Distinguished Toastmaster
BUSINESS & BRANDING COACH . LIFE & LEADERSHIP STRATEGIST MOTIVATIONAL SPEAKER SERVING ENTREPRENEURS &
MAIN STREET

RIGHT OF PUBLICITY [ You Are On This CLICKs PAGE ]

INDEX:

• MARINE MURDERER WAS BAITCLICKED, TOO (c) Carrie Devorah
  

• SO YOU THINK YOU CAN SELL THAT AUTOGRAPH? (c) Carrie Devorah
  SONY’s FILM TOOK AIM AT AMERICA’s BIGGEST TABOO NOT N. KOREA’S (c) Carrie Devorah
  KIM JUNG, SETH & SONY & THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH PARODY SOMEONE FEELS HUMILATES THEM (c) Carrie Devorah :
  THE DEATH OF KLINGHOFFER IS A MALICE OF RIGHTS (c) Carrie Devorah 
• CALIFORNIA JUDGE DONALD MILES GOT IT ALL WRONG ABOUT LAWYER SVITLANA SANGARY'S PHOTOSHOPPING CRIME (c) Carrie Devorah
• DEAD LIKE VIVIAN MAIER: PROPS FOR PROFITS- OR ARE THEY?  (c) Carrie Devorah
• THE DEATH OF KLINGHOFFER IS A CONVERSATION INCLUDING RIGHTS NOT JUST ANTI-SEMITISM  (c) Carrie Devorah
• GEHRY AND THE GENERAL aka Making A $40 Million Conversation A Heck Of Alot Simple (c) Carrie Devorah
  
• HEALTHCARE.gov's POSTER GIRL FOR RIGHT OF PUBLICITY (c) Carrie Devorah
  

________________________________________________________________________________
MARINE MURDERER WAS BAITCLICKED, TOO (c) Carrie Devorah:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

     Baitclicking is one of those dirty marketing secrets that impacted the Marine Murderer too. Being outed by his Mugshot for his DUI circulated online was a trigger in the slaughter he committed. 
    
     President Obama went to prison days after commuting 46 prisoners sentences. President Obama stumbled at giving these felons a chance at an unencumbered new start.

     November 2015, these prisoners will be on the streets. Their sentence may be commuted. The felons are forever “jailed” by their mugshots that are posted online and printed in magazines by profiteers. Those photos haunt the commutants ability to start new lives.

     Less than a week later, Kuwaitee Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, murdered five Marines at the Chattanooga Navy Yards. Abdulazeez had written in his high school year book "My name causes national security alerts. What does yours do?" Abdulazeez suffered from depression. Fuel to his depression was when Abdulazeez’ mugshot publicized after a DUI.

     Abdulazeez had been Baitclicked.

     Baitclicking is the use of photos to entice readers to click on the photo. A pseudo story accompanies the photo. Some stories hawk product. Some clicks are of celebrities. One baitclick seduces readers wanting to know what “Ophra Lied” about. Other baitclicks use mugshots. A mugshot is taken when someone is booked. Booked does not mean convicted. The man who kept three kidnapped women for a decade in his house was a popular click for a while. The “hottest conman” made the rounds a bit back. “Hottest Chicks” is another theme. Mocking funny mugshots is another theme, too.

     Mugshots were put online in the race to do what others did, making public information accessible and profitable. The legal blowback to jurisdictions allowing their information online was not thought through. Steps were not taken to protect those named and/or pictured.

     The impact of abuse of public information was and is becoming a cost to cities and states, as understanding of prisoners’ rights is growing. A sub business of illegal profiting from Mugshots is paying to have your mugshots removed. There may or may not be relationships between the entities putting mugshots online and in print, are related or profiting from the entities that ask payments of about $400 - $1500 to remove the mugshots. Print versions of online mugshot magazines, sell for $1.00. The “newspaper” alleging they serve an educational role, have been reported to have declining sales. As with anything else, novel ideas start popular, then wane out in audience interest.

     Abdulazeez’ personal circumstance became profit for a swelling startup- using freed public information to profit from. Tribute sites, prison records, facebook pages and twitter feeds have fallen victim to data being taken first then taken down, maybe, after a complicated take down process and/or fees paid and/or hiring a lawyer.

     There are laws preventing this online abuse from starting. These laws are ignored by Search Engines, Venture Capitalists and ICANN, overseeing the registries that rent website domain names. Domain names are not bought. They are of use only as long as fees are paid.

     Federal law does not allow the publishing of mugshots. The Privacy Act of 1974 says “The Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, establishes a code of fair information practices that governs the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of information about individuals that is maintained in systems of records by federal agencies. A system of records is a group of records under the control of an agency from which information is retrieved by the name of the individual or by some identifier assigned to the individual.”

     The Privacy Act requires that agencies give the public notice of their systems of records by publication in the Federal Register. Click here to see a list of DOJ systems of records and their Federal Register citations. The Privacy Act prohibits the disclosure of a record about an individual from a system of records absent the written consent of the individual, unless the disclosure is pursuant to one of twelve statutory exceptions. The Act also provides individuals with a means by which to seek access to and amendment of their records, and sets forth various agency record-keeping requirements.

               It is a misconception that State law allows mugshots to be published online. Felons, criminals and booked are people, too. Rules of image protection are state issues. Each states laws to image protection vary (http://www.rcfp.org/rcfp/orders/docs/POLICE.pdf). The laws that may be violated with using another person’s identity to make money include Right of Publicity and Right of Privacy.

     Back in 2013, a White House petition was submitted to stop “Baitclicking” of Mugshots . No word was said yet by the White House if Baitclicking is their next step to reform criminal justice, and protect the Rights of Privacy and Publicity the Venture Capital backed startups have been whoring out.

    “Busted Paper” does not print retractions when the person in the mugshot is found innocent. “Just Busted” ran the wrong names for photos of two men accused of being deadbeat dads. The dads, as it turned out were dead. A local reporter hungry for airtime appears did not do diligence to research his bit before airing his piece.

     Hennepin County Public Defenders Office managing attorney says Bob Sorensen . Sorensen points out lives are permanently changed after mugshots are posted on these websites. Sorenson says, “This is very disturbing to a lot of people and the consequences for people whose mugshots are included are much wider than most people think,” . The Ohio ACLU weighed in stating that information of a crime is public yet abusing the prisoner’s rights, this way, is not correct.

     A mugshot printed in a tabloid is not defamation if the publication accurately reports the information of that arrest. Accurate reporting is not always the case.

     In 2012, Ohio Scott Ciolek filed a class action law suit against the websites justmugshots.com, bustedmugshots.com, mugshotsonline.com, findmugshots.com — as well as mugremove.com, a reputation clearing site, focusing on Rights To Publicity. Ciolek points out the photos are often unflattering and that the booked person may have been exonerated of the alleged crime. 

     An unfortunate pushback to baitclicking is to start a countersite publishing the images of the publisher and staff who are accountable to the law for violating the booked person’s rights. There is a move called “check the box” taking on the requirement a felon has to tell a prospective employer or landlord of their record. “Check the box” will have no worth until selling of mugshots and other peoples images online without permission is stopped.

     There is a more real pushback to take. This pushback is against the Search Engines, the domain registries and ICANN that works with the Search Engines that form the Internet network, the venture capitalists funding startups engineered to gather private data. Getting justice may be too hard and too buried.

Bustedpaper.com                   COLORADO

Justmugshots.com                 NEVADA

Mugshotsonline.com             BELIZE

Bustedmugshots.com            BELIZE

Findmughots.com                    PANAMA


     Europe has begun the Right To Remove. Vint Cerf, the ‘father of the Internet,’ said Al Gore was put in to the Senate to make the Internet happen. Is Gore ground zero?

     America is the creator of the Infrastructure that allows domain names to exist, is at root fault, ground zero for all this internet madness. That infrustructure, IANA, is projected to have Trillion dollar profit potential. Current profits, rising in two years to almost ½ billion dollars are not repaid back to tax payers. There is a push to pull IANA from American taxpayers, by September 2016.

Already, uncontrolled.

Watch.

Wait.

     The shooting murders by Abdulazeez, shamed by personal information made widely public is not even a hint of what will come. It is a sockwind showing how the breeze will flow.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
SO YOU THINK YOU CAN SELL THAT AUTOGRAPH? (c) Carrie Devorah :
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Think again.

InTouch magazine ran a piece called "KATY's FIRST LOVE TELLS ALL!" reporting her middle school boyfriend was selling their loveletters.

Good news for Katy is that selling Love Letters using her name, for profit, without her written,expressed permission and, in K.P.'s case, most likely license, is a violation of Perry's Rights To Privacy and Rights To Publicity.

