The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
If you look again, I think you’ll find that no one is saying mug shots are not public information in Georgia. The article did not say that. I did not say that. I said, and the article said, that Trump does not own the copyright to his mug shot photo. That belongs to the Fulton county sheriffs office.
Inmate records are produced by state agencies and are public in GA; that means they're part of the public domain. Therefore, they are not eligible for copyright protection, per US copyright law.
"When an image belongs to the public domain, it means that it is not subject to copyright."
A Beginner's Guide To Using Copyrighted Images | Pixsy
It’s by no means impossible to use a copyrighted image – but you just need to get a license or other permission to use it from the creator first. Read our guide.
www.pixsy.com
Inmate records are produced by state agencies and are public in GA; that means they're part of the public domain. Therefore, they are not eligible for copyright protection, per US copyright law.
"When an image belongs to the public domain, it means that it is not subject to copyright."
A Beginner's Guide To Using Copyrighted Images | Pixsy
It’s by no means impossible to use a copyrighted image – but you just need to get a license or other permission to use it from the creator first. Read our guide.
Distinguish between public domain and copyright. One does not invalidate the other.
"The copyright of Donald Trump's mug shot in Fulton County, GA is likely owned by the Fulton County Sheriff's Office. This is because the copyright of a work is generally owned by the creator of the work, and in the case of a mug shot, the creator is the law enforcement agency that takes the photo.
"The Fulton County Sheriff's Office has not yet commented on whether they own the copyright to Trump's mug shot. However, legal experts believe that they are likely the copyright owners.
"The Trump campaign has been selling t-shirts with Trump's mug shot on them. The campaign has argued that they have the right to do this because they own the copyright to the photo. However, the Fulton County Sheriff's Office could challenge this claim." (Google Bard)
I don't know if the Fulton County Sheriff's Office has any desire or intention to challenge this claim. I just found it interesting that Trump does not own the copyright to his mug shot.
Last edited:
In this case, yes it does. Mug shots are public records, therefore they are in the public domain.
Once again, Google Bard is wrong. Mug shots are public records (public domain) and do not qualify for copyrights by either the Trump campaign or the Fulton County sheriff's office. Willis and the Fulton County sheriff made a big production of taking Trump's mug shot and immediately making it a public image. They obviously didn't realize they were handing the Trump campaign a huge gift.
"Georgia Open records law gives the public the right to see, inspect and copy all "public records." (emphasis mine)
Georgia Open Records | Georgia Secretary of State
Georgia Open records law gives the public the right to see, inspect and copy all "public records."
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Oh Yes ... a mugshot - as a consequence of being charged with multiple felonies under the GA RICO statues - is truly quite the gift !
Perhaps El Donaldo - being the very stable genius that he is - will deploy it during the General ... you know: to sway all those independent voters he needs to secure the Presidency in 2024 ?
We're at an impasse. The Fulton County Sheriff owns the copyright to the Trump mug shot. Believe what you will.In this case, yes it does. Mug shots are public records, therefore they are in the public domain.
Once again, Google Bard is wrong. Mug shots are public records (public domain) and do not qualify for copyrights by either the Trump campaign or the Fulton County sheriff's office. Willis and the Fulton County sheriff made a big production of taking Trump's mug shot and immediately making it a public image. They obviously didn't realize they were handing the Trump campaign a huge gift.
"Georgia Open records law gives the public the right to see, inspect and copy all "public records." (emphasis mine)
Georgia Open Records | Georgia Secretary of State
Georgia Open records law gives the public the right to see, inspect and copy all "public records."www.sos.ga.gov
Last edited:
If Your Name is Walt ...
If your name is Walt, this is what it looks like when Trump throws you under the bus.
Trump names Walt as the one who packed the boxes. If it just so happens that nuclear secrets were later found in those boxes in the Mar-a-Lago search, Walt must have been the one who put them there. Sorry things turned out this way, Walt. You should have been more careful. We wish you the best in your prison experience.
If your name is Walt, this is what it looks like when Trump throws you under the bus.
Trump names Walt as the one who packed the boxes. If it just so happens that nuclear secrets were later found in those boxes in the Mar-a-Lago search, Walt must have been the one who put them there. Sorry things turned out this way, Walt. You should have been more careful. We wish you the best in your prison experience.
Attachments
Last edited:
It was Walt Nauta's attorney who was offered a judgeship in return for getting his client to flip against Trump. Evidently that didn't go over too well.
"In a CNN interview Thursday night, Trump’s then-lawyer James Trusty claimed prosecutor Jay Bratt had threatened to sink Nauta attorney Stanley Woodward’s application for a federal judgeship if his client didn’t turn on the former president...
