In the world of post-truth drama, it makes sense. Nothing turns around the loyalty he builds when he captures the hearts and minds of his voters. Even if he dies of a heart attack, people will still seek out the kind of attitude he has been iconic for. Eton Musk is 25 years younger, but seems to be following Trump as a behavior model of successful businessman icon.
God, it would be hilarious if Trump was forced to pay Fulton County a big lump sum and destroy all of his remaining merch. I doubt the county has the resources to wage that kind of legal battle, but one can hope.
It seems pretty clear that the Fulton County Sheriff’s office holds the copyright here; the only real question is in what constitutes fair use of a mug shot.
That’s not what’s being argued. You don’t own a picture just because you’re in it and this has been proven legally on numerous cases, the story behind the LUL Twitch emote being a relatively recent example.
Trump can take a selfie and put it on a shirt. If I take a picture of him and upload it to my site, I can sue him if he uses that picture instead. The argument is that the jail can too.
Exactly, like photographers have copyright of their photos. It would be hilarious if you needed to own the subject of the photo to have copyright. The movie industry would probably collapse overnight.
But there might be a fringe use case where they can block other parties from profiting off of it themselves. There are laws in some states prohibiting criminals from collecting proceeds from their own memoirs and other works, though that probably only applies to convicted felons, and Trump isn’t there quite yet. But there might be precedent if someone really wanted to take this to court.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
In the world of post-truth drama, it makes sense. Nothing turns around the loyalty he builds when he captures the hearts and minds of his voters. Even if he dies of a heart attack, people will still seek out the kind of attitude he has been iconic for. Eton Musk is 25 years younger, but seems to be following Trump as a behavior model of successful businessman icon.
he’s the junction of fame and shame… the Jerry Springer phenomenon incarnate… his fans pay to keep the show real…
God, it would be hilarious if Trump was forced to pay Fulton County a big lump sum and destroy all of his remaining merch. I doubt the county has the resources to wage that kind of legal battle, but one can hope.
It seems pretty clear that the Fulton County Sheriff’s office holds the copyright here; the only real question is in what constitutes fair use of a mug shot.
I don’t think that counties can own a copyright on someone else’s likeness.
That’s not what’s being argued. You don’t own a picture just because you’re in it and this has been proven legally on numerous cases, the story behind the LUL Twitch emote being a relatively recent example.
Trump can take a selfie and put it on a shirt. If I take a picture of him and upload it to my site, I can sue him if he uses that picture instead. The argument is that the jail can too.
They don’t own the copyright on someone’s likeness. They own the copyright on that specific image.
Exactly, like photographers have copyright of their photos. It would be hilarious if you needed to own the subject of the photo to have copyright. The movie industry would probably collapse overnight.
Unfortunately, I have the feeling the movie industry would be overjoyed if all their actors were slaves…
Likeness is part of trademark law.
It’s a whole separate thing from copyright.
A model can own their likeness, but they can’t sell shirts of their photos from magazines.
Those specific images are owned by the magazine.
Same thing applies here.
But there might be a fringe use case where they can block other parties from profiting off of it themselves. There are laws in some states prohibiting criminals from collecting proceeds from their own memoirs and other works, though that probably only applies to convicted felons, and Trump isn’t there quite yet. But there might be precedent if someone really wanted to take this to court.
I still hold that image was stable diffusion generated.