✖ Via Boston.com / The Big Picture: A Brown Pelican is seen on the beach at East Grand Terre Island along the Louisiana coast on Thursday, June 3, 2010. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)
I first found this photo over at Washington’s Blog. The post where it appears makes a (short) argument about the ban of media coverage apparently imposed by BP and US officials and the alleged suspension of the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution it represents. At the very end of the post, the author seems to put forward a legal argument supporting the publication of such pictures as the one shown above:
In addition, use of such images is also protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Specifically, reproduction is protected under the “Mai Lai/Zapruder line of cases”, since:
(1) The images are of historical significance;
(2) They show facts which cannot be conveyed effectively in any other manner, and
(3) Therefore the Constitution trumps copyright law. (more)
Now, what exactly are those “Mai Lai/Zapruder line of cases” ? It’s not a law, but a “line of cases” and it could plausibly be used to challenge the ban of some media access to the site of the catastrophe (see The New York Times: “BP and Officials Block Some Coverage of Golf Oil Spill”). More thoughts about this over at Aphelis.
• Jul 14, 2010 link notes tagged: communication technology catastrophe animal destruction death responsability shock image representation human oil BP British Petroleum disaster copyright fair use constitution media press freedom Zapruder
