I have some photos of athletes that I’m interested in trying to sell as posters. Check that … some are mine, some I’m in discussion with AP on purchasing the rights to their photos.
Do I need the public figure’s permission to sell posters bearing their likeness? They’re mostly game-action photos, and I see the posters as being like you see in KMart or WalMart with the racks of 40-plus posters: First name up top, last name down below, block letters, the action shot framed in between.
Can I, or I must I get their permission as well as have the rights to the photo?
I believe that whoever takes the photograph has exclusive rights to the picture. The AP doesn’t need permission from every single person that it publishes in a picture. That would be a logistical nightmare. However, they do need the permission of the person who took the photograph as that’s who’s property it is. If it were true that you needed the person’s persmission for using their image, the paparazzi wouldn’t exist.
I see where you’re coming from, MacGyver, but I’m not sure if there’s a difference between publication and sale. AP can publish the photo, and resell for publishing because it’s ostensibly “news” … but I’m not doing it for any news reason – it’s purely to make money. I guess my question lies in if that makes a difference. Are news organizations given more leeway what with freedom of the press? Or is it simply “if you take a picture, you can do what you want with it?” Thanks for the reply, though … I think you very well may be right, which would be good for me.
Hokienautic, the advice you get here costs nothing and that’s about what it’s worth. If I were you I’d consult a lawyer. For general information you can also visit sites which specialise in legal stuff. Have you searched the Net?
Hokienautic, You must obtain permission from ANY person who appears (and is reasonably recognizeable) in any photo you wish to sell for non-editorial purposes. Given that the people you are referring to are sports figures, you can also expect that they will demand royalties before said permission is granted. I agree that consulting a lawyer is a wise first step. You may also wish to contact the American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP) for further info and assistance.
Thanks for the info and advice, photog; I’ll do just that. I think I was hoping you didn’t have to get permission, but knew that more than likely I’d have to. The online store I’ll be selling them through is fairly small and low-key, so royalty payments, unless we can work it out on a per-sale basis, might nip this in the bud. Thanks.
There are a lot of variables. As a published photographer, I’d consult with an attorney about the specifics.
Public figures have what’s known as a “right of publicity,” but that lives only as long as they do. You wouldn’t need permission to sell pictures of Elvis or Marilyn Monroe.
The setting where the picture is taken matters. If you’ve taken shots of Michael Jordan in a public park then selling reproductions would probably be easier than if they were taken in an NBA arena.
The purpose of the sales may affect how easy it is to get any needed permissions. Charitable fundraisers often get a warm reception. If yours is a profit-making venture and you suspect the permissions might be hard to obtain, consider making formal arrangements to donate a portion of the profits to some worthy organization (children’s wing of a hospital, Big Brothers/Big Sisters).
To elaborate on what photog and others have said, there’s some situations where this might become a rather dicey and/or expensive situation for you to commercially sell posters of NBA game action.
These days, most professional (and some collegiate) sports teams insist on having news organizations sign a standard disclaimer before they’ll issue press credentials for them to cover games. Increasingly over the last few years, teams have been inserting a clause into these agreements stating that Organization X may only use the photographs and video they make at games in a news/editorial context. And specifically, they may not resell their images for profit or use them for commercial/advertising purposes.
Why? Because these teams want to control their image, but more specifically, because they want to keep anyone else from poaching at the merchandising piece of the pie (i.e. you :)). As you might imagine, the NBA would be rather disappointed if it credentialed half a dozen photographers to a game who then turned around and used their images on posters that were being sold in direct competition with the NBA.
The bottom line is this: you can probably still make and sell the posters you’re talking about, but you may well end up having to pay a chunk of money to both the AP and the NBA. I’d recommend getting a look at the exact agreement the AP’s got with the NBA, as well as probably a lawyer versed in media/copyright law.
Actually, it’s not the NBA but the NCAA/member school and possibly the NFL. I’m doing research for a Virginia Tech store, and we’re thinking of trying to get a line of VT-related posters out and sold, including Michael Vick, Bruce Smith, Corey Moore, etc. So it’d be partly photos in VT unis and partly in their NFL unis.
Sounds like this is getting more and more difficult … we might still try it, but we’re gonna have to look at it a LOT more closely now. The main hurdle to overcome is the fact that we’re a new and fairly small store, and any one-time fee (esp. with the NFL) is likely to be out of our price range. A per-sale agreement on royalties, perhaps, we can do. We shall see. Thanks for all the comments everyone.
Actually **scampering gremlin[\b] you would probably get a cease and desist order from the Presley Estate if you tried to sell a non-authorized Elvis photo. You’ll notice there are no “fat Elvis” photos around for sale, not even for camp value. This is because about 10 years after his death the laws were changed to allow estates to control the image of a dead star. I have the details in a book at home.
The heirs of Bela Lugousi (sp?) tried to sue but lost in court. Pricilla Presley tried a different tack, getting the laws changed in Tennessee which were then recognized federally. It depends on the state in which the person lived (or died, I forget). When California passed a similar law it applied to many/most movie stars.
That’s why camera stores have Model Release forms. I don’t know the specifics for where you are but if you search the net for ‘model release forms’ they probably give you the legal info around the forms.
On this issue, the legal variables are so wide open you definitely need to consult a lawyer. The issues involved are whether your photos are being used in a newsworthy fashion, whether the subjects had a reasonable expectation of privacy when the photo was taken, whether the subjects have the rights to their own image, whether the selling of the photos is an unauthorized use of the trademarks which appear in them, and (maybe most important of all) where you took the photos. As Telemark wrote, some states like California and Tennessee have very restrictive “right to image” laws.
