Desecrating Jonbenet. Lawyer needed

[julianne]

The first ammendment protects all of us, including them. Remember that. They also are not doing anything illegal, so suing is a lost cause.

Olive, the below supports my statement that this IS illegal--snipped from an informational site on this subject.

The very first thing you must understand is the difference between an "editorial" use of a picture and a "commercial use" of a picture. Simplistically stated, if a magazine or newspaper uses a picture to illustrate an article they are doing on, say, the environment, that is an "editorial" usage of the photo. The picture is being used to illustrate the editorial content of the article. It varies widely, when, in fact, it's "okay" to use a picture of a person for "editorial content", even without their permission, and when it's not.

If, in that same magazine or newspaper, the same photo is used in an advertisement for a detergent, with the idea of promoting sales of that detergent product, that is a commercial use of that picture.

The legal requirements associated with the use of a model in those two different ways are vastly different. In the latter case, you are using a person's likeness to promote a product or service, meaning that you are using the image for "commercial purposes” and the photographer must have the person's permission to do so in the form of a valid "model release".

There are certain circumstances where you cannot use a photo commercially even if a valid model release has been signed. Defamatory, humiliating, or libelous uses are specifically and emphatically PROHIBITED!!!

So, yes, this is illegal. This is NOT covered under the First Amendment--not even close. Keep in mind, this is just referring to her PHOTO. The fact that they use her name is even worse, and is also illegal.

 

[julianne]

U.S. and International law does NOT ALLOW "libelous" or "defamatory" or "humiliating" uses of a person's likeness. Period.

JBRJustice & Bad Butterfly--carry on in your attempts to get this crap gone!

 

[Seeker]

I went in and looked around, didn't find anything about the actual JonBenet in there other than that one pix with the pentacle on it. Big deal! How many people here and at other forums have speculated that JonBenet's murder was "ritualistic" to begin with?

It's a parody folks! Offbeat and strange to us sure, but just a parody and her image has been used in countless tabloids and on countless websites with changes made in some. It's not illegal to use it or her name. Just ask Lin Wood...he was told about it last time too and said there's nothing that can be done. JonBenet is a public figure...

They aren't threatening anyone, but they are letting everyone know upfront that they will protect themselves if they are harrassed or threatened via hate e-mail. Geesh! The same things we would do if we were threatened or harassed. Anyone can track an IP that comes to their website. It's not a big deal and is a built in feature.

Besides I think they enjoy it when people over react. Kind of like Maryln Manson, or Howard Stern. They thrive on it, don't feed their addiction by over reacting to their website.

 

[luthersmama]

U.S. and International law does NOT ALLOW "libelous" or "defamatory" or "humiliating" uses of a person's likeness. Period.

JBRJustice & Bad Butterfly--carry on in your attempts to get this crap gone!

What they are doing is not a crime. It is a civil matter. If John Ramsey wants to sue them to make them stop, he can do so. Nobody else has standing to bring suit and there is no role for any law enforcement agency.

 

[olive]

Unfortunately, U.S. law makes a HUGE distinction between "private" and "public" figures when it comes to the law. If you are considered a "public" figure (which, by definition, is someone widely known and recognized by the general public), you basically have very little rights compared to the "private" citizen. JonBenet exceeds all requirements of "public".

Libel law protects private citizens. It is designed to protect everyday people from hearsay, speculation, and slander, say on a local level (local newspaper, etc.). It is very, very difficult to win a libel suit if you are a public citizen. Not impossible...but almost.

While politicians and celebrities know they are forfeiting these rights before accepting their positions, the same can not be said for people thrust into the spotlight by unfortunate circumstance. JBR, Mark Klaas, Elizabeth Smart...all recognizable, all considered "public".

Her name is not copyrighted. Absolutely anyone can legally use her name anywhere for any purpose.

Now the use of her photograph, hence her "likeness" for commercial purposes...there may be some more room to argue there. When considering this, you are involving many different precedents and laws, which could potentially conflict. That is a case at the mercy of the judge to which it is presented. However, I have a feeling it is not easily win-able, or Lin Wood would have been all over it.

edited to add: Courts DO take into account satire. They usually rule that satire can not be considered slander and is therefore not libelous.

 

[cappuccina]

...illegal, and is protected under the First Amendment...

Finding the site disturbing and in poor taste is, unfortunately NOT the same as the site being illegal...

Olive's analyses are absolutely correct...The Ramsey's are "public" figures, and unless there is copyright infringement going on, not a lot can be done here...

 

[SieSie]

I read some of the lyrics - absolutely disgusting. Whether it's "legal or not", I definitely think it's morally wrong. I won't be going back to their site, that's for sure!!

 

[luthersmama]

Unfortunately, U.S. law makes a HUGE distinction between "private" and "public" figures when it comes to the law. If you are considered a "public" figure (which, by definition, is someone widely known and recognized by the general public), you basically have very little rights compared to the "private" citizen. JonBenet exceeds all requirements of "public".

Libel law protects private citizens. It is designed to protect everyday people from hearsay, speculation, and slander, say on a local level (local newspaper, etc.). It is very, very difficult to win a libel suit if you are a public citizen. Not impossible...but almost.

While politicians and celebrities know they are forfeiting these rights before accepting their positions, the same can not be said for people thrust into the spotlight by unfortunate circumstance. JBR, Mark Klaas, Elizabeth Smart...all recognizable, all considered "public".

Her name is not copyrighted. Absolutely anyone can legally use her name anywhere for any purpose.