Even 11 year old girls turned rockstars are entitled to the expectation their inner most feelings remain that.

Tell-alls come with one price. Show-To-Sell-All  comes with a very different price tag- California Civil Code 3344, "Right of Publicity protects a person's right in his or her name and likeness" even childhood love letters.

Ms. Perry and all other celebs are protected by Life+70.

Dude, if it wasn't for fear of bad press from taking action Ms. Perry could take against you, my guess she would be right on it. But that is the way of being a Celeb in a world of TMZ and Digital Trespassing, nothing is left to the imagination, any more...

Ms. Perry, count your blessings. Any man that kiss and tells and then decides to sell is that frog you are happy is left in your 'warts & all' dust....


______________________________________________________________________________________________________
SONY’s FILM TOOK AIM AT AMERICA’s BIGGEST TABOO NOT N. KOREA’S (c) Carrie Devorah :
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

_

____________________________________________________________________________________________________
KIM JUNG, SETH & SONY & THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH PARODY SOMEONE FEELS HUMILATES THEM (c) Carrie Devorah :
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 ___________________________________________________________
THE DEATH OF KLINGHOFFER IS A MALICE OF RIGHTS (c) Carrie Devorah :
____________________________________________________________
The Death Of Klinghoffer is an actual malice violating the Rights of the Klinghoffer family.

Rights of Identity, Rights of Publicity and Rights of Privacy.

This play is potentially an act of defamation violating a man, his likeness, his identity, his voice, not just here but to every signer of the Berne Convention where  Death Of Klinghoffer is staged, performed or streamed through the wires or each country where it the script is mailed.

At each and every performance where the actor playing Leon or the actress playing his wife, or someone is playing Leon's murderer are committing the most basic form of identity theft as defined in the Penal Code, "by acting as that other person or by using personal identifying information of that other person."

New York Right Of Publicity is codified in to New York's Right of Privacy Statute, Article 5 of New York Civil Rights, Section 50 and 51.

New York right of Publicity Law, "using the name or likeness of another"- VIOLATED.

Section 51, "protecting a person's name, portrait, picture or voice"- VIOLATED.

Copyright law, "Life+ 70". Copyright law protecting Leon Klinghoffer's look. Klinghoffer was murdered in 1985. "Death Of Klinghoffer" staged at New York City's Metropolitan Opera in 2014. America is a signator to the Berne a convention as are over 126 other countries, some of which are staging "Death Of Klinghoffer." Each nation signed to the Berne Convention is accountable to Life+ 70.

The inhumanity of the Met staging "Death of Klinghoffer" was funded by State and Federal dollars. 1/2 million dollars came from New York City's Department of Culture. $1 million came from State.

Whether someone is a Leon Klinghoffer or a celebrity crying out about loss of privacies in a technology world, "The Death Of Klinghoffer" is all of us- Jewish, Arab, white, pink more purple- will end up somewhere, at some time, losing rights, publicity, privacy, identity- to the hands of others- unwanted.

Exit- staged left.

_____________________________________________________________
CALIFORNIA JUDGE DONALD MILES GOT IT ALL WRONG ABOUT LAWYER SVITLANA SANGARY'S PHOTOSHOPPING CRIME (c) Carrie Devorah :
_____________________________________________________________

JUDGE DONALD MILES GOT IT ALL WRONG ABOUT SVITLANA SANGARY’S PHOTOSHOPPING CRIME HENCE HURTING CREATORS OF CONTENT AROUND THE WORLD

The case of Svitlana Sangary is a legal industry reset, showing how few of the experts Content creators rely on know what they are talking about when it comes to Content theft. Judge Donald Miles Will be ruing the day Svitlana’s case crossed his calendar. You see, Judges are bound to a Code of Ethics. In the case of California Judges, that code of Ethics is 53 pages long. The sum total of the Judicial PDF can be focused in to one directive, promoting Public Confidence. Page 9 of 53 states, “A judge shall respect and comply with the law* and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity* and impartiality* of the judiciary. A judge shall not make statements, whether public or nonpublic, that commit the judge with respect to cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the courts or that are inconsistent with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of judicial office,” (http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/ca_code_judicial_ethics.pdf ) even when the matter is adressing behaviours of a colleague. Judges were lawyers too, once upon a time. Judges can be asked to adjudicate matters over other lawyers, just as Judge Donald Miles was asked to.

His short straw? Svitlana Gangary and 50 pics plus of Gangary with celebs and other notables, exceptin’ that, according to the A listers Gangary is shoulder to hair with, Gangary wasn’t in the pics with them when the pics were shot, something the Judge ignored in his 18 page decision. Had he notated this fact, the decision should have taken a very different decision, after all, Gangary had said, “Sangary added: "Please take a look at all my pictures, consult any computer guru if you like, and decide for yourself whether these pictures are real, authentic or Photoshopped."

Gangary posted to her site, a mythology of her raison d’etre. Gangary wrote, "I put blood, sweat and tears to finally reach a point in my life when I became a major donor and devoted supporter of numerous charitable and political causes, and got invited to the events where I was blessed with the opportunity to socialize and have my pictures taken with the talented and successful people, who have been inspiring me for my whole life, whom I admire and look up to." Gangary’s self adulation does not match up to the Yelp single star reviews by alleged former clients, one citing a CNN online piece, reposting a photo showing Ashley Simpson’s head photoshopped out with Gangary’s head photoshopped in its place  (http://www.yelp.com/biz/svitlana-sangary-los-angeles ).

Someone, a web designer, a copywriter, Svitlana wrote, third person, “Svitlana Sangary came to this country in her twenties, with nothing, and married another immigrant, who also had nothing ... Sangary's American dream has come true, as she has been able to achieve a point wherein now, in her thirties, Sangary is a prominent donor and philanthropist, supporting important social causes, who had recently received the email from President Obama, with the subject line 'I need your help today', asking Svitlana Sangary for an additional donation." Svitlana better have a copy of that email along with a copy of the check she sent POTUS. Lois Lerner may be under the Congressional hotlights but the rest of her team are doing crack research in to persons who allege philanthropy moreso alleging money requests from Barack.

Celebrity lawyer Mark Geragos and high-profile legal analyst allegedly does not think an attorney's photoshop frenzy is troublesome or worth suspension for six months from the California State Bar,  according to CNN, "If that kind of puffery is actionable by the state bar, you are going to put the entire membership of state bar out of business…There is no greater group of self-promoters Geragos knows better.

Gangary’s use of famous people’s images on her website is no different than the hacking and posting of nude photographs of celebrities Kate Upton, Jennifer Lawrence, Victoria Justice, Ariana Grande, Kirsten Dunst, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Krysten Ritter, Yvonne Strahovski, and Teresa Palmer, difference being, Gangary’s celeb have clothes on in the pics still on Gangray’s site.

Judge Donald Miles oversight of Svitlana Sangary’s case, summed up in his 18 page decision, is Primo Exampl-o why Judge’s should not be issuing decisions in areas they know nothing about- millennials in an online world, growing up in a world of accelerating theft on line. The aggregiousness of Svitlana’s crime isn’t that she injected herself in to photos with celebs, common place in a millennial culture of Pinterest, Vine, Meme’s, youtube and more. The aggregiousness is that Svitlana stole. State Bar Court Judge Donald F. Miles found Sangary culpable of four total counts- deceptive advertising, two counts of failing to cooperate with a disciplinary investigation, and a single count of failing to promptly release a client file. Didn’t take long to find the rash of Lone Star reviews of Sangary online- one star, and that, only because No Star isn’t an option on Yelp.

Two years ago, Judge Mile had steps to take.  Miles did not failing to find Svitlana Sangary guilty of Theft, reporting her to local enforcement for her Crimes. State Bar Court Judge Donald F. Miles needs to be investigated, too, Property Theft is a Crime. Photos, believe it or not World, are property, belonging to someone, making a living from them.

Stealing isn’t a crime one gets suspended for, unless one is in an SRO industry. SRO? Self Regulated, like the California Bar. SRO’s are notorious for wrist slaps as punishment for crimes everyday people would go to jail for just like the financial industry SRO FINRA that expunges bad actors backgrounds from being seen by unsuspecting investors seeking management of life savings to retire on.  Except the California State Bar is a .(dot)gov held to uphold the law of the land.

SRO’s are not people friendly. Law enforcement is not Criminal friendly. TMZ reports Svitlana Sangary was outed by Hollywood A-listers angered their pics were used as advertising on her professional website. Caveat Empore, Svitlana and note to TMZ, it isn’t only the celebs Gangary has to worry about. Her worry includes the owners of the Property Gangary stole.

Theft is a four letter word spelled J-A-I-L.

