Infringement Issue Where do I stand?

My stupid take is that your LS ID image is a fitting distillation of where you stand in this matter.

Thanks Stupid but unless your a stupid lawyer I may seek a stupid second opinion.

Pardon stupid me. But, you DID ask if ANYONE could tell you.

True True. OK Anyone who knows media law then.

Mark – think about all of the people who are quoted in newspapers who wouldn’t allow it if they had any say in the matter. Court evidence for example. There’s plenty of stuff in the media that wouldn’t be there should approval have been necessary. So it’s not too different to being an unwilling photo subject in the press? The question someone like Neal Jackson might be able to answer for us is where does the burden of proof lie with the misquote aspect?

Good luck.

Ahh. The perils of not speaking up at the time….

I can’t give legal advice (I’m no longer working as a lawyer), so don’t take this as more than observations. Get a real lawyer if it matters and not some guy on a listserve of know-it-all snappers.

In the US normally short quotes from other sources are not deemed infringements under the doctrine of fair use. And reference to the writer normally is not only permissible but encouraged (and operates to further buttress the claim of fair use).

If it is a quote of a misquote, the publisher (and the writer) had no way to know that what you wrote was not quoted correctly in its source. So it did no wrong.

If the misquote is online as well as in the book, you might write the publisher and at least get it off the Web (where more people search these days). As for the book, you may be SOL because the publisher is hardly likely to pull the book where it did not wrong, unless the quote is so fundamental to its premise that it belies the whole thing.

In the US the burden of proof is almost always on the plaintiff (the one commencing the legal action), though it may shift as the action progesses.

But, again, if any of this really matters, talk to a real lawyer.

Thanks for your input Neal.

The reason I am annoyed about the inclusion in the book is the misquote could possibly have a detrimental effect on my safety. The book has a very slanted view on the “War on Terror” and the inclusion of my quote could have ramifications. I have long dealt with the problem of a bastardized version of the original being spread on the net but I was under the impression that a publisher and or the authour should be checking their facts.

Anyway your probably right about LS not being the right place for this.

Thanks again.

Mark