Money-grubbing b*stards!

[topane]

:angry: I don't even know what to say...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,37227,00.html

[zenbooty]

"The memorial foundation overseeing the project was to use the civil rights leader's likeness and name for marketing purposes"

If someone will be profitting from this, then why shouldn't the family get a piece?

[Two Cents]

Originally posted by zenbooty
"The memorial foundation overseeing the project was to use the civil rights leader's likeness and name for marketing purposes"

If someone will be profitting from this, then why shouldn't the family get a piece?

It's a memorial foundation, they probably use the money for all costs associated with upkeep of the memorials, including the one for King.

I wonder, is it like this for every kind of memorial? Do they have to pay the families of the Presidents on Mount Rushmore, for example?

[welfareloser]

i'd say if someone's going to profit from the venture, the family should get a chunk. but if we're talking about something along the lines of a national park/ lincoln monument kind o thing, ... they oughtta just let schoolkids ahve a statue of their hero to visit on field trips without demanding money for the privelege.

[brainsmile]

I agree with you DF

[fakesurfers]

1. To receive donations, there is an overwhelming probability that the foundation is non-profit. Very few will donate to a for-profit 'foundation.'

2. Monuments are not exactly big money-makers. Why would they need donations?

3. The 'family' that would have the rights would have to only include very close kin. Coretta and his children, probably. These people are not poor.

4. Protecting the name? They've already sold it off to a couple of companies.

Upon analysis it is proven then:

the family=money-grubbing bastards

[oblongmelon]

*sigh*....thats just a damn shame. They named a friggin holiday after the guy-now his family wants money? How low class is that.

[mojo]

i would agree that they should get a chunk if that chunk were in turn to be donated in full to another charity of their choice. however, mlk belongs to the people. he spoke for all of us...not just his immediate family.

i'm not saying that they should be ripped off by any means. but if people knew that they were giving money to a cause only to find out that a portion was to go to someone's movie tickets, they may think twice at that rate.

[BrewMaster]

King's family is fiercely protective of his name but also has been criticized for commercializing it.

Emory University historian David Garrow, a King family critic, said he isn't surprised the family wants money for the memorial.

From what the article says, I guess we should expect this from the King famliy. Sucks.:(

The group putting up the foundation has to raise $100million for the memorial. Somone please tell me why the fuk it costs $100million??? I think Dr. King would agree, don't waste money on a statue and some bronze crap, feed some hungry people or do somethign useful with the cash. This 'memorial' I think dishonors Dr. King's legacy.

Side note, the group putting up the foundation is his fraternity Alpha Phi Alpha. They may technically be non-profit, but I'm sure they'd make a lot from it, even if it's just in prestige which earns them more in donations unrelated to the monument.

[BrewMaster]

On the prestige thing, you're right. That was an unfounded guess on my part.

But the $100 Million, that's a damn lotta money. I don't know what they're buildign or maintaining, but that's too much I think. There are starving homeless people in DC. Set up a homeless shelter in Dr. King's name and run it on the $100 Million. I thin that would be a lot better than some stone building with a statue in it.

[Y2J]

I saw the topic title and immediately thought of Ticketmaster