Now the use of her photograph, hence her "likeness" for commercial purposes...there may be some more room to argue there. When considering this, you are involving many different precedents and laws, which could potentially conflict. That is a case at the mercy of the judge to which it is presented. However, I have a feeling it is not easily win-able, or Lin Wood would have been all over it.

edited to add: Courts DO take into account satire. They usually rule that satire can not be considered slander and is therefore not libelous.

I totally agree. We may not like it, but it isn't illegal and it is up to John Ramsey to take it on if he wants to.

Besides, paying this degree of attention to it is what they WANT. Ignore it and it is much more likely to go away. How many new hits did they get today because we have publicized their site?

 

[cappuccina]

....they have a section on their site where they are publishing emails from WS readers about how upset they are with the site, and the bands' sarcastic answers...

Ignoring them is the only way to go...

 

[JBR_Justice]

I totally agree. We may not like it, but it isn't illegal and it is up to John Ramsey to take it on if he wants to.

Besides, paying this degree of attention to it is what they WANT. Ignore it and it is much more likely to go away. How many new hits did they get today because we have publicized their site?

Not illegal? Really? Even if you're using their name for your band? I wasn't trying to promote their website. I was only trying to find out if any legal action could be taken? Afterall, they are using her face in that manner which is disturbing.

 

[luthersmama]

Not illegal? Really? Even if you're using their name for your band? I wasn't trying to promote their website. I was only trying to find out if any legal action could be taken? Afterall, they are using her face in that manner which is disturbing.

By "not illegal" I mean it is not a crime. John Ramsey can sue them to get an injunction or damages, but it is not a crime. It is a civil law matter between John and the band. Nobody else can bring any legal action.

 

[cappuccina]

...ones have to be separated....Someone can do something that you cannot stand and do not agree with, but that does not necessarily make the action illegal....Here, John Ramsey would have to file a civil lawsuit that he probably would not win....

If you really want to be angry at someone for the horrible torture and murder of JBR, why not ask John Ramsey to tell us all the truth about what really happened to his daughter; that's much more important than a bunch of two-bit goth punks who have a hole in the wall local band, eh?

 

[BAD_BUTTERFLY]

I didn;t want to bring any more attention back to this sick site... I just thought that many would be happy to know that it is not up and running anymore. So in a sense we all got what we wanted.

 

[Deleted member 278]

Yeah! It's either gone or down.

 

[JBR_Justice]

I didn;t want to bring any more attention back to this sick site... I just thought that many would be happy to know that it is not up and running anymore. So in a sense we all got what we wanted.

Still there. I just checked.

 

[Maybe So]

It's pretty sad what people will do to make a name for themselves or to get attention they obviously didn't get enough attention from their mommies when they were little. Some day, when they are older and perhaps have children, they will themselves be ashamed of what they did. Most people grow up sooner or later....they will have to live with how sick and wrong what they are doing is. All those people in that band and the others listed on their site are fakes and posers anyway....people into that crap just sit around trying to figure out what everyone else in their peer group will think or say is cool.....and then they do it....not an original thought among them. Oh they are so antisocial and uncaring....they are so bad and scary....LOL....yea right....and then they go work at McDonalds.

If they had any real guts or were for real they would use a picture of someone from their own family who had died. Someone they were close to....now that would take some guts. It's way too easy for them to pick someone who doesn't mean anything to them and calously use her image for "shock value". My bet, they would cry like little girls if anyone was using a picture like that of some child they cared about.

Empathy....it's slow to come to some people.

It's tragic that they need that kind of attention......I say, ignore them, they are nothing and will never be anything....and they already know it.

 

[Ames]

I not only just finished emailing this band, but I also emailed boulder police. With a link to the band website.

:clap: GOOD FOR YOU!!!! That picture of JB is just awful...sick, sick, sick!!!

 

[sharkeyes]

...illegal, and is protected under the First Amendment...

Finding the site disturbing and in poor taste is, unfortunately NOT the same as the site being illegal...

Olive's analyses are absolutely correct...The Ramsey's are "public" figures, and unless there is copyright infringement going on, not a lot can be done here...

My curiosity got the better of me and I visited this website. You are correct, it is not illegal. But, JR could do something about it if he wanted to - or at least make a lot of noise about it (instead of his insipid interviews he's given). Ok, maybe JR is not aware of it - but, I doubt that, there's no way the remaining Ramsey's don't search out JBR on web to get the latest.

 

[Ames]

My curiosity got the better of me and I visited this website. You are correct, it is not illegal. But, JR could do something about it if he wanted to - or at least make a lot of noise about it (instead of his insipid interviews he's given). Ok, maybe JR is not aware of it - but, I doubt that, there's no way the remaining Ramsey's don't search out JBR on web to get the latest.

I agree...Burke even has a facebook page (like MYSPACE.COM)...so you KNOW that he gets on the computer and checks out what people say about his sister, his parents, him...and the murder. I am sure that John gets on these boards too, and checks them out...and probably laughs his butt off.

 

[coloradokares]

I agree...Burke even has a facebook page (like MYSPACE.COM)...so you KNOW that he gets on the computer and checks out what people say about his sister, his parents, him...and the murder. I am sure that John gets on these boards too, and checks them out...and probably laughs his butt off.

If that friend Westmoreland knew that a poster had said something not quite up to pa, I'd certainly think that JR could dissuade the likes of this. Exactly. I doubt either one of them are strangers to the world of the internet.