Each photo Svitlana appears in belongs to someone, a photographer and – or the agency representing the photographer ie as in the case of the Wireimage pic of Ashley Simpson, Paris Hilton, Kim K and Nick Cannon taken. Wireimage is an entity booked to cover events, often as the ‘house’ photographer, getting exclusive access other photographers won’t. Wireimage’s photos are owned by the client when TOS, Terms of Service, are Work-for-Hire gigs. 

Multiple crimes are involved here;

1- Crime One, violating the rights of the Image owner, infringement.

2- Crime Two, removing photos from wherever Svitlana accessed them- copyright theft.

3- Crime Three, altering stolen property, the photos, to cover up her theft.

4- Crime Four, assuming an Alias- Fraud.

5- Crime Five, posting the stolen, altered images back online and on to her website with the intent to profit from the photo use.

6- Crime Six, individual to each and every person pictured alongside Svitlana, celebrity and others than can look at the pic and go, “OMG, that is me,” theft of Rights of Publicity and Rights of Privacy, a crime in each and every state in America and a crime in countries around the world. Judges have already ruled that a crime on the Internet, the world-wide-web, can be pursued globally. The Right of Publicity in California protects against unauthorized uses of a person’s name or likeness for commercial and certain other exploitative purposes. The term “photograph” includes still or moving picture. The person in question must be “readily identifiable.”

7- Crime Seven, intent to commit the crime internationally

8- Crime Eight, Wire Fraud, possibly mail fraud along with an question of Rico, and conspiracy, in that it is most likely that Svitlana did not photoshop these photos alone, most likely has a webhost, web designer, someone in addition to herself complicit to this crime.

9- Crime Nine, Intent. Svitlana intended to steal. And she did. Svitlana stole.

Multiply the above crimes times the number of people in each of the photos Svitlana appears in, times that times the number of Property Owners robbed with their property taken without permission, six months is not adequate, jail is, setting the example that is going to resonate to retard, hopefully, the exponential accelerating theft of Content Owners Intellectual Property. Take that number and then? Know the chilling fact of IP Theft is that once an image is stolen, the Property owner will never know how much money they lost. The Content owner cant know that number. The Internet, by design, blocks search results from other parts of the world. Infringements showing up in a Search are nowhere anywhere the real numbers of infringements the Content creator is losing payment for.

California's statute protects against uses of a person's likeness for advertising purposes. Specifically, the statute prohibits “knowing” use of a person’s name/likeness/etc., on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person's prior consent, (Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(a))

Yup.

Complaints should be filed against the SRO that let Svitlana off with a threatened 6 month wrist slap by each individual and business harmed. This sexy story went viral, from TMZ, to CNN, so on and so forth share the Content Owner’s property forward, continuing violating the images Gangray stole. There is an exception in the law for news. In a day of everyone having a PDA, “forward”, “share” and “send” clicks, the rightful step editors should have taken was to Hyperlink to the images on Gangray’s site (http://californiacivillawyer.com/publicity.htm ), not copy and paste, themselves potentially culpable for the same crimes facing Gangray. (http://www.inquisitr.com/1486426/meet-svitlana-sangary-the-attorney-who-knew-celebrities-thanks-to-photoshop/#qF0MjHjYtq1Oykqt.99); ( http://www.ibtimes.com/who-svitlana-sangary-la-lawyer-faces-bar-suspension-using-photoshop-create-celebrity-1691514); (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2766582/Attorney-photoshopped-photos-Kim-Kardashian-George-Clooney-faces-suspension-insists-images-real.html#ixzz3ESc2SlPZ); ( http://www.lawblogs.net/2014/09/25/photo-shopping-public-figures-beside-lawyers-pictures-could-lead-to-disciplinary-suspension); (http://www.diyphotography.net/attorney-faces-suspension-photoshoping-photos-celebrities/ )

Loyola Law School of Los Angeles professor Stan Goldman says lawyers' websites and photoshopping should be controlled by the state bar. Goldman, a legal ethics scholar needs a reminder, lawyers are not exempt from the law or above the law. Lawyer’s stealing is far more aggregious. Lawyers went to law school. Lawyers “know better.”

The Courts three-step test isn’t rocket science. It is, (i) Was there a “knowing” use of the plaintiff’s protected identity, (ii) Was the use for advertising purposes?, (iii) Was there a direct connection between the use and the commercial purpose? ( Newcombe v. Adolf Coors Co., 157 F.3d 686, 692 (9th Cir. 1998). Answer all three “yes”, the statute is violated.   

California’s common-law right has a four-step test-
(i) The defendant’s use of plaintiff’s “identity”; (ii) The appropriation of plaintiff’s name or likeness to  defendant’s advantage, commercially or otherwise; (iii) Lack of consent (iv) Resulting injury ( White v. Samsung, 971 F.2d 1395, 1397 (9th Cir. 1992).

A plaintiff can go after claims for violations of both the common law and the statute. Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(g),entitles a plaintiff to “actual damages suffered,” as well as defendant’s profits “are attributable to the use.” Punitive damages “may” be awarded under the statute; California law limits punitive damages to cases of “oppression, fraud, or malice.” Cal. Civ. Code § 3294 awards attorney’s fees and costs to the prevailing side. Courts might take into account “injury to peace, happiness, and feelings,” as well as “injury to goodwill, professional standing, and future publicity value.” (Waits v. Frito-Lay, 978 F.2d 1093, 1102-03 (9th Cir. 1992).

The California Bar Association says Sangary's suspension does not go into effect until approved by the California Supreme Court, recommending two-and-a-half years of probation after the six-month suspension. Theft is theft is theft no matter how one wants to explain bad behavior. Jail, lots of it. Toss the key away. Sites like Wiki-how, need to be shut down for teaching how to steal Intellectual Property to pass it off as one’s own (www.wikihow.com/Make-a-Fake-Picture-With-Famous-People-to-Impress-Your-Friends-and-Family ).

The Statute of Limitations for Right of Publicity and Right Of Privacy claims is two-years ( Christoff v. Nestle USA, Inc., 213 P.3d 132, 135 (Cal. 2009) ). The Ninth Circuit holds the statute is retriggered when "the statement itself is substantively altered or added to, or the website is directed to a new audence."
Donald…., Judge Miles, the list of assaults goes on and on, (Yeager v. Bowlin, 693 F.3d 1076, 1082 (9th Cir. 2012), TMZ, CNN, Daily Mail, having failed to act as a lawyer and Judge. Get it right, Don. You have to. Content Creators are watching. The take away here for celebs is getting to see, firsthand, is how their grip-and-greets are abused.

Chilling, isn’t it. 


___________________________________________________________
DEAD: PROPS FOR PROFITS- OR ARE THEY?  (c) Carrie Devorah :
___________________________________________________________

A culture is defined by how they treat their dead. America revives dead actors back in to profit machines.

Dead people become props used for politics,  tourism and commercialization,  not as  in property- props, like in theatre. Tupac and MJ appear  as Holograms on stage   Natalie is singing with Dad, Nate. Ike Eisenhower, as a DC tour site, is  a $40 million expenditure, and counting, conversation in Congress. Marketing of Dead Celebs became big business to heirs and studios after colleague of mine made that industry happen with the law he passed, first in California.

Do Dead have to be Big Business? These are moral  debates  between surviving family members and their souls.  Well, only if respect for the Dead rings in cheaper than profit. If one is ethical, and moral, the conversation is refocuses on honoring a Loved, Privacy, Rights of Publicity, Life  After  Death, in tandem or hybrid with Copyright and Trademark.

The conversation of what to do with our Dead, is not just an American conversation. It, like the Internet, is now Global, without borders.

Likonelo Magagula, an intellectual property attorney at the law firm of Norton Rose Fulbright, states correctly that copyrights are owned by the person who creates the work, not by the subject. Magagula was talking about Nelson Mandela's image on T-shirts, wines and other things. Magagula reaffirms that copyright law does not prevent the depiction of Mandela's image on items.  Magagula failed to state  there  are other Rights laws preventing depiction.

The laws are the Laws of Privacy and Right of Publicity and who  owns death after life.

Reagan,  Ike, Mandela  and so many others are props. They are political props. Robin Williams is now an industry prop. Fallen military become pawns posted outside of Congressional offices on Capital Hill. ANC spokesman Jackson Mthembu  said Mandela "belongs to the ANC first and then to the whole country,"

Nope.

Nelson Mandela's name belongs to Nelson Mandela. Mandela, the family name is a name that family members can use. Once Mandela's family link their projects and their  Mandela name to Nelson Mandela, Mandela's family are  violating Nelson Mandela's Rights of Privacy and Publicity. A person's time in public office belongs to people they  served. After leaving office, the  public person is a private person. The public person's name belongs to themselves otherwise sizable speaking fees former presidents earn  would belong to the People. The fees dont.

