RE: copyright question

[mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

James you are exactly right about the persons image, but he does have one surviving heir.  His daughter can ok that and will I feel sure.  She gets the first copy of the book.

Even that though is not necessarily cut and dried.  Some public figures it would be just fine.  Put a picture of the president on a book that was political opinion and in the US you would likely be home free.  Use it to endorse a product, and to quote Jim Lovell, "Houston we have a problem".

There are so many things to consider.  Thanks for the help everyone.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: copyright question
From: James Schenken <jds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, August 27, 2010 5:10 pm
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Chris:

 

What you seem to be referring to is a “work for hire”.  It is very unlikely that the photographer provided service in this context. 

A clue would be that ‘works for hire’ activities results in the subject receiving both prints as well as all of the negatives.  That is extremely uncommon in the portrait business.

 

Another issue that might apply here is the concept that the image of the person is something that they can control.  You see this typically in the arena of celebrities and movie stars.  Their images have commercial value and they can control the use of it.  I suspect that unless special legal arrangements were made prior to the time these folks died, then all such rights expired with them. 

 

For example, even though John Wayne is long dead, the commercial rights to his image are still restricted.  You couldn’t just past his image on the cover of a book and not expect there to be repercussions.

 

Cheers,

James

 

---

From: owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 5:53 PM
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: RE: copyright question

 

I think that in this case the copy right belongs to the subject not the photographer as it is a photograph of the subject and the subject paid to have the photograph taken. It will depend on the agreement the subject signed at the time.

 

Chris