The Trump campaign may have violated United State copyright law by selling merchandise featuring the former president’s mugshot, legal experts have warned.

  • Treczoks@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think in this case, a copyright is well-justified. They have to publish the mugshot for some reasons, but without the copyright, such a mugshot could be abused. Having the copyright at least enables the government to have some control over this.

    Just imagine having your mugshot taken, and it later turns out you are completely innocent. Still, if the mugshot was in the public domain, your neighbor with whom you have a dispute over the height of cut lawn could just print your face on every billboard in the country.

    • xkforce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Except it is the accused spreading the photo of their own accord. The argument that theyre being protected by prosecuting them for copyright infringement doesn’t make sense.

      • Treczoks@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The argument that theyre being protected by prosecuting them for copyright infringement doesn’t make sense.

        No, and it doesn’t need to, as they are unrelated.

        They do own the copyright. The basic intention is to protect the innocent, but it does not rule out any other uses.