head scratcher

cdonovan

Rewind about 40 years.....maybe closer to 45 years....my dad was working and racing at a drag strip out of the city....it was a cool thing to do they all had lots of fun, hosted a lot of different events, had a legit car club and one of the participants came was also a photographer.

They allowed him to race for the use of the photos, he set up group shots and there is one photo that each member purchased their own personal copy and that was at the time used in the newspaper to advertise the club and solicit membership. The club has since disolved, but hasn't been forgotten, just a few weeks ago they were inducted into the Motorsport hall of fame my dad is a member of now both of those boards and becuase the club is now inducted they will have a display at the hall of fame with memrobelia. At one of the meetings previous to the induction it was decided that they would re start the club, they had an idea to use the old photo for tshirts, to again use in the paper to advertise, but they had a meeting crasher. The son of the photographer(who's business has since disolved) showed up and warned them that any usage of those images was not going to be allowed.

They aren't sure how to proceed, it was understood back in the day that they were allowed to use the image for advertising but now, this many years later they don't have those rights. There was never a written agreement...it was all done the way most business was...when you could trust someones word.

What rights do they the club members have and what rights does the photographer/photographers son have??? No one is even sure if the photographer is still alive.:scratch

Sam

I think the club is in a good position here. First, who has the negitives? Second does the son want money? If so, is it reasonable? Has anyone asked son, what would your dad want?

It looks like the original agreement was the photographer traded the use of his photos for race fees.

That sounds like a contract. He raced. The club gets to use the photos. Without additional specifics I think the club has the right to continue to use the photos.

Sam

Sam

ArchiTexas

Isn't this a copyright issue? As I understand it, the original agreement was to trade use of the photo's for the privilege to race. One question that arises is: was the use of the photos granted in perpetuity or not? If not, it may seem reasonable to argue that the use of the photos was understood to be at about the same time the racing was being done, not decades later. Another, related, issue is who owns the copyright? Unless it was conveyed to the club then the photographer owns it. If he is deceased then it would fall to his estate (which may or not be his son.) I agree with Sam, talk to the son and listen to his concerns - they may be legitimate. Also, if using these images is really, really, important to you - talk to a lawyer with expertise in intellectual property/visual arts. You may be ok exhibiting the photo in a not for profit setting but not in using it in a for-profit T-shirt.

Angelo

If there is no written proof of the original agreement I fear the son wins out in this matter.

This question may arise relative to the photogrpaher's estate. Since copyright extends 70 years past the author's death if there is an executor of the estate and there are other heirs involved, the executor (maybe the son) has a fiduciary responsibility to protect all rights and assets of the estate.

Failure to do so could result in negative legal ramifications for the executor.

At the moment it appears he has only put the club on notice. That doesn't mean a new agreement couldn't be reached, with the original terms as long as proper steps are taken to garner the approval of all parties to the estate.

zacker

does the son Race?

cdonovan

Not sure, but I don't believe the son races.

I guess what the club had understood was that they were allowed to use the photos (copies of, they do not have the negatives) for advertisment, there was no statement of limitations in time or usage at that point in time.

Becuase the company has disolved, they didn't expect that negatives would still be surviving.

They do plan to speak to the son but aren't expecting a good reception as thei fellow showed up out of the blue to put them on notice about usage of the image.

I completely understand that the copyright does certainly protect the photographer, but I had no idea that a contract, verbal, as in this case or written would expire or change over time. What right does the son have to change the agreement that happened all that time ago, which as my dad said, he was probably nothing more than a gleam in his fathers eye at the time

Angelo

cdonovan wrote:

Not sure, but I don't believe the son races.

I guess what the club had understood was that they were allowed to use the photos (copies of, they do not have the negatives) for advertisment, there was no statement of limitations in time or usage at that point in time.

Becuase the company has disolved, they didn't expect that negatives would still be surviving.

They do plan to speak to the son but aren't expecting a good reception as thei fellow showed up out of the blue to put them on notice about usage of the image.

I completely understand that the copyright does certainly protect the photographer, but I had no idea that a contract, verbal, as in this case or written would expire or change over time. What right does the son have to change the agreement that happened all that time ago, which as my dad said, he was probably nothing more than a gleam in his fathers eye at the time

I refer you back up to post #4...



.