Is JFK image copyrighted?

[question everything]

Just wondered whether Hillary could use his image - if she wanted - for, I don't know.. an example of taking a tough position in foreign policy and not ask murderers and dictators to please, please, play nice.

Would this piss off Caroline and Uncle Teddy?

[rucky]

1. You really do question everything, dontcha.

:evilgrin:

[question everything]

3. Better than pretending to have all the answers

:hi:

[MADem]

2. He is a public figure. Good luck "copyrighting" the image of a public figure.

Answer: NO.

[chascarrillo]

4. Photos are the copyright of the photographer. That said...

... there's a hell of a lot of photos of JFK that were taken by the government, which would be public documents and freely used by anyone.

[MADem]

5. All the "good" photos are WH photos. He never went anywhere without one. NT

[EffieBlack]

6. Pet peeve - "copyright" is a noun, not a verb

A copyright is the "right to copy." People can own a copyright, but they can't copyright anything.

I'm not targeting you - everybody does this, but it drives me crazy.

Now - a person is not subject to copyright. Someone can own the copyright of a particular photograph, painting, drawing or some other depiction. Hillary can use any photo or other likeness she wishes of JFK if she has the permission of the copyright holder or if the photo is in the public domain.

[question everything]

7. Thanks, you are correct, of course... but

my post does refer to the image of JFK, not the man himself.

Hey, at least I do not say "irregardless," which is my pet peeve.

:hi:

[EffieBlack]

8. Ha ha

It depends on whether someone owns the image and if they've given permission for its use. As some other posters have noted, many of JFK's photos are official White House photos and, thus, generally available for use by anyone (since they were paid for with taxpayer dollars, they are usually considered to be publicly owned).

[Dogmudgeon]

9. Actually, it's a little different

People do, in fact, have the right to control the use of their likeness. In legal theory, one "owns" one's likeness. The Supreme Court has carved out many exceptions for journalism and to protect First Amendment rights. But I believe that the legal principle itself is part of American common law. In most cases, the context of the use of the likeness is the determining factor.

Using a photo of JFK from the official archives is a public domain use; a photo from Time magazine requires the permission of the copyright holder, but the copyright holder usually does not require the subject's approval; if you wanted to sell t-shirts with the likeness of JFK, you would probably have to negotiate with JFK's survivor(s), in this case, Caroline Kennedy alone.

I regret that I can not provide relevant case law citations; this is a pretty big area of intellectual property law and my knowledge of it was acquired through lay reading. It's one of those nuts-and-bolts technically dense areas of the law. If you want to use someone's likeness, especially for business or mass-media purposes, you are best advised to seek professional counsel, and you should certainly NOT depend on my synopsis.

Hope this helps -- but, yes indeed, it's a big field.

--p!

[EffieBlack]

11. You are correct about the use of a person's likeness

It doesn't fall within copyright law, however, which is what I was talking about. But you're absolutely right.

[BadgerLaw2010]

10. Public domain.