RKV]

Yeah, isn't it great what a bit of high level visibility will do to the garrit-troopers? I saw this earlier today on Yon's blog and the BG clearly got the point. As I recall the details aren't quite ironed out, but I don't doubt but things will turn out right.

[RKV]

The letter below is one that the General Brooks got (which apparently did the trick [courtesy of Blackfive Blog]).

Dear General Brooks, First off, let me establish some bona fides: I am a 1982 DMG RA Commission in Armor/Cavalry from University of Florida, graduate US Army Ranger School Class 3/4-83, 9 year veteran with cavalry platoon, armor company command, battalion staff, Brigade S3, etc. Father: USMA '46, both Grandfathers USMA '19, 20, Great Grandfather, USMA 1897, Uncles, cousins,etc., all USMA. "Beat Navy" were my first publicly spoken words at age 2 in the Catholic chapel at West Point (right in the middle of Father McCormick's homily!). I am as dyed-in-the-wool pro-military, pro-soldier and pro-US Army as you wiill ever find. I say this to alert you to the fact that this letter comes from an old soldier speaking to a fellow soldier, though I have been a civilian for 15 years. I know that you have placed your sons in harm's way and I value your sacrifice. I still love our soldiers, and I am so proud of them and the work they are doing on behalf of me and mine and our republic. I know, as you do, that their story is never told well, if at all, and that those who both love the soldier AND speak on their behalf in the media are rare and should be treasured.

I have been privileged to have read Michael Yon's work, seen his stunning photographs and am proud to have even corresponded with him from time to time (mainly about our shared alma mater and the Florida Gators). I am flabbergasted that the US Army has chosen to make Michael Yon a target for both maltreatment regarding his excellent and award-winning photgraph of Major Dave Bieger and Farah, as well as placing obstacles to his return to the Iraqi theater. I am unsure if you have followed Michael's work, but you will not find a more clear and unambiguous supporter of the soldiers and Marines on duty in Iraq in any publication or mediume extant. Michael is an ex-operator, so he doesn't punch out jingo-istic propaganda, but paints stunningly accurate portraits of the type of men and women you and I both know comprise our armed forces, but whose stories are seldom, if ever, told. His sories of the Deuce-Four were told with such beuty and realism that I found my palms sweating, I was so engrossed.

Sir, I know that I only see this issue from the perspective of those who love and appreciate Michael's work. There may be another side, but it certainly seems as if the US Army position as I have seen it directly quoted seems very narrowly constructed and gives little acknowledgment to the powerful impact Michael has had praising our armed forces. Frankly, it seems like it was drawn up by some JAG "Garrit-trooper" and endorsed by others of that ilk. Michael has smelled the cordite and camo-stick, on duty and even more amazingly, as a civilian. Why does he undertake such hazardous duty? Because he loves soldiers and wants the world to see them in their powerful glory and in their tender humanity. His picture of Major Bieger was the most moving picture I think I have ever seen. It captures everything that you and I know about the Army, and the story of the people who are in it. Do not deny him the credit for having taken such risks to himself and his family, just to tell that story.

I hope the US Army will reconsider it;s stance on the matter at hand, acknowledge the work as Michael's and further allow him to return to doing the job few others have the temerity or the talent to do.

Sincerely, DWP Knoxville, TN

[metalcor]

That's the way to write a complaint letter!