• Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    1 year ago

    It seems pretty clear that the Fulton County Sheriff’s office holds the copyright here; the only real question is in what constitutes fair use of a mug shot.

      • Steve@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        1 year ago

        Likeness is part of trademark law.
        It’s a whole separate thing from copyright.

        A model can own their likeness, but they can’t sell shirts of their photos from magazines.
        Those specific images are owned by the magazine.

        Same thing applies here.

      • Nougat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        They don’t own the copyright on someone’s likeness. They own the copyright on that specific image.

        • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          Exactly, like photographers have copyright of their photos. It would be hilarious if you needed to own the subject of the photo to have copyright. The movie industry would probably collapse overnight.

          • SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Unfortunately, I have the feeling the movie industry would be overjoyed if all their actors were slaves…

      • gk99@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not what’s being argued. You don’t own a picture just because you’re in it and this has been proven legally on numerous cases, the story behind the LUL Twitch emote being a relatively recent example.

        Trump can take a selfie and put it on a shirt. If I take a picture of him and upload it to my site, I can sue him if he uses that picture instead. The argument is that the jail can too.

      • CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But there might be a fringe use case where they can block other parties from profiting off of it themselves. There are laws in some states prohibiting criminals from collecting proceeds from their own memoirs and other works, though that probably only applies to convicted felons, and Trump isn’t there quite yet. But there might be precedent if someone really wanted to take this to court.