Posted on 06/14/2006 11:16:12 AM PDT by JoyjoyfromNJ
Many people have become aware of a recent serious photo copyright infringement. The photo in question is that of Major Bieger holding a little Iraqi girl named Farah who was killed by a suicide car bomber in Mosul, Iraq. I first became aware of the infringement when stunned and angry readers contacted me under the mistaken belief that I allowed SHOCK magazine to use it on their cover. I did not, and never would have agreed to their usage. I regularly turn down usage requests for this photo uses that could earn money because this photo is sacred to me and is representative of the U.S. soldiers I have come to know. It is also representative of the horrors of the enemy we all face.
My attorneys are in discussions with those at fault, and we have demanded that all copies of the magazine be removed from circulation and from the internet. Protecting this photo has become at times a full-time job. . . .
". . . it is clear that HFM has broken faith with the deal.. . . As a result, I have ceased negotiations and am issuing a call to fellow writers, reporters, charter members of the blogosphere, and especially photographers who constantly suffer from unauthorized uses of their work, to help communicate our collective displeasure to HFM.. . . The immediate and powerful actions of a relatively small group of bloggers and their dedicated readers, combined with our formal demand to the distributors to pull all copies of the magazine out of circulation, encouraged HFM to take this case of copyrightinfringement a lot more seriously than they had up until the blogosphere thunderstorm electrocuted SHOCK.
But once the pressure was off, they resorted to delay tactics, equivocation, and the same kind of thinly veiled threat that has characterized their style of doing business. This time, instead of threatening me with a defamation lawsuit, it was the specter of bad press about me flip-flopping that was raised. They also used the image on their website and in other promotional media, such as posters and signs, despite the fact that the agreement did not cover these uses and despite the fact that I had clearly and unequivocally said no to any additional use of the image by HFM in a manner intended to promote a magazine I still consider beneath contempt. Their disregard for the terms of the deal reached such heights that a corporate spokesperson asserted in a published interview that HFM would put the image back on their website, prompting a reporter to characterize my actions in the settlement as an about face.
After they refused to remove the SHOCK magazine cover displaying my photo from their website, I DEMANDED they remove it. They countered with an offer to pay me $20,000 so they could use my photo to bolster the dismal sales. In a revealing exchange, HFM indicated that the $20,000 would have to be taken out of the amount they had already agreed to donate to Fisher House. I refused that proposal and repeated my demand again, only to be told it would take some time because their IT department is in France. This absurd assertion was made even though the image had already been removed once before, when HFM replaced it with a new cover, in a much publicized gesture of good faith. While HFM today finally took down one instance of its use on their site on Thursday, others remain more than a full day later, and anyone who follows any of the links on their site to purchase the magazine in digital form will find the image prominently displayed.
The final blow to the deal was when HFM inserted language into the first proposed settlement agreement that would effectively release them from an additional, separate copyright infringement claim resulting from an earlier unauthorized use of the iconic imaged in the French magazine, Choc, a different publication with its own distinct editorial staff and a circulation of about 350,000 copies. From our perspective, Choc was never part of our negotiations to resolve the dispute over SHOCK magazine. After more than two weeks of these tactics, I have to conclude that it would be crazy to continue negotiating a deal with a company that has already violated the spirit of our discussions. I have now repeated my demand to HFM that the magazine be pulled off the shelf.We are also demanding that any website that depicts that magazine with my photo without my express written permission pull down the image immediately.
From the tone and tenor of their actions, reasonable people can intimate the disdain with which HFM views the blogosphere. The pages of the magazine evince the contempt this conglomerate has for American readers, and I believe many people will stand with me in protesting this way of doing business. For more information on standing with me ,click here.
What I like to do is collect the renewal litter in bookstores, doctors offices, solicitations etc, on the ground and mail the litter back to the magazines for processing. Costs them maybe $1 each to "recycle". Just doing my part.
Not the same companies. The one which violated copyright is HFM.
I know it's sacred, but what a beautiful picture of the kindness and greatness of our military.
Tell them that and why, please! Let Michael know, too, on his website as an encouragement.
Will do.
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.