Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mahatmabenfoo who wrote (4752)	6/24/2003 7:15:01 PM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 12465

Charles, Anyone who wants can paint a picture of him with Donkey ears and put it on a T-shirt -- AND sell the T-shirt. It's just a visual way of saying that AP reminds them of a certain animal -- fairplay, even if the T-shirt seller makes money. I note that in your profile, you list your occupation as an attorney. I am not an attorney, but consider myself much better versed in law than the average lay person. That said, with all due respect to you, your education & training, and your profession & experience, I respectfully disagree very strongly with your opinion. To substitute other named persons (excluding Mr. Dobry and Mr. Elgindy) in your above example, let's presume that I created a Tiger Woods t-shirt or a Michael Jordan t-shirt and started selling them, with or without the aforementioned donkey ears. I can guarantee you that I would inevitably be sued by Mr. Woods or Mr. Jordan for unauthorized usage of their likeness in a commercial enterprise just as soon as they were made aware of my endeavors, no ifs, ands or buts about it, whether I sold many t-shirts or just a single t-shirt. Were I to have created the t-shirt, but not sold it, merely donned it myself, then there is no commercial enterprise aspect to the t-shirt and I am clearly protected by the free speech amendment. To me, you seem to be trying to make a distinction between selling one t-shirt (a political statement and guaranteed free speech) as opposed to selling many t-shirts (a commercial enterprise). To be fair, perhaps I have misinterpreted your posts. If so, please feel free to correct me. To return to the Dobry painting, the single painting (presuming no reproductions are ever made available) falls into the commercial enterprise arena because the painting(s) is(are) being used to promote sales of a pending book, which is clearly a commercial enterprise (in my opinion). Going one step further, and examining the surrounding controversy inherent to the book, Mr. Dobry has (again, in my opinion) gone well beyond the limits of free speech guarantees and is hiding behind the amendment to promote the future sales of his pending book. And for the moment, let's ignore any factual inaccuracies contained within his writings. Clearly his intent (in my opinion) is to harass the subjects covered within his book, not to promote education and understanding of the sleazy underworld of scam stocks and promoters. I think that Mr. Elgindy has a fairly good chance of succeeding with his legal request, though I suspect that his chances of winning any significant sums of money are scant at best. I think that the issue would be best resolved (and most cost effective) simply by having Mr. Dobry remove the paintings (and alleged likenesses) from his web site, with no damages awarded. As for your contention that Mr. Elgindy is a celebrity, and therefore falls under the more liberal guidelines for "fair use" and libel/slander, the celebrity aspect of law is more commonly applicable under libel/slander laws rather than "fair use" laws. Were Mr. Dobry a professional photographer, whose works were regularly reproduced in legitimate news outlets, then his (Mr. Dobry's) use of Mr. Elgindy's likeness in the reporting of news would constitute "fair use". However, that is not the case here. The likenesses are (in my opinion) being used to promote a commercial enterprise, and therefore fall outside of the "fair use" laws... All in all, just my opinion... KJC