Nelson Mandela's face and name are legacy. Mandela did his best to parse out his legacy before dying. Mandela, a man of peace, did not want to be warred over.

The Nelson Mandela Foundation owns more than a dozen copyrights and trademarks for Mandela, the "46664" number, the "Nelson Mandela" name,   Mandela's given name "Rolihlahla" and Mandella's clan name "Madiba." The foundation had net income of 22 million rand in 2012 and assets of 290 million rand. Actual numbers are not released.


 "The beauty of the Nelson Mandela brand is that it has been lived by him exactly as it has been presented by him. His behaviour is his brand," said Jeremy Sampson, the executive chairman of Interbrand Sampson de Villiers. "In the rush to commercialize it, we run the risk of watering down or destroying the good that the brand stood for purely with the crassness of finance." It paid Mandela 2.8 million rand in 2011 and 2.9 million rand last year  The Nelson Mandela  Foundation's job is to protect  Mandela's message. Mandela is now found on political posters, vino "House of Mandela" range of wines, and kitchen accessories, a
"Long Walk to Freedom" clothing line named after his book. Mandela family, grand daughters in the US, used Nelson's brand even on Reality TV  show called "Being Mandela."  Mandela children was Nelson marketed in art and memorabilia.
A  Mandela said,  "If everybody wants a little bit of the Madiba magic, why is it so sacrilegious for the rightful owners ... to use the Madiba magic?"

40 companies registered with the South  African government patent  and  trademark office,to use Mandela's name seem to have no connection to Mandela the man- physically or geographical- Gandhi-Mandela Nursing Academy, Mandela Truck Shuttle Services, Mama Mandela Marketing Company, Thanks Mandela Toiletries and Mandela's Shed, a restaurant. A Brazilian owns Mandela.org.  The ruling ANC sees purpose  of Madiba's magic in votes.

And then  there are the fake  charities using Mandela's name  with which  to raise funds the South African government issued a 2013 warning against. The Internet facilitates these scams being set up in an instant giving  presence  to  these  Right of Publicity and Right of Privacy Scams. Verne Harris, the director and archivist at the Nelson Mandela Foundation says the Mandela Foundation is not Coca Cola.  The Nelson Mandela Foundation cannot sue everybody.

Documentary filmmaker Ben Kitnick’s Vimeo frames this conversation of a person's rights after death  in his very simple Vimeo, The Photo Man. Is a photo separated from the person who snapped it, or it was taken of, is that photo an Orphan or...? There is no "or." Publicity  Rights. Privacy Rights and Life+70.

Ben, all of 21, is wise beyond his years. Ben's talent impacts the argument Congress is yet to grasp in an Internet world, what happens to peoples things when people die? Or when the check bounces on the storage locker holding a person's effects.

In a Reality TV world of Pawn Stars and other such shows, we all know where Storage Locker contents go and what happens to a person's belongings when their Apartments and homes get swept out. One man's trash becomes another man's treasure. The value of items are determined then sold, if possible, for a profit, including items that the person made, ARTS content  and Items like personal  photos. If the photos are not of a famous person or by a famous person, Kitnick's Vimeo shows us where those photos  go. The photos go in to bins, hoarded, protected, used. Lifetimes tossed. Bins overflowing. Hollywood buys the lives of the dead, Photo Man says.

This the story Ben tells. This is the lesson Congress needs to hear. There are laws beyond Copyright. Lawyers know this is more than a debate about Copyright, Brands and Trademarks. It is a conversation about Respect for  the living and dead. Right of Privacy and  Right Of Publicity laws across the United States of America delineate when, or if, these photos and identities can be used.  Unless laws are known and enforced, money will continue to be milked from the dead after their death.

Enter, the story of the Nanny Photographer- Vivian Maier, John Maloof and the State of Illinois. Enter the Primo argument illustrating for Legislators the con, the grift, the lie of Orphan Works..."I looked  for the Content Creator and I  did not  find them." Not in the Age of the I.O.T, you cant say that. I.O.T.? Internet of thieves.

John Maloof, filmmaker of the documentary Vivian Maier, acquired  some of Vivian Maiers photo in 2007. 2007,  is when the Internet was testing publishing gathered private data online. 2007 was  a  year for simplification of finding people. Maier  died  in 2009, survived by children she nannied for and by her Intellectual property, hundreds of thousands of  Maier's photographs and negatives, over 100,000 that were acquired by John Maloof. Maloof's website "The  Maloof  Collection" says, "All photographs appearing on this website and in the archive of the Maloof Collection are copyrighted and protected under United States and international copyright laws. The photographs may not be reproduced in any form, stored or manipulated without prior written permission from the Maloof Collection."

The items are not Maloof's to sell. Without a will, Maier's world of property , her negatives and photographs, are Property of the State of Illinois. Maier died without  survivors.

The year Maier came back to life was 2011.  Maier's property had been in a storage locker, the locker's monthly fee was unpaid. Maier's property had been sold. Story goes several people now possessed Maier's work  bought at auctions and elsewhere.

Photographer John Maloof filed to trademark "Vivian Maier" in January 2011, 8522 7162.  Maloof had Vivian's IP for  two  years, four before Trademarking Vivian's name. Maloof states on his USPTO  application,  under "Other Data: The name "VIVIAN MAIER" does not identify a living individual." Maloof knew Maier was dead. Vivian Maier's Copyrights could not be bought or sold for 70 years. The USPTO lawyers and legal clinics know Rights of Publicity governs the trafficking of  people. IVivian Maier infringes the Nanny Photographer's Life+70 of  copyright  protection. Maloof's commercialization of the Dead Woman's IP ignites this conversation (http://gapersblock.com/ac/2013/08/13/the-curious-case-of-vivian-maiers-copyright/)

Maloof knows about Intellectual Property rights. Maloof's site says "For any licensing inquiries please contact the archive manager Martin Fuchs. Please give as much detailed information as possible about how and where you want to use photographs, including print run, size of image, etc."

Maloof writes that "Maier died in 2009 at the age of 83, before the extent of her legacy had been fully understood or revealed" and "At the end of her life Maier became impoverished, but several children she had cared for pooled their money together and paid for an apartment and other necessities in her later years. Unbeknownst to them, a storage locker that contained a slew of negatives Maier had secretly hidden away was auctioned off due to delinquent payments." The kids Maier nannied do not have the

Laws are laws, to be upheld.  It is easy to run with ideas using other people's IP before rights are nailed down. This is the push Tech is making under the guise of Orphan Works. Maier's works are not orphaned.

2014-2009= 5 years. It is five years since Vivian Maier died. John Maloof has launched a Vivian Maier cottage industry.

Copyright  term is Life+70.  Right  of Publicity and Right of Privacy vary state to state. No work is orphaned UNLESS Life+70 and Right of Publicity and Right of Privacy have termed, which in some states is NEVER.

John Maloof and the Maloof  Collection  has a problem, as does The Photo Man, as does the United States Holocaust Museum's  entry photo hall, as does stationery companies violating people's rights Commercializing owner's IP and ID printing vintage photos as graphics on ledger line booklet fronts and backs, as do the Mandela Clan; as do the parties battling over Anne Frank. (i) territory, the world is big, and (ii) Rights- of Publicity and Privacy, beyond the battle of Copyrights.

In the Maloof-Maier matter, the USPTO  has a problem that is an easy enough Congressional fix. The USPTO granted for Maloof a Trademark of Vivian Maier's name without (i) asking how long Vivian  has been dead and (ii) for not asking Maloof for written documentation of alleged written assigned rights. The USPTO should have. Maloof wrote the name Vivian  Maier  belongs to a person who is no longer living.

Maloof does not have the rights to build the empire he is fashioning from Maier. Gallery owner Howard Greenberg wrote, "“My fascination with her story has only grown, as has my involvement with her photographs... It is not everyday that one becomes so involved and even obsessed with a particular photographer,” comments Howard Greenberg.  Greenberg, working with Maloof on the Maier project, says it clearly, What little is known about Maier’s life is the result of John Maloof’s extensive research. He discovered her obituary on line in 2009 which was just the beginning of his investigative work." Dead people without heirs assign  no Rights.

Greenberg wrote, "For a brief period in the 1970s she worked as a nanny to journalist, Phil Donahue’s children. Towards the end of her life, Maier was supported by the children she had cared for in the early 50s. Unbeknownst to them, one of Maier’s storage lockers (containing her massive group of negatives) was auctioned off due to delinquent payments."

 There is no predicting what garner's public outcry. The official photo of President Obama visiting the 9-11 Museum was released. There was no outcry. A surge of criticisms plagued newspapers within hours. The Museum had a gift shop. It was profiting from the dead. The marketing of  this iconic site remembering the dead, in fact, came  months if not years before this outcry. Selling the dead became commodity with celebrities who are dead. California led the wave of states passing laws creating commerce of Marilyn Monroes and the like in death and then rebirth of life.

