After reading this article, in which I learned of former US Air Force pilot Scott O’Grady’s plans to sue Fox and Discovery Channels over stories about him, I am left with a foul taste in my mouth.
It seems to me that Mr. O’Grady, who was, by all accounts on the clock when he had his ordeal, should be a little less litigous with this.
What do YOU think?
Obviously, I was cranked up enough to screw up my coding. Coodjapeese?
I fixed the coding for you.
IMHO, Mr. Grady has every right to sue if they used his story without his permission.
On the clock? He was working for the American government, therefore his story belongs to the American people, therefore Fox can do what it wants with it? I’m afraid you’ve lost me.
Should he stand by and let his story be distorted? If he feels it has, sueing would be the legal remedy available to him. What would you do?
Am I missing something here? We’re talking about real events, aren’t we? You can’t have intellectual property rights in real events! If O’Grady feels he’s been defamed or misrepresented, fair enough, there are remedies in law for this… but you can’t copyright something which actually happened, can you?
If you could… how would you report news? To take one example, the Enron scandal would never have come out if Kenneth Lay could have sat on the rights to the events! And why - although he’s “designated” as the “hero” by the news media - would O’Grady have any stronger claim to intellectual property rights than anyone else involved in the actual incident? What’s to stop, say, Radovan Karadjic saying “Hey! He was shot down during the Bosnian campaign - that reign of terror was my idea, I own the copyright on all the pain and suffering!”
Daft. Just plain daft.
I don’t think the film Behind Enemy Lines was based on O’Grady’s story. If there was a Discovery Channel tie-in that was and had the same name, chalk that up to the Discovery Channel ALWAYS trying to lure in viewers with subjects similar to current films. The title is totally generic anyway; the 2001 film is one of several.
PS: O’Grady wrote a CHILDREN’s book about his experience? What the hell? This is material for kids? Somehow I’m not surprised, though, he always seemed kind of dim and doofy.
If the hero used foul language, was a “hot dog” type pilot, and disobeyed orders - unlike O’Grady according to the lawsuit, maybe they didn’t base it on him after all.
Did Fox advertise the flick as “inspired by actual events”? I don’t think they did; but isn’t that phrase code for “we bought the rights to avoid being sued, then made whatever damn film we wanted.”
Even if he wins, good luck trying to get a cut of any profits from Hollywood.
I think he’s suing for something approximating libel. It’d be like me making a mocking caricature of George Bush showing the character “Borge Gush” doing unmentionable things to animals.
I cannot comment on whether or not the lawsuit has any merit. Would probably depend on the shows, which I have not seen.
War hero? He got shot down, survived, then got rescued? Is self-preservation heroic? I thought heroism is characterized by disregard for personal peril in order to help others.
He wasn’t a hero - he was a target. He should just be happy his butt was rescued and he needs to get on with life.
Well, it sounds to me like he just wants his cut. In my opinion, any reasonable person would conclude that the movie is based on his experiances. I mean, come on, US Pilot shot down over Bosnia, avoids capture and is rescued. Pretty clear-cut to me. He sees everyone else getting rich off his story and he wants a cut. The actual charges are crap, but the end result will be a fat check.
I guess my vote is for “Hero turned Pig” (but, hey, isn’t that the American Way?). They should have just paid him as a consultant from the start and stuck his name in the credits, and this story would have never happened.
Money isn’t everything. Oh, wait! This just in: Money IS everything!
Since his story was national and worldwide news, and he has since made his living as a motivational speaker and selling that book (lots of sales probably based on name recognition alone) would he qualify as a public figure? Thereby making it harder to win a libel suit.
He does make his living now based on his name recognition after all. Did he participate in that TNN show about people famous for “15 minutes”; or did that one just used old interview footage. alone?
an aside… it seems to me that was pretty much what he said at the time, claiming that his rescuers were the real heroes. If this is the guy I’m thinking of, at least.
One could envision a time when soldiers come off the front line, report to their superior officer, then call their agent.
Or maybe a “salary creep”, as in baseball - “That guy got $300,000 for his story and all he did was get shot down and beat up. And those are 1996 dollars. My client won the Silver Star in combat …”
This has zip to do with capitalism. This is a lawsuit, not a means of production.
I disagree, waloon, it’s a quick and easy way for him to produce a lot of green in his pocket 
matt, I agree with your post 100%. I was stationed at Aviano back when he was shot down (taking one of my targeting pods with him, thankyouverymuch!), and pretty much all of us rolled our eyes at the prospect of his “heroism”.
What really chapped my ass, though, was that there is a special medal that they give out to people who work in Egress. If a chute they pack is used in a combat situation, they get a freaking medal. v00t.
I’d just like to point out that in the military circles I’m in touch with, O’Grady is not seen as the sharpest tool in the shed (and that’s putting it nicely).
Seeing this story disappoints me, but doesn’t really surprise me.