High court dilemma: Can lie about medal be crime?

[ConHog]

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.

[logroller]

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.

[fj1200]

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.

[ConHog]

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

[logroller]

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?

Oops, autocorrect fail--I'd meant to say grantor--Congress.

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.

[ConHog]

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.

[gabosaurus]

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.

[ConHog]

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.

[fj1200]

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.

[trobinett]

Stolen Valor is an unconstitutional law, no matter how much I agree with it.

First of all, the 1st amendment doesn't protect someone lying. 2nd, if the writers of that amendment could of had a poster boy for WHY they wrote the law, it would be this case. What a slime ball. They should take a 100 points off of his credit report.

[ConHog]

First of all, the 1st amendment doesn't protect someone lying. 2nd, if the writers of that amendment could of had a poster boy for WHY they wrote the law, it would be this case. What a slime ball. They should take a 100 points off of his credit report.

Neither does the first amendment protect the truth.. It protects FREE SPEECH. Which is defined as neither truth nor lies.

I'll tell you who MIGHT have a civil case here. Actual MoH winners might could sue this douche bag for slandering their noble service. I'd find in favor of them in a heart beat.