HomeGrownVintage "borrowing" images

[darkhorse9]

This is an interesting issue. Technically Daryl doesn't own the copyright on the image, but he does own the copyright on the photograph of the image. Any photo rights are granted to the person who takes the picture. If he can prove that they used his actual photograph (scan/picture/whatever) he might be able to get some ground with it.

Think of it this way. If I go to a concert and took a video of the Eagles singing Hotel California, I am free to do whatever I want with that video. Sell it, trade it etc. I own the video, even though I don't own the rights to the song. The caveat would be if the venue/artist makes a condition of contract (ticket purchase) that there be no video or photos taken during the show. They can sue you for violating that agreement and confiscate the material, but only for violating the agreement not the songwriting copyright.

That being said, whomever is the owner of the Mello Mint estate/trademark has more of a claim. My guess is that has expired into public domain, therefore it comes under fair use domain.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by darkhorse9

That being said, whomever is the owner of the Mello Mint estate/trademark has more of a claim. My guess is that has expired into public domain, therefore it comes under fair use domain.

This was my thought as well. If the picture took artistic license, then I believe it may be covered. But then you'd have to also establish that you wanted to provide some protection to the item, by listing it with (R) or (C). If not, I would think that since the wrapper is older than Mickey Mouse, it would be in the public domain.