Gay couple sues after photo used in anti-gay flier

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 4:07 PM GMT
    This story broke some weeks ago, but now the gay couple has actually brought a lawsuit today, for unauthorized use of their copyrighted engagement photo to promote gay hate. I wish them a speedy and generous judgment.

    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/26/14098656-gay-couple-sues-after-photo-used-in-anti-gay-flier?lite
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 4:11 PM GMT
    Me too. I hate that guy, he's a county supervisor in Loudon County, near DC and one county away from our farm. What a bigoted freak.

    There was an article about him in the WaPo this morning, he's got some other problems for blurring the lines between his elected office and his hate group:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/for-loudoun-supervisor-eugene-delgaudio-blurred-lines-on-fundraising/2012/09/25/2ec1e206-eca7-11e1-a80b-9f898562d010_story.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 8:09 PM GMT
    That's terrible. I also wish them a quick and generous judgement.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 8:47 PM GMT
    I hope the bastards who did this are hung out to dry.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 8:58 PM GMT
    GonzoTheGreat saidI hope the bastards who did this are hung out to dry.

    Yes, and what may help is that the material was copyrighted by a professional photographer. It just wasn't a snapshot somebody put on their own personal webpage, which might be considered fair game for use by others.

    Furthermore, it can be argued that the couple suffered an invasion of privacy, and was slandered, demeaned and held up to public ridicule & criticism by the content of the ad in which it appeared. They are private individuals, not public figures who can, under certain circumstances, lose their claim to protections from such privacy assaults.

    It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 9:01 PM GMT
    It´s SO sick to take their ENGAGEMENT photo and use it to attack gay relationships. I just can´t find the words. They have no moral dignity, no compassion, no decency, no self respect and no connection with reality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 9:09 PM GMT
    Like the suit says they could have just used a stock photo of two guys kissing, not someone's personal photo.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 9:19 PM GMT
    It's only a matter of time before he gets outed as a pedophile.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 9:58 PM GMT
    paulflexes saidIt's only a matter of time before he gets outed as a pedophile.

    I'd say that's highly likely!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 26, 2012 11:12 PM GMT
    This is their biggest nightmare. Two guys kissing. I once had a client that said "I just don't like the gays kissing, like I kiss my husband."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2012 2:51 AM GMT
    The use isn't so important to me as the theft of property. An image is copyrighted, whether registered or not. Even my profile picture (horrible lighting and a netbook camera) is copyrighted, though not registered. However, I'm not sure that the subjects can bring the lawsuit over the copyright. The photographer can.

    So, suppose I snap a picture of two men sitting on a park bench. I don't need their release for a "news" use of the picture. It can be used to illustrate a wide variety of topics. I would have to be careful not to misrepresent the subjects. For example, using it to illustrate an article on "pedophiles in the park" could get me in trouble.

    I cannot use the picture for commercial purposes without a release from the subjects. I can't put the picture above "Check out WalMart's fall collection."

    The two men in the picture may have a basis for a lawsuit on the use of their image: it misrepresents them and holds them up for ridicule. They do not have a standing in copyright.