“He apparently, along with five other people in his presence from DOJ, extorted a very well-respected, very intelligent lawyer from Washington, DC, saying essentially, ‘If you want this judgeship that’s on Joe Biden’s desk, you have to flip your guy to cooperate against the President of the United States,’” Trusty charged.
Bratt said Woodward wasn’t a “Trump guy” and was going to do “the right thing” with respect to Nauta, a source familiar with the meeting told The Post Friday."
Trump aide Walt Nauta indicted in docs case after attorney claims ‘extortion’
Donald Trump’s personal aide Waltine Nauta has been indicted alongside the former president on six charges stemming from special counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents probe.
nypost.com
The law says otherwise - I'll believe what it says.
You're misunderstanding the law. To correct that, consider this. If you create a mural to be vinyl wrapped on the side of your truck, what do you have to do to obtain ownership of the copyright? Or if I take a photo of a member of our gym, what do I have to do to obtain the copyright for that person's photo?
The answer is nothing. Copyright rights automatically accrue to the creator of the work in question. We can register the copyright if we choose so others clearly know to whom the copyright belongs, but that is not required to obtain the copyright itself. By law, that is automatically conferred on the creator of the work.
In the mug shot case, the Sheriff's office created the photo so the copyright automatically belongs to that office. Every mug shot the Sheriff's office takes is the copyrighted property of that office. No one else owns the copyright, because no one else created the work.
An item can be placed in the public domain, but that does not cancel the copyright or change the fact that the Sheriff still owns the copyright.
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
And it now appears that yet another Trump-provided (and Trump-paid for) lawyer - this time John Irving, who reps De Oliveira - is being beset by the prospect of conflict of interest issues:
Imagine that.
Imagine that.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
From a defendant's point of view, I can understand why it would be quite welcome for Trump to pay for your attorney and seemingly fight on your behalf in court. Some of these defendants are people of ordinary means and have little or no experience in the justice system, and probably no experience as a defendant on charges that carry long prison terms. I'd guess their every waking moment is focused on the charges against them and they're probably eager to accept all the help they can get.
I can also understand why Trump would want to hire lawyers to defend these people at his expense. First, it is perfectly legal for him to do that. It is not uncommon for a corporation that is in trouble to pay for lawyers to represent the relevant employees as well as the corporation. Trump is doing nothing unusual here.
In addition to it being perfectly legal, hiring attorneys to represent other defendants give Trump an inside advantage he would not otherwise have. This works as long as the arrangement is maintained. But as we have seen with Employee #4, the defendant may discover it is not in their best interests to be represented by an attorney paid for by Trump.
Smith is filing motions about this but the defendants have families and friends too. There are probably dozens of people and hundreds of strangers telling them they are better off with an attorney of their own, even if the attorney is a court-appointed public defender.
There may be one or two defendants who are blindly loyal to Trump who will stick with their Trump-paid attorneys. But most of them will likely see those who fired their Trump-paid attorneys are not getting charged. They are cooperating instead and thereby reducing their risk of jail.
I do indeed remember that. That's partly why I started keeping track of Trump's win/loss record in court. At present, by my list, Trump has won four court decisions and lost 115. In other words, he has lost 96.5% of the time. With a record like that, the better question would be, "are you tired of losing yet?"
These numbers are slightly different from last week's list. My research continues. Since the last list was published, I found three more cases that Trump brought to court. They were defamation lawsuits against CNN, New York Times, and Washington Post. All three were filed by Trump in different courts at different times. All were dismissed.
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Change the above (highlighted in bold) to:
"Trump is doing nothing unusual in that respect."
And I'm good with it.
Which of course, is to say that Trump may well be doing other things which are, in fact, "unusual".
Indeed.
Some of the best resolutions for January 6th defendants have come as a result of having been represented by Federal Public Defenders.
Yup.
My prior posts and sources speak for themselves, so there's no reason to repeat them. The above statement ignores the GA Open Records Law: it clearly states public records can be copied. When the Fulton County Sheriff's Dept released the Trump mug shot to the public immediately after taking it, they surrendered any copyright privileges they might have had. Their intent was clear: they wanted it reproduced to the fullest extent possible and they got their wish.
Obviously - and for good reason, there has been no effort on the part of the Fulton County Sheriff's Dept to now sue the Trump campaign or anyone else for copyright infringement. This absurd idea is a straw man creation of Trump haters who want to counter the tremendous positive effect the mug shot created among the Trump base. Their plan to disgrace Trump with a mug shot turned into a massive political blunder, and they can't stand it.