The resemblance is phenomenal.
Posted on 01/28/2020 2:06:46 PM PST by yesthatjallen
The young, sandy-haired boy wears a self-satisfied expression. His small hand is clenched as if he is in the middle of a triumphant fist pump.
By now, Laney Griner is used to seeing the photo she took of her son in 2007 when he was 11 months old splashed across the Internet or featured in various advertisements. The child’s name is Sam, but for years the world has known him as the popular Internet meme, “Success Kid.”
Last week, Griner discovered her son’s copyrighted image in the last place she ever expected to find it: a campaign fundraising ad for Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa). King has repeatedly come under fire for inflammatory remarks and rebuked as racist, anti-Semitic or insulting to minorities. The ad superimposes Sam’s famous face over a blurred picture of the U.S. Capitol alongside all-caps text that reads, “FUND OUR MEMES!!!”
“I was filled with rage. It made me so angry,” the 44-year-old mother from Jacksonville, Fla., told The Washington Post on Monday. “It was just kind of shocking.”
Griner, who identifies as “really liberal,” said she never gave permission to King or his staff to use Sam’s likeness, and is working with her legal team to make sure they don’t continue. On Monday, Griner’s attorney sent a cease-and-desist letter, demanding the congressman and his campaign take down the meme from all platforms associated with them and acknowledge the misuse in a public apology, among other requests.
SNIP
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Sorry - your kid’s image is in the public domain.
Of course it’s fascinating how “really liberal” = anti-free speech
Ahhhh. So you put your kid’s image on the interwebs and your upset somebody used it. Get a grip.
Quick, kid .. run away .. do it now .. RUN !
The same BS music artists pull when a conservative plays one of their songs.
“I was filled with rage. It made me so angry,” the 44-year-old mother from Jacksonville, Fla., told The Washington Post on Monday. “It was just kind of shocking.”
Liberals are such nasty, combative people.
Griner, who identifies as “really liberal,” ...
So we all know her kid’s future already.
Poor kid.
The rest of the country can complain about Steve King all they want we will keep electing him. We know the truth about how they take things he says out of context.
Exactly. All over 4chan and elsewhere.
The resemblance is phenomenal.
The kid’s calves are like cantaloupes.
I would like to sympathize with this mama if she’d complained sooner— I wouldn’t want photos of my children all over the internet without my permission, where who knows what manner of demons could see.
But how’d the photo get on the internet in the first place? Didn’t she put it on Facebook?
At this point, she’s complicit, like a lot of those #MeToo bandwagon-jumpers.
Nope, not even close. It’s copyrighted, and she licenses it. Read the Wikipedia page linked in comment #1.
Steve King didn’t license it. His bad.
Read comment #13. It’s copyrighted. King didn’t license it. He loses.
500 copies of that should be tweeted right back at the mom!
No - she doesn’t.
She might’ve copyrighted it but there’s so much of it in the public domain that shows she either hasn’t enforced it or licensed it to a meme generating service where someone on Kings campaign made it from.
Perfectly.
Legal.
Hey, she licenced it, and sells it, and she has a right to ask someone not to use it.
Not the way I understand it from experience. The licensee only receives money for the first time it’s put up. After that, she’s out of luck.
If it is different now, I’d love to know cuz I’d make some money on photos I am the licensee of.
Oh! So IOW, mama copyrighted baby’s image, and she’s been making $$ off it?? Sheesh. That’s just creepy.
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.