• Facets (new session)
• Description
• Metadata
• Settings
  • Rule: ActivityStreamsMapasEquivalentb3sb3sifpdbprdf-labelfacetshttp://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/dbpedia#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/opencyc#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/umbel#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/yago#http://dbpedia.org/schema/property_rules#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/SUMO#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/WordNet#http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ldpoplwebskos-transurn:det:rdf:labelvirtrdf-labelvirtrdf-urlNone
    
  • Inverse Functional Properties: Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects
  • "Same As": Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects (recommended) Apply to subjects, objects and predicates (not recommended on big datasets) Apply to predicates only (special use cases only)

About: Wandt v. Hearst's Chicago American     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)

Wandt v. Hearst's Chicago American,129 Wis. 419, 109 NW 70 (1906), was a Wisconsin Supreme Court case wherein the court ruled that a photographic association could be construed as defamation or libel. The Chicago American ran a picture next to an article about a person who repeatedly attempted suicide. Although it wasn't explicit that the picture was of that person, the location of the picture next to that article created a false association that constituted libel. This case is authority that: where a person's picture is taken by a photographer, there is a breach of an implied contract or relationship of trust when the photographer makes additional pictures and uses them for commercial purposes.