Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Westchester, New York
    Posts
    67,823
    Thanks (Given)
    7315
    Thanks (Received)
    34146
    Likes (Given)
    7051
    Likes (Received)
    7758
    Piss Off (Given)
    14
    Piss Off (Received)
    19
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475724

    Default High court dilemma: Can lie about medal be crime?

    I don't think assholes that pull this shit should get away with it based on "freedom of speech". I'm confident others feel differently. My stance is based on protecting those who protect us, and protecting the meaning behind the awards these men earn for bravery and character.

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Xavier Alvarez stood up at a public meeting and called himself a wounded war veteran who had received the top military award, the Medal of Honor. He was lying about his medal, his wounds and his military service, but he wasn't the first man to invent war exploits.

    He was, however, one of the first people prosecuted under a 2006 federal law aimed at curbing false claims of military valor.

    Concerns that the law improperly limits speech and turns people into criminals for things they say, rather than do, are at the heart of the Supreme Court's review of his case and the Stolen Valor Act.

    Veterans groups have come to the aid of the Obama administration, which calls the law a narrowly crafted effort to protect the system of military awards that was established during the Revolutionary War by Gen. George Washington. The high court will hear the case Wednesday, which is Washington's 280th birthday.

    "They're committing fraud. They're impersonating somebody else. They take on attributes of somebody else, attributes of a hero who served honorably," said Pam Sterner, whose college term paper calling for the law wound up in the hands of members of Congress. "When you do that, impersonating someone else, that's fraud, not freedom of speech."

    Civil liberties groups, writers, publishers and news media outlets, including The Associated Press, have told the justices they worry the law, and especially the administration's defense of it, could lead to more attempts by government to regulate speech.
    http://news.yahoo.com/high-court-dil...100520506.html
    “You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colin." Need I say more?” - Chris Rock

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    23,893
    Thanks (Given)
    4180
    Thanks (Received)
    4524
    Likes (Given)
    1412
    Likes (Received)
    1065
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    39
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9173677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimnyc View Post
    I don't think assholes that pull this shit should get away with it based on "freedom of speech". I'm confident others feel differently. My stance is based on protecting those who protect us, and protecting the meaning behind the awards these men earn for bravery and character.
    "They're committing fraud. They're impersonating somebody else. They take on attributes of somebody else, attributes of a hero who served honorably," said Pam Sterner, whose college term paper calling for the law wound up in the hands of members of Congress. "When you do that, impersonating someone else, that's fraud, not freedom of speech."
    http://news.yahoo.com/high-court-dil...100520506.html
    Hmm...
    Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.
    ... not sure where the injury is to call it fraud. They're not really impersonating anyone in particular.
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Westchester, New York
    Posts
    67,823
    Thanks (Given)
    7315
    Thanks (Received)
    34146
    Likes (Given)
    7051
    Likes (Received)
    7758
    Piss Off (Given)
    14
    Piss Off (Received)
    19
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475724

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    Hmm...


    ... not sure where the injury is to call it fraud. They're not really impersonating anyone in particular.
    I can't make a case for fraud based on the current laws. But I do think the Stolen Valor Act is excellent and I hope it remains on the books.
    “You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colin." Need I say more?” - Chris Rock

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In a house; two stories, suburban
    Posts
    7,471
    Thanks (Given)
    214
    Thanks (Received)
    264
    Likes (Given)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    7
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2395474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    Hmm...


    ... not sure where the injury is to call it fraud. They're not really impersonating anyone in particular.
    Arent they impersonating Medal of honor recipients, as a class, who more often than not have perished in defense of the united states and it's citizens-- requiring the grantees of such an honor to uphold the integrity of the medal for those unable to defend the honors beatowed upon them. i would parallel this law with trademark protection; where a risk of dilution, whether realized or not, poses a significant likelihood of injury to warrant legal protection.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimnyc View Post
    I can't make a case for fraud based on the current laws. But I do think the Stolen Valor Act is excellent and I hope it remains on the books.
    Stolen Valor is an unconstitutional law, no matter how much I agree with it.

    However, if a stealer of valor were to have his ass kicked by a real vet, I wouldn't vote for prosecution either.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    23,893
    Thanks (Given)
    4180
    Thanks (Received)
    4524
    Likes (Given)
    1412
    Likes (Received)
    1065
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    39
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9173677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimnyc View Post
    I can't make a case for fraud based on the current laws. But I do think the Stolen Valor Act is excellent and I hope it remains on the books.
    I think they have a high hurdle to meet when implementing a law like this.

    Quote Originally Posted by logroller View Post
    Arent they impersonating Medal of honor recipients, as a class, who more often than not have perished in defense of the united states and it's citizens-- requiring the grantees of such an honor to uphold the integrity of the medal for those unable to defend the honors beatowed upon them. i would parallel this law with trademark protection; where a risk of dilution, whether realized or not, poses a significant likelihood of injury to warrant legal protection.
    Trademark might be an acceptable standard but there is no standard required for recipients to continue upholding that I'm aware of. If I claim to have won a Pulitzer do they have recourse against me?
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    I think they have a high hurdle to meet when implementing a law like this.



