« B&W Over the Years | Main | New All-Time Record Set for a Photograph »

Thursday, 19 May 2022


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

It’s Trump, what do you expect? His whole life has been a series of cons and ripoffs. It’s appalling that anyone ever thought for a moment that he should be President, even if the alternative was Hillary Clinton.

In my opinion, this doesn't seem like something that a TRUE "man of the people" would even consider doing. Just sayin'.

Anyone who associated themselves with him deserves the screwing they get.

Is his book selling?

Well, there is no denying that the T administration refined kleptocracy to the heights of depravity. Did anyone have any doubt that this practice would carry over to reaming people, especially his supporters, after the presidency?

Why is it I'm not surprised?

"Stop the Steal!"
--His own words.

It's always been a man's world. This guy just flaunts it.

IIRC, this is a vanity press release. He (indirectly) is the publisher. So he's depriving the photographer of potential sales, while selling at an inflated price and retaining all profits, by selling to those that would purchase the book.


Trump with his bible-

The expressed viewpoint is as strange as thinking that a wedding is about the wedding photographer. Nope, its about the bride and groom.

Legalistically, these presidential photographs are probably a work for hire, and not the photographer's property. At least they should be, given their importance. Except when in public, it is also hard to imagine that presidential photographs could be obtained without presidential consent, or that consent would be given without thought to being able to use the images.

These are not artistic photographs by a creative photographer at their own initiative, and expense. They presumably are purchased, documenting an historic event, a presidency. A federal photographic record purchased at public expense, if I'm not mistaken, is immediately public domain, and may not be copyrighted. It's also odd to be attacking the former President apparently without any thought about such rights issues.

More importantly, presidential photographs are about the presidency much more than about the photographer.

Faulting the President for publishing about his presidency is just such weird thinking.

[We're faulting the former President for taking advantage of his photographer. We're on the side of photographers here, that's all. If you're on his side and not hers, that's up to you. --Mike]

'Don't want to upset anybody'? If that means people being told about things he actually does, I believe their phraseology would be 'suck it up, snowflake'. They just have to chew on it - if they don't like what they're hearing, then they shouldn't like him.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007