Vivian Maier died in Illinois.  Illinois protects the dead from new life, from being exploited.

Illinois Right of Publicity Act, at § 30, protects "an individual's identity." Section 5 defines the key terms. An "individual" is defined as a "natural person," meaning that the Right of Publicity act does not protect the names of businesses or other legal entities, "Identity" meaning any attribute of an individual that serves to identify that individual to an ordinary, reasonable viewer or listener, including but not limited to (i) name, (ii) signature, (iii) photograph, (iv) image, (v) likeness, or (vi) voice."

What constitutes a violation?

The Right of Publicity Act protects against unauthorized "commercial" uses of an individual's identity. Section 5 defines use for a "commercial purpose" as a "public use" for the purpose of: (i) offering the sale of products, services, etc. (ii) advertising or promoting products, services, etc.; or (iii) fundraising. It does state that "Use of a person's identity in private documents, even if used for a commercial purpose, is not "public" and is not a violation of the Act. See MetLife v. Seldman, 734 F. Supp. 2d 304, 311-12 (E.D.N.Y. 2010)." Commercial is  using a person's image  to imply the person is endorsing a  product.

Using a  person's image tying it to advertising, may be found to  be a commercial use   violating Illinois Right of Publicity Act designed to protect  First Amendments, § 35(b) lists five exceptions:
(i) portraying that person in a work of art (such as a painting, play, movie, song, etc.) is protected, as long as the work of art is not "in and of itself a commercial advertisement."
(ii) non-commercial purposes including news reports, sports, public affairs, and political campaigns.
(iii) an author's name can be used in connection with their work only if the use of their name is truthful.
(iv) Advertisements for the above
(v) professional photographers may display people's images as samples of the photographer's work at the photographers place of business.

The State  of  Illinois lets a plaintiff collect actual damages, monetary relief, and the defendant's  profits, known as personal and  commercial damages, Section 40 of the Act. Section 50 says the Courts can award "appropriate" injunctive relief. at its discretion and, Section 55, award attorney fees and court costs.

Section 40 of the Act provides from monetary relief. A victorious plaintiff can collect both their actual damages and the defendant's profits that result from the violation. The minimum monetary award is $1,000. A plaintiff can claim both "personal" damages and "commercial" damages. See Villalovos v. Sundance Associates, 31 Media L. Rep. 1274, 2003 WL 115243, at *5 (N.D. Ill. January 13, 2003). Punitive damages are also available for willful violations.

Illinois  Statue of Limitation  claims under the Illinois Statute is a one-year-statute.
 Blair v. Nevada Landing P'ship, 859 N.E.2d 1188, 1192 (Ill. App. 2d Dist. 2006).

Maloof owned Maier's  works in 2007. Maier died in 2009. Maloof trademarked Maier in 2011. Maloof rolled out his  film   on  Maier in 2013. The RIght of Publicity one-year-statute may have tolled. Copyrights, Life+70 has not.

MLK's heirs are vigilant.  They  sue. The anniversary of King's "I  Have A Dream Speech" proliferates an annual moaning and groaning the speech  is  copyrighted. Others complain King belongs to  the  people. King belongs to himself and his heirs.

Who advocates for the Dead? For the Rachel Corrie's, the Trayvon Martin's, the IDF soldiers tweeted by Hamas in their Dead Jew Scorecard, for Chezi Goldberg whose photo and article "If You Don't Cry Who Will"  was circulated  by non-profit "One Family" within hours of his murder on Egged Bus 19. One  Family founder, Marc Belzberg, was ordered by the SEC for disgorgment prior  to moving to the Middle East where "One Family" was  founded (UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, D. COLUMBIA.  S.E.C. V. FIRST CITY FINANCIAL CORP., LTD.
688 F. SUPP. 705 (D.D.C. 1988) . For Leon Klinghoffer, subject of a Metropolitan Opera commissioned by the Brooklyn Academy of Music, including La Monnaie, San Francisco Opera, Opéra de Lyon, Los Angeles Opera and Glyndebourne Festival Opera, as well. The opera was conceived of by theatre director Peter Sellars and choreographer Mark Morris. Wheelchair bound Leon Klinghoffer was murdered in 1985 by Palestinian terrorists, seizing the Achille Lauro, a cruise ship,  shooting Leon in the head then pushing his wheelchair and Leon in to the Ocean.

Post 9-11, a trend began to aggregate dead in to "poster" and flag" depicting the murdered in thumbnail photos, few, if any, were requested by the survivors for this purpose. The 9-11 Museum.  9-11 and its murdered are on the news stations, on television networks in movies  and in memorial  shows over  and over and over again. What is the definition of news? When  the event happens?  Anniversaries of? Souvenirs of the 9-11 Memorial have been sold on the streets of  New York for a long time now. A Cartel is selling Souvenir Books using stolen Intellectual Property for “regular $19.95 but you can have it for $5.” New York City Mayor's Michael Bloomberg and De Blasio  are silent  on  commercializing  their  dead.

What will be done? Dunno. Monuments in DC to the dead, the battle of Ike Eisenhower to become a memorial, Fields of Manassas. Mount Vernon. Arlington. Death is big business.

But then, there are  Rights.... Copyrights, Rights of Publicity and Privacy. And in a world of the World Wide Web, the Internet, Search Engines and ISPs, there are Trade Agreements, Berne Convention and The Hague. Time to take the global conversation of Search Engines,  ISPs facilitating theft of Copyright and violating  Rights of Publicity and Privacy to The Hague  or the theft  facilitators  to task  for International crimes.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
THE DEATH OF KLINGHOFFER IS A CONVERSATION INCLUDING RIGHTS NOT JUST ANTI-SEMITISM  (c) Carrie Devorah
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Leon Klinghoffer was murdered in 1985, nineteen years before Sonny Bono's namesake Copyright Extension Act was signed in to law. The late Congressman's Act extended Content and Copyright protection to Life+70 from Life+50 was signed in to law in 1998.

The opera, The Death Of Klinghoffer was first produced in Brussels and in New York, in 1991, six years after Klinghoffer's murder. 1991-1985= 6 years. Do the math.  Leon Klinghoffer's rights are violated, Right  of Publicity, Right of Property, even copyright.

Adressing John Adam's opera as a conversation of anti-semitism, still, after all these years, is Legal Idiocy, drum banging keeping that conversation alive rather than ending it legally, appropriately. John Adam'ss Opera grandizing the murder of a wheelchair bound man is not, nor should have ever been, an argument on anti-semitism, if the true goal was terminating performance of John Adam's Opera.

The  single bullet here, Leon's Revenge, is an argument of Rights- Right of Publicity, Right of Privacy. Even Copyright if how the victim looks and was dressed on that day are copied. Legal arguments are just that, legal arguments- conquerable. Arguments of anti-semitism are polarizing.

Right of Publicity, Right of Privacy. Should lawyers have known this back in 1991. Yes. Why did they not act upon it? Well, cynical but honest, if problems get solved then a lot of non profit people will be out of work. I am out-of-brother. The Klinghoffer girls are out-of-father. Rights of Publicity and Privacy are Property that are inherited (Martin Luther King Jr. Center For Social Change v. American Heritage Products, 250 Ga. 135, 296 S.E.2d 697 (Ga. 1982).) It is Theft Of Identity.

Hang around DC long enough, you learn that non-profit salaries commensurate with media mentions and talks given. There is a  problem with the groups arguing to  defend this man's memory. The  problem is  they are  groups, non-profits. Non-profits exist for a mission. The mission is managed by people. People, well, some work for free, others get paid. Handsomely. Abe Foxman is paid over $3 million dollars a year (http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=10657#.U_Izhtq9KSM).

Adressing Rights of Publicity and Privacy, brings on board even more laws to adress, like Conspiracy, laundering the funds generated by any and all collaborators, and so on. Their element of Conspiracy doesn't have to be a formal agreement or a written agreement just the agreement between two or more persons with some form of mutual understanding of working together towards a common unlawful end. Conspiracy can be proved by Circumstantial Evidence. Conspiracy is a predatory crime, sort of like solicitation, that is governed in federal courts and most state courts, by statute.

The handling of the Opera naming Leon Klinghoffer is a bell tolling to start putting non-profits out of business, when non-profits profit while problems are not resolved. As a wise man said to  me years ago, do you really believe there is not a cure for AIDS.  A  cure  for  AIDS would put a lot of  people out of business.

I have been in Lisa and Isla Klinghoffer's shoes, with our  ears being bent and twisted, by non-profits, after tragedy befalls our  families.