    Trademark might be an acceptable standard but there is no standard required for recipients to continue upholding that I'm aware of. If I claim to have won a Pulitzer do they have recourse against me?
    If they used their alleged Medal of Honor to gain something of value then I could maybe see this being illegal. Otherwise , it's just scummy.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In a house; two stories, suburban
    Posts
    7,471
    Thanks (Given)
    214
    Thanks (Received)
    264
    Likes (Given)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    7
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2395474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ConHog View Post
    Stolen Valor is an unconstitutional law, no matter how much I agree with it.

    However, if a stealer of valor were to have his ass kicked by a real vet, I wouldn't vote for prosecution either.
    like I posted earlier, it's a trademark enforcement- an authorized power.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    23,893
    Thanks (Given)
    4180
    Thanks (Received)
    4524
    Likes (Given)
    1412
    Likes (Received)
    1065
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    39
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9173677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by logroller View Post
    like I posted earlier, it's a trademark enforcement- an authorized power.
    You'll have to show the government is able to trademark and that the MoH qualifies.
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    You'll have to show the government is able to trademark and that the MoH qualifies.


    The government CAN trademark, but if there is no *TM* or circled R next to it, it generally isn't considered to be a trademarked item.


    For instance, this

    armylogovector_gold.gif

    is clearly a registered trademark, but that doesn't mean a person can't say US Army without worrying about being convicted of trademark infringement.

    this however

    moh.jpg

    doesn't appear to be registered

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In a house; two stories, suburban
    Posts
    7,471
    Thanks (Given)
    214
    Thanks (Received)
    264
    Likes (Given)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    7
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2395474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by logroller View Post
    Arent they impersonating Medal of honor recipients, as a class, who more often than not have perished in defense of the united states and it's citizens-- requiring the grantees of such an honor to uphold the integrity of the medal for those unable to defend the honors beatowed upon them. i would parallel this law with trademark protection; where a risk of dilution, whether realized or not, poses a significant likelihood of injury to warrant legal protection.
    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    Trademark might be an acceptable standard but there is no standard required for recipients to continue upholding that I'm aware of. If I claim to have won a Pulitzer do they have recourse against me?
    Oops, autocorrect fail--I'd meant to say grantor--Congress.

    Quote Originally Posted by fj1200 View Post
    You'll have to show the government is able to trademark and that the MoH qualifies.
    Latham Act-- 15 USC 22

    You don't need to register a trademark for it to be considered valid-- but I believe the Medal of Honor Society has done so.

    I gather this all hinges on the damages/defamation; as the Stolen Valor Act makes no distinction, it was ruled as too vague by the liberal activist 9th circuit court. Which I understand, and am compelled to agree with the court-- I thought it made the distinction of some damage caused or undeserved benefit received.
    Certainly where some commercial interest exists, say, selling a product which says made in the USA when its not, its easier to prove damages; but what is honor, and is it a tangible interests that is subject to dilution. Tough ? to answer with any certainty.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by logroller View Post
    Oops, autocorrect fail--I'd meant to say grantor--Congress.


    Latham Act-- 15 USC 22

    You don't need to register a trademark for it to be considered valid-- but I believe the Medal of Honor Society has done so.

    I gather this all hinges on the damages/defamation; as the Stolen Valor Act makes no distinction, it was ruled as too vague by the liberal activist 9th circuit court. Which I understand, and am compelled to agree with the court-- I thought it made the distinction of some damage caused or undeserved benefit received.
    Certainly where some commercial interest exists, say, selling a product which says made in the USA when its not, its easier to prove damages; but what is honor, and is it a tangible interests that is subject to dilution. Tough ? to answer with any certainty.
    I'm not sure a trademark infringement case could be made against someone for merely claiming they have been awarded a MoH.

    Could Coca Cola win a case against someone who says they drank a Coke? I doubt it.

    Seems to me, that the trademark infringement case would be against anyone who is making fake medals.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    16,760
    Thanks (Given)
    94
    Thanks (Received)
    1751
    Likes (Given)
    7
    Likes (Received)
    165
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    13
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9306079

    Default

    Since when is lying a crime? Not only do people lie on a daily basis, but they hire lawyers to defend their lies. And if they are wealthy enough, they get away with lying.

    Like ConHog said, if I show you a fake medal of honor, and use it as a ruse to borrow $5,000 from someone, I am not guilty of a crime. I am guilty of being a lying sack of shit. But we have elected lying sacks of shit as president.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11,865
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gabosaurus View Post
    Since when is lying a crime? Not only do people lie on a daily basis, but they hire lawyers to defend their lies. And if they are wealthy enough, they get away with lying.

    Like ConHog said, if I show you a fake medal of honor, and use it as a ruse to borrow $5,000 from someone, I am not guilty of a crime. I am guilty of being a lying sack of shit. But we have elected lying sacks of shit as president.
    In fact I'm pretty sure it has became a requirement.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    23,893
    Thanks (Given)
    4180
    Thanks (Received)
    4524
    Likes (Given)
    1412
    Likes (Received)
    1065
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    39
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9173677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gabosaurus View Post
    Since when is lying a crime? Not only do people lie on a daily basis, but they hire lawyers to defend their lies. And if they are wealthy enough, they get away with lying.

    Like ConHog said, if I show you a fake medal of honor, and use it as a ruse to borrow $5,000 from someone, I am not guilty of a crime. I am guilty of being a lying sack of shit. But we have elected lying sacks of shit as president.
    That's kind of like fraud and stuff, it's kinda like a, you know, like a crime.
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums