Get advice to help you create your t-shirt graphics. Discuss t-shirt design software, special effect techniques, or other topics related to creating a t-shirt design on your computer. If you'd rather hire a graphic designer to do the work for you, please post in our Referrals and Recommendations section here.
What are the legal issues of using famous deceased people. I have seen like a billion Jimmy Hendrix shirts and Che Guevara shirts, but these are illustrations. I have never seen photographs of these people on t-shirts.
Is there a methond of gettin permission to ose these preexisting photos?
You can try and find the copyright holder of the photo. A lot of famous people still have trusts operating to collect residuals and licensing their image, likeness or name if you are going to be profiting. You need their permission also. For the "I'm Rick James. *****" shirt we started we eventully received a C&D from his trust and later an attempted suit. Some pursue this very actively while others don't.
What if the owner of the photo is different from the person's estate?
There is a right of publicity. How I basically understand the right to publicity from talking with my lawyer is that a person has the right to control the commercial use of their name or likeness. I would think that if you are going to mass produce content of a photo for commercial use you would want to obtain permission from the estate/person and also the actual photographer. Laws are very complicated and dependent on court findings that can change their interpretations over time. You should talk with a lawyer about each specific situation so you know where you stand and how to defend yourself in the future if needed.
On a side note: regarding that famous image of Che Guevara that you see on so many t-shirts. If the product gets enough attention the C&D you receive contains the following excerpt.
"Your Che Guevara t-shirt infringes on the exclusive North American and worldwide copyright that my company, Fashion Victim, owns for this image, taken by Cuban photographer, Alberto Korda. "
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam
Why was it an ttempted suit?
Refused a settlement agreement because of certain demands. Stood firm about it and later received a rivised offer after the filing which was later dropped
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam
Do you owe Dave Chappelle any money for bringing the term into popular use?
Why? He didn't coin the phrase or trademark it for use on products nor did Rick James' estate until after the fact of it's popularity. it was from an arrest transcript years earlier and had been thrown about in popular culture for some time. He just played up the comedy/parody angle of it in later years.
There isn't really a difference between a deceased and a living celebrity as far as I know; the estate protects their rights in death. The best way to get the appropriate permission would probably be to contact the agent of the estate; if they don't control the relevant copyrights etc. they should be able to put you in contact with whoever does.
I've been thinking about pursuing some of these companies for use of their trademark/copyrights. Do you pay per sell, or per image used. Anyone have an idea how much the cost generally (in a broad, approximate sense) run? I did read somewhere that you need to actually call the company, not email.
There is some provision for using "famous" people's likeness. Tiger woods sued an artist for his likeness being in a painting (I think at Augusta Nat'l) that the artist was selling prints of. The courts rules that people in the public eye should expect their likeness to be used (paraphrasing) and of course this was a painting and limitied reproduction, not a mass produced T-shirt.
As mentioned - the mark holder (or person/estate in question) can and often will pursue you - once it's in the courts at best you have a 50/50 chance of "winning".
I've never heard of a court telling someone famous that they shoule "expect" people to use their likeness. Even if they did "expect" it, it doesn't make it legal!
Everything I've ever seen gives a person a right to their own likeness, especially for commercial use use. Unless they sign off on it, of course.
I know O.J. Simpson lost the rights to his likeness to the Goldman and Brown families so that they could collect the money from the civil suit that they won.
But, there had to be a court case in order for O.J. to lose his likeness.
I think it's very interesting. I don't see how this guy painting Tiger Woods, selling the painting, and Tiger gets nothing, is any different than taking a picture of a famous person, making it look artistic on a t-shirt and selling that.
Basically the court said that a person's right to their image is not absolute, and someone can make money from a person's likeness without the person getting a dime.
I find something very wrong with this case. The painter wasn't reporting news, or getting pictures pertaining to a news story. He painted a famous person at an event with the express purpose of profitting from it.
That just doesn't sit too well with me...
__________________
Last edited by Comin'OutSwingin; November 11th, 2006 at 06:39 AM.
I think it's very interesting. I don't see how this guy painting Tiger Woods, selling the painting, and Tiger gets nothing, is any different than taking a picture of a famous person, making it look artistic on a t-shirt and selling that.
Solmu's Guide to Intellectual Property
Step 1. Convince the court it's Art.
Step 3. Profit.
Not to side with either - like I have said it's up to the courts and often he who has the best lawyers win regardless of the facts/truth - I had the case at one time but can't seem to find it, I do know it's true and may be an isolated decision, but once it's ruled that way it makes it easier to rule that way again
famous people 