Someone who conspires to commit a crime and commits the crime can still be charged both with the crime and conspiracy to commit the crime, in this case, violation of Rights of Publicity, Privacy and Copyright- how Leon was dressed the day he was murdered, a look that is Leon's signature.

The more people agreeing to commit the crime, the greater potential for the number  of parties to the criminal activity.

Potential parties to the Klinghoffer Family legal claims  of Rights of Publicity, Rights of Privacy and Copyright, will include the below listed, published online in a Wikipedia article. Potential parties to the Klinghoffer Family claims will include any and all government agencies- local to Federal, domestic and foreign, grantors of any and all non profits, foundations, one can anticipate the list will grow longer, than the listed below, once a bonafide paper trail is done.

Wikipedia's "The Death of Klinghoffer, The Opera" page states the following listed. It is scored by John Adams. Adams collaborators are choreographer Mark Morris and theatre director, Peter Sellars, all parties active in producing the Opera in Brussels and in New York, the Théatre Royal de la Monnaie, Brussels, Belgium, 19 March 1991, directed by Sellars; the Brooklyn Academy of Music on 5 September 1991; the San Francisco Opera in November 1992; the collaborators in Nuremberg, Germany in 1997 and at the Opernhaus Wuppertal in 2005; the Finnish National Opera, Helsinki, February 2001; BBC Symphony Orchestra, London 2002; Channel 4, Penny Woolcock, London Symphony Orchestra; collaborators on the 2001 soundtrack; collaborators of the 2003 telecast; collaborators of Decca's DVD released 2004; Australasian performance at the Auckland Festival, New Zealand February 2005; collaborators of Scottish Opera at the Edinburgh Festival August 2005; Brooklyn Academy of Music iDecember 2003; collaborators of the Curtis Institute of Music through its Curtis Opera Theatre and Curtis Symphony Orchestra, Philadelphia, February 2005; the Juilliard Opera Center students and collaborators conducted by Adams; the Opera Theatre of Saint Louis, conductor Michael Christie and director James Robinson, June 2011; collaborators with the English National Opera 2012; collaborators with the English National Opera and the Metropolitan Opera, the Met's general manager Peter Gelb; collaborators with the Long Beach Opera, conductor Andreas Mitisek and stager James Robinson, March 2014.

The point should be further made by holding accountable each actor and musician that took a paycheck for uttering Klinghoffer's name. Stealing an image has a  Legal Price. Hone's craft comes with a price, too. The Opera's premiere cast, the conductor, the tenor, the terrorist, Leon, Marilyn and exiled Jews and Palestinians are named on Wikipedia and playbills. That said, Leon's name is all over Google Search https://www.google.com/search?q=leon+klinghoffer+opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari.

The argument Legislators are tasked overwhelmed with adressing is not now nor ever has been about Right To Take Down. The argument is only and only ever should have been focusing on how did Rights To Publicity and Privacy get shoved aside and tromped on.

The answer is Legal Illiteracy, an answer I can illustrate by vignette.

 A rights holder privacy non-profit group contacted me to discuss Copyrights, sharing his group just paid $20,000 to a lobbyist in DC. I asked this Rights Holder how his group selected this lobbyist. The man's answer is Classic and ominous. The man said the Lobbyist has been around DC for 20  years. And I said, "so what did that get you, the lobbyist being around DC all this time with ARTS creators losing rights to pushed agendas of Orphan Works, Collective Licensing and Resale Rights up in Congress all this time?" The advocate said, "never thought about that. Good point."

Good point. Yes.

As far as I am concerned it is time to start dismantling these non-profits and charities that incite argument rather than find that one conversation bringing parties to resolution. Finding a solution to John Adam's Opera, wasn't that difficult, it just meant reading the law.

Let me share some sisterly advice. Step away from the ADL. Step out on your own. The argument is not anti-semitism, anti-christian, anti-muslim, anti-aethiest. This is the time for making strange bedfellows. No sister, father, mother, daughter, son, brother, survivor wants to see their dead one exploited. Let me clarify, exploited by others. In these days of 24/7 exploitation, some families go the Michael Jackson hologram route  or "Being Mandela", Madiba's grandchildren's  show. That is their choice.

To make our difference, me and the Klinghoffers, and for the families  of anyone else whose dead is murdered again after life, the winning argument for us survivors is the non-political, non-agenda  page of Right of Publicity and Right of Privacy. It's not about you. It's not about me. It is the law.

We cannot  bring back our dead. We can protect our beloved in death. We can set an example of living, of not letting our dead be used to incite hate, of not being forced to mourn our loss, in public, over and over again, at the whimsy of news and in the name of Art.....

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
GEHRY AND THE GENERAL aka                                                                                                                                                                                                      MAKING A $40 MILLION CONVERSATION A HECK OF ALOT SIMPLER (C) Carrie Devorah :
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

I’ve been tracking the progress of the Memorial To Nowhere, the 19 year plus battle over creating a memorial to General Eisenhower. This issue is hitting a crisis point. There are people that remember Ike than we want to believe. Not cynicism. Fact.

Another fact is history and history makers are forgotten, faster, each Social Media day. I’ll show you images I shot for my Photo Essay the Wall Street Journal hyperlinked to in 2003. Most people have no idea looking at my iconic photographs of where the image is or of its history or significance. So, this is the do it or die year for Ike. The Eisenhower Memorial has got to be moved forward, fast, before another historic landmark like the Old Post Office building down on Pennsylvania Avenue becomes a Trump Hotel, before another Hoover FBI building is being sold and before another St. Elizabeth Hospital sits empty maybe becoming a Tech hub or condos, or even a parking lot. Until then? A site for summer concerts.

I’ve attended hearings on the Eisenhower matter. I have the bragging rights to know what Ike liked for his eternal DC stone, so to speak. I have pictures. I photographed the discrete non ostentatious statue to IKE that sits outside the US Embassy in London. Give me time, I’ll dig it out of my archives. And I met Susan. Let me be more polite, I met Mr. Eisenhower’s daughters. Let us not forget, Ike the President belonged to the people. Ike Eisenhower belongs to his kids.

At the recent meeting called by the National Civic Arts Association, Congress’ conscience when it comes to ARTS and public places, I led off the Q&A with Comments I scribbled.

1-    No photo was shown of the Ike Memorial in the UK, a statute making the argument best against architect Frank Gehry’s ostentatiousness proposed memorial.

2-    I raised issue of the cost of building any Memorial today. Money to maintain the Memorial down the road will be a different reality. Architect’s ideas are cheap to pencil on paper. Maintaining the Memorial, once built, will be anything but cheap and unpredictable the way costs are rising. Pierre L’Enfant proposed setting aside land for a “great church for national purposes.” Washington National Cathedral fulfills the national ideal envisioned by L’Enfant. The Washington Cathedral is smaller than Gehry’s proposed memorial. Today, the Washington National Cathedral is charging entrance fees of visitors. The church cannot afford the thousands it needs a day to stay open. The Cathedral’s future is uncertain. It may have to shutter if it cannot raise the funds or find a benefactor….

3-    I have an expertise on Memorials in DC, covering them since 2003 (www.godinthetemplesofgovernment.com) DC does a banging business with tourism, mostly international guests and schools, make that lots of schools that barely can calendar in all the memorials standing today. Memorials in DC are not kid friendly, for kids of any age. No matter how many bells and whistles a site has, when asked, visitors will say they don’t want to go see yet another large memorial. Bigger is not better to a school kid who complains, too gig, too much to see, too much walking.. Food, swag and souvenirs are fun. Kids don’t want to see 4 floors of a building. Give Ike fans around the world the best experience they can have and, for most, never see otherwise. Give Ike’s fans the best. Build up a virtual Ike Memorial online. Forget Gehry’s tribute to Gehry.

4-    DC has a history of millions being spent on Memorials to nowhere. Private funds are raised, matched and, not accounted far too often. What these no-go Memorials share in common is an Art Commission and the National Capital Planning commission, stuffed with appointees. With continuing problems of Memorial budget overruns, refusal to account for spendings, etc, get rid the Commission scuttling taxpayer investigations. The Commission is accountable to We The People. If the Commission is doing nothing wrong, there is nothing to hide, with every reason to provide requested papers to the public. Legislate that Congress. Put up the papers, Commission members, or catch the next train out of Union Station.

There is something far easier to effect, far, far easier.

I did simple math while the Civic Arts Panel was talking. I looked up online the day Ike died. March 28, 1969. Copyright is Life+70. Ike belongs to his family through 2039. End of story. Well, almost. I will explain.

