*******Attention Sleuthers*********

Discussion in 'Benjaman Kyle' started by believe09, Oct 22, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I received an email from Mr. Kyle regarding a photo taken by Savannah Morning News that has been floating around unattributed-Please remove post-haste from any myspace, facebook, banner or flyer the photo of Mr. Kyle leaning against the newel post...what I affectionately call Mr. Kyle's "glamor shot." The morning news is threatening legal action.......

    PEACE!!!!
     
  2. spamelope

    spamelope Active Member

    Messages:
    1,931
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    What a wonderful publication-NOT. I hope everyone in that area BOYCOTTS the paper. How childish to threaten to take legal action against those trying to help give this man his identity back. Thanks for the head up, believe.
     
  3. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I AGREE-for what it is worth...wondering what is going on with the licensing perhaps of it....wondering if Savannah News is planning on selling it to someone...Newsweek etc
     
  4. Cymro

    Cymro New Member

    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's clearly a licensing issue... may be one or more of the following:

    1. An overly aggressive legal department or a corporation looking to make money out of tragedy;

    2. A corporation with a policy to protect its licensing rights on every occasion, even when there is no harm done by the unlicensed use, so that they can't be shown to be lenient if a defense is raised in a more egregious case;

    3. Preservation of rights so that they can negotiate a license fee, e.g,. to Newsweek;

    4. The left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.

    Either way Benjaman would have no influence over how the image is used and even assuming he wants that image to be out there, he has no rights. He's part of the photo, just like the furniture - copyright lies with the image's creator, the photographer, which he or she has assigned to the newspaper that employed him or her. So the newspaper's conduct says nothing about Benjaman's desire to be identified.
     
  5. Kentjbkent

    Kentjbkent DELETE ACCOUNT

    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Why now? hasn't this picture "been around" the net for a while????
     
  6. dreamweaver

    dreamweaver New Member

    Messages:
    6,095
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    =========================

    I am going with other posters idea, that perhaps Newsweek wants exclusive rights to pics.
     
  7. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bkunknown.jpg

    This is a wikipedia that apparently releases the photo into the public domain. HOWEVER, I checked to see the history on the article and who established it-see below. The way it appears to me, the wikipedia page was established by Colleen Fitzpatrick, not the owner of the photo.

    Hmmmmm.....


    (cur) = difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m = minor edit, → = section edit, ← = automatic edit summary(latest | earliest) View (newer 50 | older 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

     
  8. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    They kicked me to someone who required an email, so I sent the following:


    Good Morning!

    I am a case manager for an organization that assists families of the missing and works with unidentified individuals. I have been advocating on behalf of "Mr. Benjaman Kyle", an amnesia victim who was discovered behind a Burger King in Richmond Hill, GA in 2004. "Mr. Kyle", or "BK Doe" as he is classified, has been the subject of a number of published media reports beginning in 2007. The Savannah Morning News interviewed him for an article in September of 2007, and this photo was taken:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bkunknown.jpg

    Although the link referenced above releases this photo into the public domain, I have been told by Mr. Kyle that the Savannah Morning News is threatening legal action unless the photo is removed from all flyers, articles, banners and webpages.

    Could you please verify this and either have someone call me or send me a return email? I appreciate your time and attention.

    Sincerely,
    Believe09

    I will let you guys know what I hear....:waitasec::innocent:
     
  9. Kentjbkent

    Kentjbkent DELETE ACCOUNT

    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I looked at the Savannah News story on BK (found through google) and clicked on the photo in question. It gave the name of John Carrington so googled that.

    John Carrington is the photographer (employed by Savannah Morning News) who is "credited" with the photo.

    Here is contact info:

    Phone Number: 912-652-0306
    Email: john.carrington@savannahnow.com

    (I thought about emailing him myself when I got home today from work, but checked this thread first. Maybe send an email to him, Believe09?)

    Here is link where I found info on him...

    http://savannahnow.com/user/128
     
  10. Kentjbkent

    Kentjbkent DELETE ACCOUNT

    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I will be interested to hear what you find out, Believe09. What I am not understanding is why BK is supposively being threatened with legal action over the picture?

    From what I have learned recently about licensing fees (thank you contributors to Caylee Anthony forum!), it would make sense that if Savannah Morning News and/or John Carrington are attempting to enter into a license fee agreement with Newsweek, there could be an issue of "value" of the picture since it is already in the public domain. But correct me if I am wrong, but I thought it was NOT BK who has submitted the photo to the various myspaces, missing person forums, OUR forum (Tricia) etc. If SMN/JC were wanting to get the photo removed from public so they could "sell" it (licensing fees), wouldn't they be threatening legal action against the various site owners?

    What legal grounds would they have to sue BK?

    Is anyone aware of whether Tricia has received a stop and desist order from a SMN attorney?
     
  11. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    All of your questions are excellent ones-Tricia did not-I received an email from BK that counseled me to take it down. The photo is still on his facebook, I believe....I took it down because poor Tricia does not need the headache of another copyright infringement threat (People Magazine cough cough), but I am following up with Savannah. I will send a copy of my email to Mr.Carrington and I THANK YOU for the email address.
     
