Legal issue? Copywrite on historical photo

8string

8string

Well-known member
I have purchased a historical photo (cheaply) through auction for a documentary and it has the name of the photographer on it. I have exhaustively searched for this photographer to see if someone owns the rights to this photo. It appears to be pre-1950s, done by a shop on Kodak postcard stock.

It does not appear that this photographer was 'known' since no one appears to have published any of his other work on the web. It could have been a studio that long since has gone out of business and the photographer is dead. However, other options certainly are possible.

How would you suggest I proceed? If there is no way to reach the photographer, and through time he/she is dead and gone, is there some way to establish who 'owns' the copywrite and how to use it? Is it better to just not use it? I understand that there is a 50 to 100 year copywrite law, but the photo is not dated.
 
First off, it's copyright. Normally I don't care about spelling, but it drastically changes the meaning. Most likely its copyright extends 28 years after publication, which should have passed even without a specific date. I'd just use it, personally. It sounds like you've done your diligence to research it, and the ability to use even actively copyrighted photos has been established before. There's not a whole lot off fallout you could get for that, and even that is really unlikely.

With an exception, since there's always one. The estate may own the photo and, depending on what it is, consider it extremely valuable. I know we have some old ship photos at the local library that require a lot of letter writing before you can do anything, even down to altering the description for accuracy. But even those people would probably be understanding if it came to that.
 
Thanks to both of you. Yes, it was late and my spelling was sloppy. (G). I guess that I while I understand that the photo *may be* copywritten, I have no way of finding out if it is...There is no record I can find of this photographer, and only a couple of old photos listed on various sales outlets testify that his stuff is out there, but not actively being managed. his name is on the shot, as many old photographers did, but this is not Edward Curtis we're talking about. If I use it, and someone does see it who is in his estate, what is the liability like, since we are talking about a not for profit educational video. Is it just not worth it to use an old photographed, that you haven't obtained rights to, even if you give attribution?

It seems to me that there is this gray area, where a photographer could be dead and gone 75 years, I could have the only existing photograph of this image, due to negatives being destroyed and his estate scattered to the wind, do an extensive search on the internet for the ownership, not find it, but not be able to use the image for fear of lawsuit. Correct? The document that Andrew sent me seems to be saying that.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top