Search Mailing List Archives
[liberationtech] Snowden masks for Holloween?
shava23 at gmail.com
Mon Sep 2 23:32:01 PDT 2013
IANAL, but I used to work in entertainment licensing and was a member at
licensing.org/LIMA. Probably qualified as a paralegal in this area.
Trademark has nearly nothing to do with it, although you can involve a
likeness in a trademark -- at which point it is no longer personal (e.g.
Col. Sanders' estate has no recourse to complain that the current KFC logo
isn't a suitable likeness because of the reasonable expectations of
commercial art of that genre, if precedent holds).
And, uh, right, because we don't really care about the law or Snowden's
rights, just what we can get away with internationally and in the court of
public opinion. Thinking of running for president? ;)
On Sep 3, 2013 1:52 AM, "Tom O" <winterfilth at gmail.com> wrote:
> Unless he's trademarked his likeness, it's doubtful he'd have any
> And if he did, what chance does he have to defend it in Russia?
> Slim to none
> On Tuesday, September 3, 2013, Travis McCrea wrote:
>> I actually disagree... his ownership of his likeness is minimal. He is a
>> public figure and as such anyone who wanted to make a mask would be pretty
>> free to do so. I am not saying someone should go out and do it, and if you
>> do and get sued don't come after me... but if I had the resources available
>> and I thought this could make some money I would do it.
>> Travis McCrea
>> USA: 1(206) 552-8728 / CAN: 1(778) 709-4859
>> Candidate for the Canadian Pirate Party in the Vancouver Centre riding.
>> Any views stated in this email are my own and do not reflect the opinions
>> of the party.
>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Shava Nerad <shava23 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> No one elected him and he may have volunteered for the spotlight but not
>>> in the same way that some one does when they campaign for office. Even
>>> movie stars have a right to their visages. Where you could say that a sign
>>> "We are all Snowden" is political speech, citizen Snowden also has rights
>>> to privacy and dignity, and commercial rights that he does not abandon by
>>> being a well-knnown whistleblower, any more than say Rush Limbaugh would by
>>> being a well-known radio personality. Just see how fast the lawyers would
>>> be layered on top of you if you tried to make Rush masks for Halloween
>>> without licensing on the basis of him being a public figure -- and he's
>>> been part of our cultural landscape far longer. Scarier, too. ;)
>>> On Sep 2, 2013 7:43 PM, "Paul Elliott" <pelliott at blackpatchpanel.com>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 05:44:41PM -0400, Shava Nerad wrote:
>>>> > Wouldn't there be a licensing issue? It's a hard argument that he
>>>> has no
>>>> > right to the commercial exploitation of his likeness on the basis of
>>>> > a fugitive whistleblower, and I doubt anyone is authorized as an
>>>> agent to
>>>> > grant that license on his behalf.
>>>> > We have these privacy laws about just using people's images without
>>>> > permission. They are a bit like copyright, but say you can't exploit
>>>> > subject matter without permission, for profit, with a few
>>>> > (Face not recognizable, press reports on "public figures, " release
>>>> > signed,… ).
>>>> > CSJ ethics guidelines and EFF's bloggers' guides and Berkman's guide
>>>> > media creators have good outlines for US law on this stuff.
>>>> > Also my union has a nice guide, the National Writer's Union (AFL-CIO)
>>>> > which I only mention because it's behind a paywall -- and also to
>>>> > that since it's May Day… er...Labor Day here in the states, I am
>>>> > quoting all this off the top of my head and making you verify and
>>>> look up
>>>> > the links. I am on holiday. ;)
>>>> Is not Snowden a public figure? I am sure bush and obama did
>>>> not approve all the bush and obama masks?
>>>> Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096
>>>> pelliott at BlackPatchPanel.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd
>>>> Suite J
>>>> http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117
>>>> Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on
>>>> Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
>>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
>>>> companys at stanford.edu.
>>> Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google.
>>> Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
>>> companys at stanford.edu.
> Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google.
> Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at
> companys at stanford.edu.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the liberationtech