ONTD Political

Gay Couple's Wedding Photo Turned into Attack Ad

11:49 am - 06/29/2012
Brian Edwards and Tom Privitere have been Photoshopped into poster-husbands for an antigay campaign mailer.

A married gay couple is outraged after an antigay "hate group" has stolen one of their wedding photos and used it in a political attack ad.

Brian Edwards heard about the ad from a friend who sent an iPhone picture after recognizing him and husband Tom Privitere.

"I’m in shock and I’m angry and I’m hurt and I’m flabbergasted and I’m livid," Edwards wrote on his blog, The Gay Wedding Experience.

The Public Advocate of the United States, which is classified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an antigay "hate group," had taken the photo right off the website, cut out the New York couple and pasted them in a Colorado setting, then slapped on it the question: "State Senator Jean White's Idea of 'Family Values?'"

It was then mailed to thousands of people, according to a report in The Denver Post, as an attack on the state senator seeking reelection. White has twice voted in favor of Colorado's failed effort to pass a civil unions law there.

"I want to share what this picture means to me," Edwards wrote in reaction. "It represents my first home away from home, my beloved NYC, which at the time this image was taken (2 years ago) did not allow same sex couples to marry. It represents my longterm relationship with my best friend, my partner, and now husband – the love we share and obstacles we have overcome. It is a reminder of the happiness I felt the day he proposed to me and of the excitement I had all throughout our engagement. It represents hope and it represents love. Or at least it did."

The Post reports that the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases — since others have supposedly done the same with their copyrighted images.

“Other groups make fair use of our materials or 2000 photos from our website under these broad principles of political education," the group's president, Eugene Delgaudio, told the Post.


Source.

Yeah, I'm sure their appropriation of a gay couple's wedding photo was all about ~principles of political education~.
aviv_b 29th-Jun-2012 08:51 pm (UTC)
What vile fuckery. These are real people, not some staged stock footage. And I very much doubt this falls under fair use. I hope an attorney helps them go after The Public Advocate for damages.
sesmo 29th-Jun-2012 11:56 pm (UTC)
Damn, now I want to volunteer to help them out.

Step one is to register the copyright. Step two is to sue these fuckers into oblivion.
aviv_b 30th-Jun-2012 02:13 am (UTC)
I'm hoping someone from Lamba Legal or even the Southern Poverty Law Center might step up to help. SPLC has been very successful in, as you say, suing hate groups into oblivion.
macabremeltdown 29th-Jun-2012 08:51 pm (UTC)
The Post reports that the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases...

Um, no.
myrrhmade 29th-Jun-2012 08:52 pm (UTC)
Fucking disgusting, how dare they.
darth_eldritch 29th-Jun-2012 08:53 pm (UTC)
Fuck this shit. "Family values" my ass.
nitasee 29th-Jun-2012 08:53 pm (UTC)
he Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases

They say that now. But, will they crow a different tune if the couple sues them for copyright infringement. Which I hope to hell they do.
iolarah 29th-Jun-2012 09:22 pm (UTC)
Which I hope to hell they do Me too; the couple -and- the photographer should.
dixiedolphin 29th-Jun-2012 10:00 pm (UTC)
They ought to sue not just for copyright infringement, but also for privacy violations and improper use of their likeness.

A wedding is a private event and, as such, you can't just use photos from it willy nilly. I don't have my photo law book with me here at the office, so I can't recall the exact way this is handled... but for non-notable people in a non-public setting, their privacy is protected.

Plus, most states have laws protecting people from having their likeness used without permission. Pretty sure this would fall under that as well.

Hope they sue the pants off these bigotted assholes.
mirhanda 30th-Jun-2012 06:38 pm (UTC)
I don't think the couple can sue for copyright violation, but the photographer could. They might be able to sue because they didn't release the use of their likeness.
13chapters 29th-Jun-2012 08:54 pm (UTC)
The Post reports that the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases — since others have supposedly done the same with their copyrighted images.

BEST DEFENSE EVER.

I guess this is redundant, but seriously, what a bunch of ASSHOLES. I would be fucking livid.

I just asked my dad the lawyer if the couple about the possibility of a lawsuit. He says they do have GROUNDS for a suit, but whether or they would WIN would depend on how the picture was originally published, and how the Public Advocate got their hands on the photo in the first place.
coraki 29th-Jun-2012 10:10 pm (UTC)
I would still think the photographer would have grounds to sue if he didn't give up the rights to image and he owns the image.
redstar826 29th-Jun-2012 09:00 pm (UTC)
and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases — since others have supposedly done the same with their copyrighted images.

lol the "but everyone else is doing it!" defense didn't even work with my parents when I was a little kid
nitasee 29th-Jun-2012 09:07 pm (UTC)
Yes, but using that defense speaks volumes of the maturity of these idiots.
moonbrightnites 29th-Jun-2012 09:14 pm (UTC)
It's their entire mentality and level of intellect distilled into one sentence of stupid.
ill_tex 29th-Jun-2012 09:29 pm (UTC)
How dare this group talk about values? How dare they use Brian and Tom as an example of the EXACT opposite thing the couple supports?
littlelauren86 29th-Jun-2012 09:37 pm (UTC)
the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases — since others have supposedly done the same with their copyrighted images.