There is the erroneous belief that someone in public service belongs to the people. No, their private persona does not. Their public persona, official photos, etc. paid for by US government belongs to the American people. If Congress got this right, a lot of online insulting and Intellectual Property infringing would be curtailed. Presidents and legislators are humiliated by people stealing photographers’ copyrighted images which the infringers then mark up with nasty sentiments unkind to the public person and to the Content owner.

It’s not rocket science.

So here is the scoop. No one owns a president’s private life. No one owns a President’s name. We The People own what we paid for. We The People own each image snapped by all of President Obama’s photographers and Social Media staff Flickering him, Instagramming him, Youtubing, etc. If only Congress grasped this fact, a lot of grief, and shekels, would be saved.

There is a person’s Right of Privacy and something called Right of Publicity. They are State Laws. Copyright is a Federal law. Rights of Publicity and Privacy vary state to state. Right of Publicity is a property right of a person to protect use of their image, likeness, name, voice or signature from being commercially exploited without their consent, without assigned permission for it to be used in a commercial manner and without their being compensated, if they want to be compensated. Right of Publicity is violated every day online, all over the Internet, by Search Engines robbing Internet Users of their right to profit from their own image or identity.  Over twelve states have Right of Publicity surviving death. Tennessee says Right of Publicity protection continues indefinitely as long as the Right of Publicity is being exercised. What is good for dead celebrities should be good for Dead presidents and for dead everyday people.

A person’s Right of Privacy is invaded when they are being stalked or intruded upon; when their name or image is appropriated ie. Parodied such as Licensed character costumes all over streets of New York, Vegas, used for commercial purpose without license; when someone’s private life is given unreasonable publicity, for example, Manuel Noriego or Kim Jung-on. No matter what they are accused of, laws give them the right to be angered by their name and likeness used in games they find offensive,   their name or likeness appropriated; their being publicized in a false light to the public.

Permission must be secured before a person’s, a President’s, image or likeness, voice or signature, are connected with merchandise that is sold, packaging and advertising for products and services.

When Ike left service to country, Ike returned to private life. Unless a contractual agreement was written and signed by Ike’s executor, giving Ike’s Rights of Publicity and Privacy, ad infinitum, to the Consortium proposing Ike’s Memorial, then the consortium is up a creek without a paddle, with millions of dollars to be accounted for to We The People and to Ike’s executor. In one fell swoop, a lot of sites, memorials and vendors, knees are shaking. They should. This reality raises specter to multiple of the Memorials, even Museums. Those images of the murdered people in the Holocaust Museum entry? Yup. Not seventy years yet. For all anyone knows, the images photographers are still alive. Except, some designer had an idea that exceeded state laws.

Men and women that serve America belong to their families. MLK III told me no member of MLK’s family on his Dad’s Memorial’s board. David Eisenhower resigned his seat.

D, lawyer up, you got rights. Dad’s image may be infringed if you didn’t sign a contract giving up rights how Dad’s image and name would be used. Elvis is dead. He left the building a long time ago. Presley’s estate gave up fighting the army’s of Elvis impersonators. The cost of fighting was deemed too great. MLK’s estate fights vigilantly to protect MLK’s “I have a dream” speech. On the anniversary of the speech, the blogosphere was crammed with criticism of King’s family protecting Dad in death. No, Congress- fair use, is not a defense to claims of invasion of privacy or violation of publicity rights. Get this right, and a lot of the issues of the Internet coming to Congress will be mitigated. Fair use is abused by people who want something for nothing.

The National Planning Commission? Congress established the National Capitol Park Commission in 1924, to assure the McMillan Plan was implemented. The Commission was given oversight of the "comprehensive, systematic, and continuous development of the park, parkway, and playground systems of the National Capital and its environs." The National Capital Planning Act, naming the Commission, was passed in 1952. The Commission’s “job” was simple. The Commission was to reserve the region’s natural and historic features. Somehow the pocketbook became limitless and unaccounted for.

The Ike Memorial is not the first Memorial the Commission has before them with these same concerns. Nor will the Ike Memorial be the last. Millions in funds are raised then go unaccounted for. Money goes somewhere. America is entitled to know where the funds went. A team of researchers should be sent over to the National Archives where the Commissions’ papers are archived. The Commission is bound to follow laws. Compare the laws to the archives, see what matches, see what is missing. A clear picture of pattern and practice will appear.

The National Capital Planning Commission’s own site is a good resource to start with along with a bit of history refresher to learn more about the Commission. (http://www.ncpc.gov/ncpc/Main%28T2%29/About_Us%28tr2%29/About_Us%28tr3%29/Commission.html)   The Commission is an easy enough ball to unravel. I would not want to be standing in their shoes.

As a (dot)gov, NCPC.gov, the Commission is regulated. Records must be kept. 5 U.S. Code § 552a adresses “Records maintained on individuals.” Once Ike left being president, Ike became an Individual whose estate is overseen by his executor who could seek access to Commission’s papers under (A)(1) Conditions of Disclosure … giving written assurance that the record will be used solely as a statistical research or reporting record, and the record is to be transferred in a form that is not individually identifiable or (B ) Accounting of Certain Disclosures which must… (2) retain the accounting made under paragraph (1) of this subsection for at least five years or the life of the record, whichever is longer, after the disclosure for which the accounting is made; (C ) (h) Rights of Legal Guardian. This may be a technicality but…. Dead people have rights, too, a point I raised in my proposed 2D ARTS IP, ID and Commerce Legacy Act. Someone should argue for the dead when they are no longer here.

Ike’s kids are arguing. It is about time someone, Congress, lawyers listen.

Lastly, there is compliance to Notice Requirements, that “(2) Any officer or employee of any agency who willfully maintains a system of records without meeting the notice requirements of subsection (e)(4) of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more than $5,000.

Done good? A nation is judged by how they respect their dead. On that reason alone, the Commission should be eliminated. Maybe it will give the Judiciary something to do instead of tearing open Title 17. They clearly don’t understand Image and Privacy Rights to the Dead or to the Living….

---

_____________________________________________________
HEALTHCARE.gov's POSTER GIRL FOR RIGHT OF PUBLICITY (c) Carrie Devorah :
_____________________________________________________

This is Fair Use Image used on Healthcare.gov

Congress, notorious for being slow to get ahead of the curve, has a gift from Obamacare’s poster girl, to create policy protecting Users content and User’s Right To Publicity- their own.  Sleight of hand government style, for weeks you saw Adrianna, the face of Obamacare, now, you don’t. Adrianna has become an Internet sensation viraling beyond her suspected imagination forecasts the future of Facebook and other Tech companies policy shift to take content of Users addicted to Internet crack- for purposes unnamed, good, bad or nefarious.

---

Adrianna was not a stock photo as some suspected. 

The value of online User’s content weights equal to that of a celebrity's image, when it comes to media and marketing. Technology values User’s content,  something about gold in Algorithms and advertising. So, Techies like Facebook announce, out of Users’ Blue, a TOS, terms of service policy change to take Users content.

Adrianna, the Girl of Glitch, face of Healthcare.gov a role she pursued, got more than free family photos when she signed the Release required of her. Adrianna wants her privacy back. Adrianna may get her privacy back.Tech Users wont, nor will Users know where their name, face and online lives will be used in advertising producing profit for the global private companies Users failed to see the Free Internet as. The use of anything online is totally unpredictable let alone when a User has had their IP, Intellectual Property, stolen out of their control. An Orthodox Jew or a Moslem may be used to advertise Bacon, a Vegan may find themselves selling leather shoes, an Aethiest may be used to sell Bibles. A virgin may appear in Craigslist ads for hootchie.

Users were groomed to get hooked on Internet crack Technology has been dealing Free Service that ended up not being free implemented with slow changes over time. In light of growing numbers of Internet Addiction, crack, coke, shopping, gambling, Internet. Addiction is addiction regardless if the addiction is pushed from Internet Dealers or Drugs. Projected? Lawsuits launched against parties in the Tech industry that will rival the litigation against the Cigarette companies. Tech dealers seeking to hook Users has a charge that should be embellished here with Fraud, Deceit, conspiracy.  If the world wasn’t already fractured, User lemmings are about to be pushed over  the Cliff.

Grin.

What is good for the Goose is good for the Dander….. may ruffled feathers fly. If there is no consequence for identity theft or selling someone without their knowledge, then, I am Google, we are Google, on product, on stationery, T-shirts and business cards. Why not? Find me a Judge who will rule Unauthorized Use against me. Or you. Or all of User us.

Congressional committees with oversight on Identity Theft, Fraud and Human Trafficking have a gift to adress here and now. No, the Judiciary cant punt this over to the FCC playing whack-a-mole with each new ID-slash-data-bundler popping up. Increasing private information filed with a government agency is being released public. The millienials running Congress don’t recall Rebecca Schaefer, the young actress murdered on her doorstep by her stalker who accessed Schaeffer’s home adress through the DMV. The DMV may not be releasing home adresse’s these days- DMCA take down notices appearing on Chilling Effects are giving clues. Sites like www.123people.com and www.spokeo.com are. 