  12. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Dear Mr. Carrington-

    I wanted to forward to you an email I sent to the research department of the Savannah Morning News-I advocate on behalf of Benjaman Kyle also known as BK Doe. He informed me two days ago that I was to remove from all flyers, banners and web pages any representation of your photo of him leaning against a post because of legal action.

    What confused me was the link referenced in the email below that seemed to release the image into the public domain-would you mind letting me know by return email or phone call whether or not reproductions of your image constitute copyright infringement? We have featured it prominently on a number of communications that have been sent all over the world wide web.

    I appreciate your time and attention to this request.

    Sincerely,
    Believe09
     
  13. Kentjbkent

    Kentjbkent DELETE ACCOUNT

    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I didn't think she did as I figured she would post something and I agree that she doesn't need that hassle!

    I have to tell you, I have a daily subscription to the SVM and if they confirm that they are going to force anyone associated with trying to help identify BK into removing that photo, it will be the day I will cancel my subscription and will read for free online!
     
  14. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    P.S. Thank you to IMAMAZE for removing all my extra posts-can ya tell I was having some trouble with WS hanging??? :)
     
  15. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    He took the time to educate me in the world of photograph ownership...

    Ms. Believe09,

    The photos taken for the Savannah Morning News/www.savannahnow.com are the property of the company. None of the photos published to our website are public domain. I believe it is permissible to send the link to our website so others can view the photo there. But you must have permission from our company to use the photo in any other way.
    I don’t personally have any problem with you using the photo to help find Mr. Kyle’s identity. However, I am not in a position to grant you permission to use it.
    I suggest you request permission from the publisher of Savannah Morning News, xxxxx, or try his secretary xxxxxxx.

    Best regards,

    John Carrington

    I contacted the publisher and his secretary and will alert you as to any further replies....
     
  16. Roselvr

    Roselvr Ask me how to get your loved one in NamUs

    Messages:
    7,033
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That is total BC.
     
  17. Roselvr

    Roselvr Ask me how to get your loved one in NamUs

    Messages:
    7,033
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Think to possibly rename this to something about photo © - and for all to please read.

    IMO, they should have watermarked the photo when it 1st appeared.

    Any clue on how many people are using this photo? Tons. It's every where. Good luck to them tracking everyone down. It has nothing to do with Ben; he's not the one using it.

    I have a few choice words for them - and I feel if they are going to piddle around with this they are going to lose readers and those of us that send people to their site to read the story. There are so many stories out there on Benjaman; we can send people elsewhere to read.

    EDIT - Doe network also has this photo. Good luck getting a reply from them.
     
  18. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Oh, I dont think they are on the hunt for everyone to be honest. I suspect someone caught sight of Benjaman's FB page and that is what started the discussion.

    I read the copyright law, and there is no obligation of the part of the owner to watermark the photo. It all comes down to "fair use." As much as I hate to say it, putting the photo unattributed on banners etc does NOT constitute fair use and does impact their possible revenue...either through hits on their site or licensing fees. HOWEVER, I dont know that they will actually take it to the mat-I am waiting to hear. :)
     
  19. Roselvr

    Roselvr Ask me how to get your loved one in NamUs

    Messages:
    7,033
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Maybe I'm reading this wrong but the way I feel; if it's used on a poster, someone is going to google Benjaman. When they do, their link will come up, it will get more people to their site.

    I'm not going to lie.. he's a good looking man and when that photo is used; women are going to want to know who he is.

    I feel they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.

    Anyone that takes photos and puts them online has the realization that one of their photos are going to be used. Someone I know at my computer forum found one of their flower photos on laptops & monitor screens for a very large online retailer called Newegg. The photo was watermarked but it was cut off.

    IMO, a smart photographer will watermark the photo in a way it can't be cropped out. In Ben's photo, say across his chest. If they feel the need to protect their rights, watermarking should be done even though it's not "necessary".
     
  20. Benjaman

    Benjaman New Member

    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Dear Friends at Web Sleuths,
    I have not been sued or threatened to be sued by the Morris Publishing Group. I received information, indirectly,from an United States Congressman's office, that the Morris Publishing Group (the owners of the Savannah Morning News and the <SavannahNow.com> web site) were preparing to file suit against people who had posted items that the Morris Publishing Group had published, on the World Wide Web.
    After having learned of this information, I tried to notify everyone, whom I know, that they were in danger of being sued if they used copyrighted material from the Morris Publishing Group. Corporations like to pick someone who cannot afford to pay an attorney, file suit against them and thereby get an "easy win". In doing so they set a precedent in the courts, that would make it easier for them to win future suits. I would not like to see that happen to anyone that I know, especially if they were sued because they were trying to help me.
    I do not blame the Morris Publishing Group for trying to protect their copyrighted material. If they allowed their copyrighted material to go into the Public Domain they would lose their ability to make money and they are in the business to make money. If I were in their shoes I would do the same thing. Look at how the Woolworth's Corporation last the trademark for "aspirin". That is not an exact parallel, but it is close.
    Should anyone decide to go ahead and use that picture of me, taken by John Carrington, they should, at least, give him credit for having taken that picture. It is the best picture of me that is in existence and far exceeds my own attempts at photography.
    Respectfully yours,
    Benjaman Kyle
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice