Updated

[cat_77]

As an update to this post on our children's picture being put up online without our permission after being aired on television without our permission:


E contacted the show requesting that either the children's images were blurred or removed. She was contacted and told that they are unable to blur the images and would have to take down the entire story segment from their site, not just edit the clip and would she please reconsider.

She said no. We'll see if they take it down.

Why the hell they can't edit a video clip is beyond me. Snip-snip - I have a program that can do it for you if you would like.

Part of me thinks the station is being stupid for not just doing a quick edit. Part of me is honestly vindictive enough to wonder how pissed this will make Miss Thang. Yes, it's shallow, but I am still rather pissed at the whole thing happening in the first place. I'd go into another rant, but really, I've already covered that.

Comments

[cleothemuse.livejournal.com]

Uh, they HAVE to take it down. Permission was not given by the parents/legal guardians of the children in question, therefore it is illegal to use their images.

[cat-77.livejournal.com]

As of right now, 11:25 pm MN time, it's still up. E told them to take it down 12 hours ago.

[johnnym77.livejournal.com]

This is when you mention the magic word: lawsuit.

[cat-77.livejournal.com]

It shouldn't have to take that for them to follow the law. They did not seek permission of the parent or guardian minor children prior to using the image of said minor children in a public forum. A request by the legal guardian was made to remove it. YOU REMOVE IT. Simple as that.

[johnnym77.livejournal.com]

This is true. However, the network is a business. The quickest way to get a business to do what you want is to 1) threaten a lawsuit or 2) stage a boycott. Number 2 is probably not a viable option.

But if you really want to cause a fuss, tell a reporter from a rival network or someone from the Strib. "News station uses children without permission" has enough salaciousness as a headline to cause a stir.

[johnnym77.livejournal.com]

Also, I found this case on-line this morning (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=mn&vol=apppub\0204\c9011162&invol=1). It's a case about a couple going through a divorce, and in the process the daughters names and pictures were shown on a KSTP broadcast featuring the father. The court determined that the father did not have the right to use the images without the mother's approval.