So How Does The Idea Apply...
Oct. 5th, 2005 01:18 pmOkay kids! More debate.
For anyone involved in the discussion of using a name or likeness without consent (in that context, for spiritual/ritual/religious purposes...scroll down to the entry titled "Here's The Line..And Here's Someone Pole Vaulting It...." if you don't know what I'm talking about and care to know.)
So here's a real-life situation of similar structure but completely different details and context.
A coven in Colorado is holding a fundraising event at the end of the month. The fundraiser was originally intended to raise money for St. Jude's Children's Hospital in Memphis. Some people in town found out about this and made a stink because the coven was renting an American Legion Hall. These people circulated a petition to try to get that organization to cancel the hall rental and took the issue as far as the city council. As far as the town's concerned, the issue has dropped and an apology was issued to the coven. The event has not been canceled. The issue has made national news. St. Jude's has since sent the coven a letter asking them to stop using the St. Jude's name for the fundraiser because the situation has gotten too much media attention. They say that they authorized the coven to raise money for them but not to use their name. Huh. The coven has since changed the focus of their fundraiser to a Native American reservation in South Dakota.
St. Jude's has not consented to the use of their name in this situation. If the coven had not chosen to raise money for another organization, but kept with the hospital, should St. Jude's have remained detatched and felt no effect? Or would they have been violated in some way?
(It's interesting but not relevant to the question to note that St. Jude's authorized the group to raise money for them, but not use their name.)
Articles on the story...no registration to read.
Hospital for kids tells pagan group to count it out
Letter to pagan group from St. Jude's
Curious to see what y'all do with this.
For anyone involved in the discussion of using a name or likeness without consent (in that context, for spiritual/ritual/religious purposes...scroll down to the entry titled "Here's The Line..And Here's Someone Pole Vaulting It...." if you don't know what I'm talking about and care to know.)
So here's a real-life situation of similar structure but completely different details and context.
A coven in Colorado is holding a fundraising event at the end of the month. The fundraiser was originally intended to raise money for St. Jude's Children's Hospital in Memphis. Some people in town found out about this and made a stink because the coven was renting an American Legion Hall. These people circulated a petition to try to get that organization to cancel the hall rental and took the issue as far as the city council. As far as the town's concerned, the issue has dropped and an apology was issued to the coven. The event has not been canceled. The issue has made national news. St. Jude's has since sent the coven a letter asking them to stop using the St. Jude's name for the fundraiser because the situation has gotten too much media attention. They say that they authorized the coven to raise money for them but not to use their name. Huh. The coven has since changed the focus of their fundraiser to a Native American reservation in South Dakota.
St. Jude's has not consented to the use of their name in this situation. If the coven had not chosen to raise money for another organization, but kept with the hospital, should St. Jude's have remained detatched and felt no effect? Or would they have been violated in some way?
(It's interesting but not relevant to the question to note that St. Jude's authorized the group to raise money for them, but not use their name.)
Articles on the story...no registration to read.
Hospital for kids tells pagan group to count it out
Letter to pagan group from St. Jude's
Curious to see what y'all do with this.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 09:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 09:59 pm (UTC)(it's in reference to the big debate that rumbles on farther down in my journal)