Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

States try to bar use of war-dead names, images
Seattle Post Intelligencer ^ | 05.17.07 | PAUL DAVENPORT

Posted on 05/27/2007 8:55:51 PM PDT by Coleus

Incensed by the sale of anti-war T-shirts and other paraphernalia emblazoned with the names and pictures of America's military dead, some states are outlawing the commercial use of the fallen without the permission of their families. Despite serious questions of constitutionality, Oklahoma and Louisiana enacted such laws last year, and the governors of Texas and Florida have legislation waiting on their desks. Arizona lawmakers are on the verge of approving a similar measure.

"You should have some rights to your own name and your own legacy, particularly if you're a deceased veteran," said state Sen. Jim Waring, a Republican who sponsored the Arizona bill. "Celebrities have that. Why shouldn't our soldiers have that?" The bills were prompted largely by pleas from military families upset that their loved ones' names and photos were being used on phone cards, body armor and other products.

In many cases, the target of their ire is Dan Frazier, a Flagstaff, Ariz., man who sells T-shirts online that list the names of 3,155 U.S. military personnel killed in Iraq. The shirts bear slogans such as "Bush Lied -- They Died" and "Support Our Remaining Troops -- Bring the Rest Home Alive." Margy Bons, a Phoenix-area woman whose Marine reservist son, Sgt. Michael Marzano, was killed by an insurgent bomb in Iraq in 2005, said he believed in his mission.

"My son was not duped into going to war," she said. "I'm angry that somebody can use somebody else's name for their political beliefs without permission." Frazier, 41, said he will not retreat. "I'm providing a valuable service to people to help show the enormity of the cost of war," he said. Under the Arizona bill, violators could get up to six months in jail and fines of $2,500 for an individual and $20,000 for an enterprise. A spokeswoman for Gov. Janet Napolitano declined to say whether she would sign the bill if it reached her desk.

The Florida bill would impose a $1,000 penalty per violation for using a military member's name or photo commercially without permission. Law enforcement officials in Oklahoma and Louisiana said they were unaware of any prosecutions under their laws. But the Arizona legislation also authorizes families to sue, and Bons said she will see Frazier in court. Frazier said he has sold a couple of thousand shirts through his Web site since 2005 and regards it as more of a political statement than a moneymaker.

Frazier said the bills and laws infringe on his First Amendment rights to free speech. Waring said Frazier is selling a commercial product, and that opens the door to regulation.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; US: Arizona; US: Florida
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 05/27/2007 8:55:52 PM PDT by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Coleus

I forget that anti-war (anti-US and Israel and pro-terrorist) exhibit that places GI boots of the fallen.


2 posted on 05/27/2007 9:25:35 PM PDT by endthematrix (a globalized and integrated world - which is coming, one way or the other. - Hillary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Ok ... let’s rip down that Vietnam Vet’s wall, or maybe we can just spray paint over the names. Naturally, we’ll have to go into Arlington Cemetery and pull out every headstone with a name on it as well. < /sarcasm off>

Either we have freedom of the press, or we do not. I’ve read the Constitution (with emphasis on the Bill of Rights) and do not recall seeing the disclaimer that the bills are only for a select group; and on a subject that people approve of.

I have the right to speak my mind, you have the right not to listen. As long as I do not force you to listen, you do not have the right to silence me.

Using the names of those who made the greatest sacrifice to further an anti-war political stance is despicable; however trashing the Constitution to prevent these degenerates from airing their views is far worse - it is evil.

3 posted on 05/27/2007 9:25:49 PM PDT by Hodar (With Rights, come Responsibilities. Don't assume one, without assuming the other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
What families of the military should do is turn the tables on these profiteering scumbags.

Print up shirts with profiteer's name, with slogans such as "American-hating liberals and surrender-now Democrats have taught (profiteer) all he needs to know to turn a lousy buck."

All proceeds go to support the families of slain soldiers...

4 posted on 05/27/2007 11:07:07 PM PDT by kromike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

ok


5 posted on 05/28/2007 1:10:19 AM PDT by screaming eagle2 (No matter what you call it,a pre-owned vehicle is still a USED CAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Moonbat slimeballs profiteering off our war dead. Fred Phelps is low but hasn't stooped that low - yet.

Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

6 posted on 05/28/2007 1:14:06 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

What makes it different and unacceptable is it is an overt and aggressive ploy to erode the will of the citizens of this nation to fight a war for our very survival.

If it is done to aide the goals of the enemy it is an enemy action being committed by a domestic enemy for the benefit of a foreign enemy.

Then there’s the tired ol’ pomo saw that all things are equal and nothing is of value.

This used to be understood at the gut level of the majority of our citizenry.


7 posted on 05/28/2007 1:14:46 AM PDT by Grimmy (equivocation is but the first step along the road to capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kromike
The First Amendment protects free speech but not the sale of commercial goods. I think families should have standing to sue if the name or likeness of a loved one is used in a manner they haven't previously authorized. I should add I support the free market but we have rules to ensure a level playing field and ethical conduct on the part of businesses. As well we should.

Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

8 posted on 05/28/2007 1:19:43 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

There have been some draconian prosecutions of people who used the symbol of the the Olympics without permission of the USOC. Olympic bus lines in NJ actually changed their buses to read Olympia during the games. Sound like these parents are just getting the rights to their loved ones’ images and names.


9 posted on 05/28/2007 5:58:57 AM PDT by Dilbert56 (Harry Reid, D-Nev.: "We're going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson