Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,761 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
A local Tucson "punk rock band"used as its album cover, the photo of Officer Eric Hite who was murdered while making a traffic stop.
The pic, originaly in the Arizona Daily star, showed officer Hite lying mortaly wounded in the street while two fellow officers were rendering assistance.
The filthy scumbags said it was their attempt at "dark humor"
Officer Hites funeral was attended by thousands, overflowing the church. He left a wife and child.
The star has refused to name the band since that would give them further publicity
To sink even lower, these shits went on to pay homage to "cop killers" on its album mentioning John Montenegro Cruz, who murdered officer Patrick Hardesty in 2003, and David Delich, who murderd officer Hite.

The band members are NOT teenagers but rather adults.

The lead singer of these scum said he wouldn't apologise to the people he offended.:mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Outrageous. What a bunch of crapheads. :mad:
 

·
Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
Who owns the rights to the photo I wonder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
The rights to the photo are owned by the newspaper. so the scum used it without permission. But since they are worthless filth what would you expect?
It was time for these adults to grow up a long time ago. No question that these jerks are doping it for personal profit because that damned CD is for sale. That's illegal no matter how these sickos try to justify being thieves.

The Associated Press owns many of those nationally distributed photos. They also post warnings on their materials and file lawsuits against copyright thieves...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,935 Posts
Like most of the "three chord wonder bands," this is something that will generate more sales for them than trying to produce a single to put on the album that gets air play.

I'd love to see a copyright violation take place.
 

·
Platinum Bullet Member
Joined
·
41,381 Posts
I'm all for the First Amendment, but there are consequences to using it. If you are man enough to use these pictures and say these things, then you are man enough to have YOUR name plastered all over hte 5 o'clock news. Shame on the local news for censoring it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,365 Posts
The rights to the photo are owned by the newspaper. so the scum used it without permission. But since they are worthless filth what would you expect?
Just asked my sister, a journalist for over forty years, she said that some newspapers don't copyright their photos or other content at all, or at least never bother with infringements.
Near as I can figure the photo copyright belongs to the photographer unless he has contracted to transfer his property to the news agency exclusively.

Practically any photo of a deceased person may under certain circumstances be barred from use by the family. I ran across a similar case recently. It amounts to nobody having exclusive control over a person's image regardless of copyright on a particular photo.
If a person's image is used in a manner that promotes something the person while living would be opposed to the family can sue as it would defame the character of the deceased.
The Family of the photographer who'd originally taken the often used photo of Che' Guevara started up several such lawsuits in recent years challenging the use of the photo in a manner inconsistent with Che's beliefs.

Basically owning license to use a photo gives you no clear cut right to a person's image in that photo, and you must honor the deceased persons beliefs.

There were a couple of similar suits taken out by relatives of the deceased, I forget the exact details.

Here we go
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0829-01.htm
Che's widow has also sued for this reason.

Here is the Personal Rights Protection as outlined in the Tennessee state Code 47-25-1101
http://www.preslaw.net/prpa.pdf

The image of the deceased is not to be used in any form of advertisement without express permission of his estate.

Whether Arizona recognizes this protection or not I have no idea, but theres supposed to be provisions for it under federal law as well.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
100,657 Posts
I'm all for the First Amendment, but there are consequences to using it. If you are man enough to use these pictures and say these things, then you are man enough to have YOUR name plastered all over hte 5 o'clock news. Shame on the local news for censoring it.
First amendment provides quite limited protections for commercial speech - which this appears to be. But if i were the members of the band, I'd be sort of concerned about being in a vehicle registered in the name of any member. Almost every trip in a car involves SOME violation of traffic law.

And there is just no telling what might turn up during a traffic stop...
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top