Hide Comments
Michael Yon wants his picture used only for certain kinds of propaganda. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that his beef is with Polaris, not the magazine.
Posted by WW at June 3, 2006 03:01 PM
WW:
Yon clearly states that he has "no relationship with Polaris Images and never authorized them to distribute my work," so I don't see how you come by that opinion.
Posted by The Cranky Insomniac at June 3, 2006 03:33 PM
WW - Have you even read about the story behind the picture? I suggest you do, before making more of an ass of yourself on this issue. Your hatred and ignorance of the military clearly shows.
*****
"Major Mark Bieger found this little girl after the car bomb that attacked our guys while kids were crowding around. The soldiers here have been angry and sad for two days. They are angry because the terrorists could just as easily have waited a block or two and attacked the patrol away from the kids. Instead, the suicide bomber drove his car and hit the Stryker when about twenty children were jumping up and down and waving at the soldiers. Major Bieger, I had seen him help rescue some of our guys a week earlier during another big attack, took some of our soldiers and rushed this little girl to our hospital. He wanted her to have American surgeons and not to go to the Iraqi hospital. She didnt make it. I snapped this picture when Major Bieger ran to take her away. He kept stopping to talk with her and hug her."
*****
Posted by Michael in MI at June 3, 2006 03:44 PM
Look, I'm not a lawyer, so that's who'll have to sort it out. My point was that the magazine says they bought the photo from Polaris. If that's true, then I'd think it's Polaris, not the magazine, that stole it. Yon's complaint makes it clear that he wants his pics used only for pro-war propaganda, which given his copyright would seem to be his prerogative.
Seems to me that it hinges on whether or not the magazine bought the pic in good faith.
Posted by WW at June 3, 2006 04:58 PM
Maybe both Yon and the magazine should sue Polaris. Yon for stealing the pic, and the magazine for selling them stolen goods.
Posted by WW at June 3, 2006 04:59 PM
No WW, even if the magazine bought it in good faith from Polaris, once informed that they didn't have proper authorization to use it the are responsible to act accordingly (in this case, secure permission from Yon or withdrawl the product containing the picture from the market). They did neither of these things.
If I by a car that had been stolen, I can avoid trouble if I honestly didn't know it was stolen and then give it back. If I continue to drive it around insisting it was mine, I'd be in trouble. HFW should have with withdrawn the magazine from the market and sued Polaris for damages, but instead they are driving around in a stolen car.
Posted by chthus at June 4, 2006 02:59 AM
Sounds like one for the lawyers. Sounds like Yon just wants to squeeze some cash out of someone, which makes him a good American at heart.
Posted by WW at June 4, 2006 04:11 AM
Ownership of a Photo it a matter for lawers but accusations of Warcrimes should be tried in the court of Public opinion? You never cease to amaze, WW.
Posted by Deamon at June 4, 2006 04:32 AM
Hide Comments |
Show/Add Comments in Popup Window(8) | (
Note: You must refresh main page to view newly posted comments here)