Oh please. Total class act.
eversofar 29th-Jun-2012 10:02 pm (UTC)
The Post reports that the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases

actually, copyright law restricts your usage of an image but w/e.
illusivevenstar 29th-Jun-2012 10:08 pm (UTC)
The Post reports that the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases

Good job on handing them their lawsuit win, if they choose to sue.
effervescent 29th-Jun-2012 10:33 pm (UTC)
That's vile. :/ I can't imagine having something so important turned into something so awful. I hope they sue.
tsu_ 29th-Jun-2012 10:57 pm (UTC)
that is just absolutely vile and disgusting
sparkindarkness 29th-Jun-2012 10:59 pm (UTC)
This is vile- to do that to anyone and to do it with their wedding photos? To take what is such a special day for them and use the depictions of this to fuel bigotry against them? That's repellent
lafinjack 29th-Jun-2012 11:06 pm (UTC)
So wait, why are they suddenly in the middle of a snowy forest? Is the Pacific Northwest part of the gay agenda?




This one I can understand the intent behind: they're invading the heartland!

pleasure_past 29th-Jun-2012 11:42 pm (UTC)
Snowy forest = Colorado. Because there is nothing in Colorado but ski resorts full of rich white people. True story.

(Look, I think I saw this dead horse twitch so I have to keep flogging it.)
cyranothe2nd 30th-Jun-2012 05:29 am (UTC)
Is the Pacific Northwest part of the gay agenda?

Well, Dan Savage *does* live here...
mingemonster 30th-Jun-2012 12:23 pm (UTC)
they'd probably have some trouble making people believe that marriages in new york should influence voting in colorado
tabaqui 29th-Jun-2012 11:11 pm (UTC)
For fuck's sake. 'Everybody else is doing it'??? No, no, no. Jayzus.
schmanda 29th-Jun-2012 11:43 pm (UTC)
The Post reports that the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases — since others have supposedly done the same with their copyrighted images.

“Other groups make fair use of our materials or 2000 photos from our website under these broad principles of political education," the group's president, Eugene Delgaudio, told the Post.
Personal Responsibility, amirite?
thelilyqueen 30th-Jun-2012 03:42 pm (UTC)
Conservative personal responsibility: Everyone else needs to accept even manufactured negative consequences for making decisions I disagree with, but if I get called out on my bad behavior people are being meanies.
pleasure_past 29th-Jun-2012 11:44 pm (UTC)
It's too much to hope that they go bankrupt over the inevitable lawsuit.

I'm going to hope that anyway.
herosquad 29th-Jun-2012 11:51 pm (UTC)
These guys are friends-of-friends and from what I've experienced, they're incredibly kind and charming people who don't deserve any of this shit.
tinylegacies 29th-Jun-2012 11:56 pm (UTC)
Oh wow I know a gay man named Brian Edwards but it's not this one thank goodness.

This is AWFUL though. I hope they sue that organization for all they have.
froda_baggins 30th-Jun-2012 12:07 am (UTC)
Wow, I can't even. I feel so bad for that couple. I don't even know what I would do if something like that happened to me. I'd be so upset.

I hope they can get some kind of damages from all of this.
kyra_neko_rei 30th-Jun-2012 12:12 am (UTC)
The Post reports that the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases — since others have supposedly done the same with their copyrighted images.

“Other groups make fair use of our materials or 2000 photos from our website under these broad principles of political education," the group's president, Eugene Delgaudio, told the Post.


Because a public group sharing images with people who do innocuous things with them is TOTALLY THE SAME as using a private couple's image of themselves in an attempt to destroy the very thing the photograph was taken to celebrate.

There is something particularly obscene about snagging a couple's wedding photo and using it to attack their right to get married.
dokyungsoo 30th-Jun-2012 04:00 am (UTC)
how rude of them. why on earth would someone think this was a good idea?! - it's one thing that you're a homophobic idiot (a huge ass thing, that is), and it's another to actually translate your disgusting thoughts into actions, and interfere with someone's love lives. seriously, how insecure can someone get? argh, this is fucking terrible. why would anyone be proud to participate in an evolution of "hate", to be part of a "hate group"? that shit should be illegal as a whole, let alone one going to the extent of doing this. so fucking repulsed rn.
perthro 30th-Jun-2012 04:17 am (UTC)
Does anyone know if they can actually afford a lawyer? Should one of us see if Popehat can find someone to do pro-bono?
cyranothe2nd 30th-Jun-2012 05:27 am (UTC)
OT: But their picture is ~adorbz~ How could anyone look at that and be, "The gey seck wargarblll!!!1!"
the_siobhan 30th-Jun-2012 11:40 pm (UTC)
That was my reaction. I'd look at them and go, awwwwwww.
tiddlywinks103 30th-Jun-2012 05:30 am (UTC)
the Public Advocate refuses to apologize and claims that even though the photo is copyright protected, it can do with it as it pleases — since others have supposedly done the same with their copyrighted images.

“Other groups make fair use of our materials or 2000 photos from our website under these broad principles of political education," the group's president, Eugene Delgaudio, told the Post.


Ah, the old "You did it first!" defense that conservatives always trot out to downplay and dismiss their own fuckery...
chasing_breezes 30th-Jun-2012 10:20 am (UTC)
Incredibly classy response, my total respect for the couple. I'd be hurling around expletives... And maybe heavy objects.
moonshaz 1st-Jul-2012 01:46 am (UTC)
Okay, I read this in kind of a rush, so maybe I missed something. But I sure HOPE that couple is taking those fuckers to jail for copyright infringement, if nothing else.
This page was loaded Aug 21st 2017, 6:08 pm GMT.