Harvey Milk's nephew files trademarks for famous relative's name

The fracas over the Human Rights Campaign's plan to move into the late Supervisor Harvey Milk's old camera shop in the Castro has raised questions about who owns the gay rights leader's legacy three decades after his rise to power in San Francisco.

It has also brought to the fore who holds the copyright to Milk's name and image, for HRC plans to sell Milk branded merchandise and donate portions of the proceeds to several local groups.

Who can claim they are carrying on the work started by Milk, the first openly gay person elected to public office in a major U.S. city, in the mid-1970s will likely be an ongoing argument for as long as there is an LGBT movement.

As for who can legally profit off of his memory, that question has a more finite answer.

http://www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=5337

Wonder if it would affect them in any way.

Leave it to me to worry about the musical ramifications. :freak:

Just because Priscilla Presley was able to trademark her ex-husband's name and image - requiring ever Elvis impersonator to get permission to continue their trade, IIRC - doesn't mean that everyone else has to get into the act. For that matter, I don't agree with trademarking Elvis, either, or at least not to the extent that he has been.

though anybody can claim the mantle, the specifics such as the name and likeness can be protected to some extent

Or has something changed since my last trip to San Francisco for Pride '09?