Quote:
Originally Posted by homerunhitter
Got it! My head was spinning with all those big words! To put it in lamens terms, your saying that in your opinion you think it soul be ok to still collect and sell signed photos that happen to be unlicensed? Thanks
|
Yes, I would not get let it keep you up at night. The entities that own the rights are not going to go after someone who has bunch of single signed photos of different people. Sean is also right in that photographers can license their photos to someone like Photofile or Fanatics. It is usually the photographers themselves who get very aggressive with enforcing their rights on images.
I am an advanced photographer who protects the rights on my photography, mostly my concert shots (40 years worth). I also collect photographs of American Olympians. Many of my photos are rights free, meaning they are in the public domain. As a rule copyrights on photos last for 85 years after the photo could have first appeared in a publication. This is a general rule with exceptions. I also own a lot of what are called 'orphan' negatives and slides. You can never prove who may have taken them so rights are debateable. All of that along with doing legal research for 35 years and being married to lawyers twice, including my current wife, I view it a bit differently than most.