Thank you Congress.

Glitch Girl is the face of the Healthcare.gov Internet cockup Blame Game. It is reported Adriana was not contacted to be the face of Obamacare rather than Adriana reached out to a friend at the Agency, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services — the agency responsible for the rollout of the Affordable Care Act, volunteering herself, most likely envisionsing being the Face of Success, the face that launched a thousand ships. Rather, Adriana is the face that launched a thousand slips.

Adrianna consented to prostitute herself for photos. The selling of people by others is Human Trafficking. I got Stavros on board with that understanding in the EU. Mr. Fosberg from State, at the Unknown Internet symposium held at GW’s Elliot School of Business, after I stated bundling of people’s identity details and/or photos, within zipcodes or across borders is unabashed Human Trafficking, said to me he never thought of that before.

I said, statedly, HOW COULD YOU NOT in the days of the Internet making ID theft of the Dead and the Living, a given, on steroids.

The Right of Publicity, California Civil Code Section 3344, is for the Publicity Rights of Living Persons. California Civil Code Section 3344 is California Civil Code section 3344.1 known as the ASTAIRE CELEBRITY IMAGE PROTECTION ACT granting statutory Post Mortem rights to the estate of a “deceased personality.”

California Civil Code Section 3344.1 allows for (i) any person using such personality's "name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness on or in products, merchandise or goods" without prior consent was liable to be sued for damages and profits arising from the unauthorized use (ii) such prior consent may only be given by persons to whom the personality had transferred such power by contract or trust prior to his death, or by trust or will after his death, or, where no such latter provision was made, his spouse, children, and/or grandchildren, but (iii) a play, book, magazine, newspaper, musical composition, audiovisual work, radio or television program, single and original work of art, work of political or newsworthy value, or an advertisement or commercial announcement for any of these works, shall not be considered a product, article of merchandise, good, or service if it is fictional or nonfictional entertainment, or a dramatic, literary, or musical work."

Fast forward 2013, to a world of Twitter, Meme’s, Vines, Pinterest, Perez Hilton on-image scrawls, misreadings by activist Judges of what is Fair Use and Safe Harbor.

Unauthorized Use is Textbook. Jimi Hendrixs’ estate infringement lawsuit started as a battle over Trademark before shifting to Right Of Publicity’s legal octopus, Intellectual Property, with Plaintiffs asserting control over use of their names, voices, signatures, photographs, images, likenesses, gestures, mannerisms, plus. Hugo Zacchini won in the Supreme Court against Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., stating he had no incentive to perform his human cannonball act if TV broadcasters could show his act without his approval and compensation.  

Digital technology shows scenes of people and places that never happened or existed. Adrianna may find her herself becoming a celebrity she had no choice to be, immortal and forever resurrectable, a face in a porn film the same risk Users may have of their childrens’ photos getting mixed up in child pornography stills or film. All it takes is for images to be morphed, moved in numerical processing techniques then converted into the digits to make up a computer file, transmuting one image into another. Think Woody Allen in ZELIG, 1983. Think Fred Astaire dancing after death. Think Natalie singing with Nate.

Computers are doing anything. Elton John worked with Bogie and Cagney for Diet Coke. Lucille Ball pitched Service Merchandise. Elvis shimmied and shaked for Pizza Hut, Super Bowl XXXII. Tom Hanks acted with JFK in Forrest Gump. Clint Eastwood, fifty years before acting with The Chair, ran alongside Kennedy’s motorcade. Computers make leggy thin model blondes, leggier, thinner and less blonde or model. Tom Cruise’s chin, in Mission Impossible, was wiped of drool by a computer ‘mamma’. Makeup artists are queuing unemployment lines. Technology is making them obsolete being cheaper with less risk to actors. Technology innovators are working on full length feature films starring Dead Celebrities. What makes Legislators think they are impervious from abuse by the stain they failed to prevent. Soon, with all the Algorithms Google is emoting, Legislators wont be needed in Committee Hearing Room seats. Soon, with all the Algorithms Google is emoting, Legislators wont be needed in  Committee Hearing Room seats.

Venture Capitalists are pushing Theft of ID, Identity, forward under their terms as an advertising commodity called Algorithms or such. Google’s Eric Schmidt requires his lovers to sign a Confidentiality agreement reportedly along with $15million plus payoffs most likely funded with Content stolen from Legislators, staff and constitutents families. Legislators already finding their photos embarrassingly photoshopped can expect to find themselves in “home movies” aka a political version of Bob, Carol, Ted and Alice except it wont be Bob, Ted,  Carol and Alice. With image synthesis, it will be Waxman, Burgess, Biden and Murphy. The movie clip wont have them playing but pocket pool.  

Image synthesis doesn’t  use extant imagery. Images are made using math. Data describing the item is fed into the computer to make a photographically realistic replication. Two decades ago, George Lucas’ visual effects supervisor predicted R&D would create a Ready For Close Up person replete with hair, eye, expressions and zits perfected, almost. Companies were developing ergonomic analysis software for 3-D people modeling. Game developers were behind the push to make games evermore realistic to the point Knockdown leapt off the PDA screen on to the streets of America with fatal replications of reel life.

Congress now has a chance to get ahead of the problem, now, before photogrammetry does. The artists, virtual or otherwise, do their job well, drawing upon inspiration that online content taken by Tech Companies grab to create the worlds largest shutterstock agency as is underway in the steal of people’s Rights Of Publicity.

Celebrity, to date, has perks.

Fred Astaire’s widow chose Dirt Devil for her dead husband over $25K from Diet Coke. Aistaire daughter said the ad was tasteless. Aistaire’s widow said it was so Fred- innovative. Since Mrs. Astaire can control a dead man’s image, so should the every day people. Even Adrianna. My guess a good lawyer will find Animation software is in every computer, iPad and mobile phone as are editing tools.   

What this comes down to is conversation, not debate. Mrs. Chu- how do you feel when you see your images used to slur you and slander your family name? Mr. Murphy- if your child’s image was rounded up in a sting in Thailand as a Calling Card to a site, what then? Mr. Labrador- if artworks drawn by your child posted online were taken by a Tech company and marketed as Art By The Child Of Congressman Labrador were taken then sold online, who deserves the profits from Copyright and from Right of Publicity.

Dead is gone from America’s vernacular. Technology allows people to put into places or defamatory situations they would never have done while alive, if dead, or wishing they were dead, if alive. Case point- Adrianna. Emoticon- SAD, PUZZLED, BROKEN HEART. POUT.

The financial incentive to keep dead people alive is financially staggering. Combined sales of entertainment industries constitute 5% of Gross National Product. Israel’s former Prime Minister staying on life support all these years gives his family pensions and perks. Pull his plug, entitlements to his family end. On the rise is more than 2.2% of the labor force is affected by trade in intellectual property.

What did Adriana’s Standard Release say?

I expect the Release will be demanded for production at an upcoming E&C committee hearing before the Tsunami of Right of Publicity litigations hit against Tech companies for marketing Users content for purposes unnamed, without compensation, moreso without signed “Standard Releases.” Everyone knows there is no such thing as the word “Standard” especially when it comes to legal interpretation.

FIGHT THEFT OF COPYRIGHTS
<>
SUPPORT(c)

POLITICAL ROCKSTARS
AGAINST
IP & ID ABUSE BY
TECHNOLOGY

_________________
NOVEMBER IS MOUSTACHE MONTH
STOLEN IPR IS HAIRY
LOSING IP MAKES BILL PAYING 
A CLOSE SHAVE _________________

_________________
WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN
____________________

___________________
Capitol Hill Switchboard
(202) 224 3121 _____________________

WRITE YOUR
SENATOR
___________________

__________________
KNOW YOUR CONGRESSMAN OR
SENATOR
?
SEARCH BY ZIPCODE
__________________

Create
The 2D ARTS IP
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
PROTECTION
ACT
FOR
TREASURED
HEIRLOOM
ARTS
LEGACY
INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY
PROTECTION
SIGN THE PETITION

__________________
TELL HERE HOW COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT HURT YOU ______________

___________________
TELL
TECHNOLOGY
KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF
MY COPYRIGHT
_______________

HONORING THOSE WHO GAVE THEIR ALL
SO WE MIGHT HAVE OUR
PROPERTY RIGHTS
THANK YOU

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STARTS with a Pencil &Paper in 2D(dimension) 
Everything Else about IP(intellectual property) comes down to COMMERCE .
_____________________________________________________________________________________________