Shooting victim potrait photog halts lawsuits after family rebuke

[RamboLiberal]

TUCSON (KGUN9-TV) - The photographer who owns the rights to the famous family portrait of Christina-Taylor Green, the youngest victim of the Tucson mass shooting, tells KGUN9 News that he is giving up his efforts to sue news media that used the photo. That announcement from photographer Jon Wolf came late Monday afternoon, shortly after the little girl's family issued him sharp rebuke, and said it would ask one of Wolf's charities not to accept money from donors referred by the photographer's website.

Shortly after 3:30 PM Monday, Jan Howard, a public relations specialist for Strongpoint Marketing, which is helping the Green family with public relations matters, sent KGUN9 News this statement on behalf of the family:

"Jon Wolf, as we have painfully learned, showed poor taste in his choice to litigate over the usage of his photograph of our little girl Christina-Taylor Green. Our intent was not to allow others to profit from the Jon Wolf image but to allow the media to portray our daughter in the best light possible and to tell her story. It is unfortunate that he has chosen to litigate over the use of his photograph at this time, or at all, in light of the fact that our family is still mourning and grieving the loss of our daughter."

By now much of the nation has seen the photo of Christina posing with her mother. It helped the community, and the nation, come to know what a special little girl Christina was. Tucson portrait photographer Jon Wolf had taken that portrait about a year before the tragedy. Under U.S. copyright law, he owns the media rights to the image.

http://www.kgun9.com/Global/story.asp?S=14028197

He owned it but IMHO he was jerk trying to play the Righthaven lawsuit game.

[blondeatlast]

1. Legally, he owned it--but the timing was callous and stupid. What he

could have done is simply asked to be credited--and then reap the indirect financial rewards of that.

[AlabamaLibrul]

2. That assumes there is any indirect financial reward for a byline.

There isn't and never has been. How many people can name the person who took some of the most iconic photos of all time - V-J Day in Times Square, Che, Iwo Jima, etc? IMO he shouldn't have backed down - even now. The TV station didn't quit selling commercials during the time after the tragedy, and they used his photo to support their commercial programming.

[Pithlet]

3. Big difference

Between photographers capturing iconic moment, and bottom feeding assholes jumping on the bandwagon of a portrait picture after the fact to profit off their tragedy. That's just beyond disgusting. He damn well should have backed down. He should never have done it in the first place.

[AlabamaLibrul]

4. I assume you are calling on all media to give back all profits ever

since that is their business model - jumping on the bandwagon after things happen.

[Pithlet]

5. Why would you assume I'm saying that?

It was blatantly and directly exploiting someone's tragedy. Are all instances where someone profits doing so?