Is using an image of a public figure incorporated with your own design copyright infringement? I ran across a design contest for a MMA fighter that wants a new tshirt design to sell on his website. There are alot of good designs that won't be chosen that people want made into shirts. I know that using logos on the shirt without permission is a no-no, but is creating an original design and putting the persons name in the design infringement? There are shirts everywhere that do this, but I wanted to know if someone has done legal research on this matter. http://blog.jameshom.com/images/chuck_preview.gif
__________________ Unik Ink Specialty Printing-oversize & all over printing
Impressions 2008 Awards winner- Manual Textile Screen Printing
Last edited by Rodney; February 12th, 2007 at 01:37 PM.
Reason: linked to images instead of loading them inline to help dialup users and to prevent side scrolling
I would think it would be the same as a copyright logo, for instance, there are 'estates' that own the name and image rights of dead stars (like Elivis, M. Monroe and James Dean). Even Bela Lugosi Jr. (a lawyer) has the rights to his fathers image and name usage. I'd drop the person a line first (through their agent) and get written permission. I'm told Chuck Norris has signed off on small runs of t-shirts with his image, but I haven't seen it in writting so I'd be careful. Yea, I'd say contact the person/estate first. Better to be safe than sorry.....
Using a person's likeness on a product for sale is a violation of their "right of publicity". So, no, you can't do it without permission from either them or their estate (if they're dead).
On top of right to publicity, some people will have trademarked their image. On top of both of those, a lot of the images you would want to use would be copyrighted to the photographer who took them.
You should not do it, specially if the person is well known, and if he or her gets money with his/her image. I have a t-shirt in my site with the face of a Chef that was famous when I was a kid. He is not active right now but stil, I could get in truoble. I took the chance as he doesnt get money out of his image. Sometimes it could work as promotion for that person. I would say dont do it, but there are risk you can take, just wish you dont get caught
However, I think if a person is a political figure there are some laws that allow to use their image under the freedom of speech laws. Not sure Wikpedia is the end all be all of this answer.
I'm not sure though..
I would stay away from any photos without a release. The few dollars you make would not be worth the time andmoney spent defending yourself in legal proceedings.
Our legal has advised that we can use public figures in the political arena. Upon occasion there are others you can use such as Mona Lisa, Einstein, etc (folks that have been dead forever and no one has the exclusive rights to marketing for them). Actors would not fall into that category as they either market their images or employ people to market their protected images. Heck, even cartoons have marketing protection (such as Donald Duck, Minnie Mouse, etc).......I wouldn't use the Chuck Norris thing. An interesting one is the use of Arnold S (the terminator)....when he became a governor, a zillion people are using his image because of his cross-over. There's nothing he can do about it as he is no longer just an "actor". We came up with a great one (it is protected now by us).....it had an outline of Arnold with the words "EX-Terminator" that will be used when he's sent out of office.
Upon occasion there are others you can use such as Mona Lisa, Einstein, etc (folks that have been dead forever and no one has the exclusive rights to marketing for them).
Einstein hasn't been dead forever, not even colloquially speaking.
Old artworks in general are an interesting separate case, thanks to Bridgeman vs. Corel (while kind of different to what's being discussed here, it's useful to know).
While not the same I am curious as to how do the tabloids get away from selling mags with the pics of brad and angelina out walking . Do they have to get permission to use those pics ? If not why is a tshirt different ? Both are for money. Both w/o permission. Hell the tabloids even add their own made up gossip to enitce you to buy the mag while standing in line.
It's published under the guise of news reporting, which is enough to make most of the difference (the rest is not worth the effort of getting into). Sometimes the use of images by tabloids is illegal. When that happens, sometimes the celebrities sue. Sometimes they don't, because sueing a tabloid could be hazardous to their career. Most importantly... what tabloids do has absolutely no bearing on anything we do.
Our legal has advised that we can use public figures in the political arena. Upon occasion there are others you can use such as Mona Lisa, Einstein, etc (folks that have been dead forever and no one has the exclusive rights to marketing for them). Actors would not fall into that category as they either market their images or employ people to market their protected images. Heck, even cartoons have marketing protection (such as Donald Duck, Minnie Mouse, etc).......I wouldn't use the Chuck Norris thing. An interesting one is the use of Arnold S (the terminator)....when he became a governor, a zillion people are using his image because of his cross-over. There's nothing he can do about it as he is no longer just an "actor". We came up with a great one (it is protected now by us).....it had an outline of Arnold with the words "EX-Terminator" that will be used when he's sent out of office.
Copyright infringement question? 
Re: Copyright infringement question? 
