Re: photos of ancient artifacts

On 07/20/2000, Pat Sloane <patsloane[_at_]aol.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/20/2000, Edward Harvey <eharvey[_at_]sbceo.org> wrote:
> >
> > 2) If a collector has given me permission to photograph items in
> > his collection and even given me possession of the artifacts
> > temporarily, do I need a license agreement to use these images
> > in my project?
>
> If you're a professional photographer you ought to know that when you
> photograph people or their property, you need their permission to publish
> the images.

I disagree. It may be good etiquette, as well as good practical advice to ensure continued access; but if the photographer received permission to take the photograph, he or she is the owner of the copyright in the photograph. There is no legal barrier to publishing a photograph of a artifacts that are otherwise in the public domain. [An interesting question arises if the photographer did not receive permission; but that's beyond the scope of this question.]

As for photographs of people, the right of publicity would limit your ability to use the photograph for commercial purposes such as advertising. It should not limit your ability to use the photograph in a book; although the law in this area is much less clear. [This is the dispute in the Tiger Woods v. Rick Rush case that is currently on appeal before the 6th Circuit.]

> > 3) If the author of a book on these artifacts, who is also the
> > photographer of the images used in his book, gives me permission
> > to use these images in my project, do I have to have permission
> > from the individual collectors of the objects in the images?
>
> Yes.

Again, I disagree, for the reasons given above.

Tyler T. Ochoa
Associate Professor
Whittier Law School
<tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu> Received on Thu Jul 27 2000 - 18:51:08 GMT