Steve B,
To answer your speculation about the cards you mentioned, it'd have to be a case by case basis, and one I'm sure Topps investigated in their legal department, but given the time frame, I'd say the odds are good those cards are public domain as well, for several reasons.
As I said, anything before 1923 is public domain. However, anything copyrighted prior to revised legislation being passed in 1978 granted the rights holders a 28 year term, which could be extended to 56 if the owner applied for an extension. After 1978, when the period of ownership was modified to the current life-of-the-author-plus-70-years (or 120 years from creation if it was a work for hire, like a baseball card), copyright holders prior to 1978 STILL had to apply for the new extension, or their works would go public domain on schedule.
This means that unless someone thought to file the paperwork, many of the cards of the 1930s and 1940s went public domain by the 1960s-1980s. And I'd bet most if not all DID go public domain because there was no individual to apply for an extension, since they were works for hire, and the companies that created the works either didn't exist, or did not regard the cards to be of any further value to warrant the hassle and legal fees of filing for a copyright extension (recall this was the time when 52 Topps, indeed nearly all baseballs cards were being sold for a few dollars or in Christmas Rack packs...they were generally not held to be very valuable, to the great benefit of those of us who SAVED our cards).
This is why, in my field, I'm frequently able to use educational and industrial films free of charge without royalties, because their owners did not bother to apply for an extension of the copyright, and they lapsed into public domain. As did the classic baseball cards of the 40s.
And as for the rights of the figures themselves...that gets a little murky. On the one hand there is the issue of privacy and control over one's image, but there is also a principle in privacy relating to famous people, namely, "How did you obtain your fame?" And in cases where people thrust themselves into the spotlight by actively pursuing public roles (politicians, actors, sports figures), they have less claim to rights over the use of their image because they are public figures. It's why the tabloid rags are able to run paparazzi photos of unknowing celebs, because since they actively sought the public sphere, they have less entitlement to a private one.
|