I can’t tell if this is supposed to be a defense of UHC or not?
Because what you’re saying is spectacularly missing the point.
They aren’t going to come out and say “we own the likeness of Luigi Mangione” any more than they will say “Our business model collect premiums that deny coverage and hope you die before you can fight us”
Do you see any colorable claim here regarding this design?
My statement was in response to
And my point was- just one drawing, not all likenesses.
I am not defending them, just clarifying what is actually going on. I have no idea if they have a valid claim to that or not. IANAL.
You also have no idea if Luigi is the killer. You are not a juror in the case, right.
Look at the image on the t-shirt. No one with any discernment would conclude that it infringed on any intellectual property of UHC.
“I’m not defending my client. I’m just clarifying he’s not guilty” wouldn’t fool anyone except the most credulous of fools.
Of course they don’t. How could they possibly?
They bought the rights to the reference material?
I never said it was. Look, the issue isnt that UHC claimed one image was copyrighted- and i dont give a rats ass if it is or isnt.
My point was that that it was ONLY ONE IMAGE- not all of them. Got it? ONE IMAGE. Not all.
Here is another thing-Mangione is not a hero. He (allegedly) killed someone in cold blood. There is no justification for that act.
Sure UHC does decline more than its share of claims- but that has nothing to do with it. I dont care how much you have UHC or the insurance business. Cold blooded premeditated murder is wrong.
I dont know- what not ask the courts? IANAL, nor do I play one on TV. The media seems to think they have no valid claim. Somehow, that is not the deciding decision in the USA. The courts decide, not the media, not the SDMB. The courts.
Suppose I decided to sell a t-shirt with your face on it. Would United Healthcare have a valid copyright claim against it?
If you went into a store and bought a bottle of Merlot and found it contained sewage, would you have a claim for fraud?
You can’t know unless you’re a lawyer, a viticulturist and a civil engineer.
Shades of “we can’t say which eye Moshe Dayan’s eyepatch is over unless we know which way he’s facing right now”. 
I’m sorry, I thought you weren’t a lawyer. Let’s leave these legal decisions to the courts.
What if the target was Hitler?
Most people would say “well, OK, Hitler is an exception.” But that position invalidates the absolutist argument that “cold blooded premeditated murder is wrong”, and turns it into "some cold blooded premeditated murder is wrong". Which means the question is where the target lies on the innocent-victim-to-Hitler spectrum.
And I don’t think it looks good for this CEO. Especially since in many ways his job was to commit mass premeditated murder for profit; we just don’t call it that because we treat murder as justified when done for the profit of a corporation or rich man.
Clearly many people disagree with that, and I don’t believe you get to tell them who their heroes are. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not one of them. But I am very surprised at the surprise.
Re: Hitler—I remember the assassination of Osama bin Laden, who only facilitated the death of a few thousand Americans. Nobody decried his murder, either.
I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but I strongly get the impression this is an argument of “Killing someone is OK as long as it’s done non-violently.” The only difference between Mangione and Thompson is that one killed with a gun while the other killed with a pen.
There’s also the scale. Mangione (if guilty) killed one person, once. Thompson’s leadership of his company killed thousands, year after year. “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” ― Anatole France
To be clear, nonviolent action to fix the cluster mess that is US health insurance is better, more ethical, more effective, and longer lasting than violence. We have reached a point where it took a public murder to get attention on the issue. That’s awful. Also awful is that Thompson’s death will probably not accomplish improvements or even change. Society’s attention will move on to the next shiny object.
BCBS has been hit and miss for Mrs G and I over the years. They seem to cover the big things pretty well, but nickle-and-dime frequently on denials and challenges to little things like generic meds, small supplies (sutures, slings, etc), and therapies.
In my case, I had to go to the ER for a dislocated ankle. They covered the visit but would not cover being able to get a simple air-cast for my ankle to allow me to leave the ER on my own. I was offered the numbers of medical supply warehouses that I could Uber/taxi myself to to pick up their particular “pre-approved” device, but the ER’s version was deemed not covered.
The nurse at the ER then “gave me a test fitting” of their own air cast, then with an exaggerated wink said “Oh Mr. G, there appears to be a scratch on this one and we’ll have to note it as being thrown away as damaged, we’re terribly sorry”, and then slipped my pantleg down over it and wheeled me out to my car, tossing the box in their waste container.
I again note that I have searched for any actual evidence of these sorts of claims made with enough absolute confidence that his death sentence is considered by many a justified execution, and my inability to find such and the lack of anyone offering up more than an internet anecdote or so.
Again what I do find is horrible enough. Stupid denials that often occurred after service was provided, threatening financial ruin, reversed on appeals 90% of the time but huge stress in the process. Procedures rescheduled and delayed. These are bad things. Even Bad Things. I suspect my failure to keep track of our bills and claims and appeal and contest during family illness (psychologically I could only do so much) while we were covered under United cost us multiples of thousands that we paid out of pocket. I hate UHC. They suck. No question.
AND these claims that the murder victim was a guilty guilty guilty mass murderer by way of corporate action and inaction? It’s a big claim that deserves some actual evidence.
If you, any of you that keep claiming it, have some to share, something more than someone saying something you heard on social media or the internet, please do.
I remembered a claims denial rebuttal letter written by a pediatric oncologist, and couldn’t find it online. Sure enough, it was done by UHC, and this YouTuber reads it, with identifying information redacted, at about the 11 minute mark.
Then might Mangiones’ lawyer create a ‘Nuremberg’ defense? A one man ad hoc tribunal.
The one with the alleged oncologist ranting that Zofran was being not being covered?
I say alleged because I suspect that letter is complete bullshit. For many reasons beyond the fact that no pediatric oncologist would write an appeal so unprofessionally. Nor is scopolamine, also mentioned, used by pediatric oncologists, pretty much ever since Zofran became widely available years back. And Zofran is so usual and customary and not expensive. And many other reasons to call bullshit.
But in any case, that was an alleged denial of a medicine to control nausea and vomiting. Not the cancer protocol.
If it was real, and I can tell real stories of medication denials from even this last that are as stupid as that, worse, not just by UHC, that cause stress and wasted time for patient families and providers alike, that risk interruption of effective care, it isn’t murdering people.
It is aggravating, frustrating, and exasperating. It makes me angry when it happens. And people just repeating as fact that the victim perhaps was guilty of crimes worse than a murder, was guilty of murder on larger scale, without demonstrating any basis for that statement, also frustrates.