Thursday, December 30, 2010

Buzz Aldrin Sues Topps for Use of Likeness

Astronaut Buzz Aldrin is suing the Topps trading card company in federal court in Los Angeles for the use of his likeness after they used what is arguably him inside a space suit doing the first walk on the moon.

Aldrin, a very private man since his launch to fame, has been very protective of his likeness and has fought to protect others from profiting or exploiting him. What's worth noting here is the fact that you can't actually see Aldrin in the photo on the Topps Heritage box, but you can see the image of a suited man (obvious to all as Aldrin) on the moon.

For a long time it has been said that if you can't see a persons face you don't need a release, and there are numerous court cases that point out the fallacy of that argument. So, the point remains - get a release wherever you can.

If you'd like to know more, the Washington Post has more here.


(Comments, if any, after the Jump)


Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you've got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
at

4 comments:

  1. Oscar WilliamsDecember 30, 2010 at 12:26 PM

    Had always thought NASA photos were in the public domain for free use. Went to their site and found the following information. Obviously the problem deals with a recognizable person and Aldrin's photo is so iconic everyone recognizes him.

    Thanks for posting. Opens our eyes concerning the need for releases when we might have thought unnecessary.


    From NASA ---

    Reproduction Guidelines for Use of NASA Images and Emblems

    NASA images generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video and audio material for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits and Internet Web pages. This general permission does not include the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products (including Web pages) that are not NASA sponsored.

    If the NASA material is to be used for commercial purposes, especially including advertisements, it must not explicitly or implicitly convey NASA's endorsement of commercial goods or services. If a NASA image includes an identifiable person, using the image for commercial purposes may infringe that person's right of privacy or publicity, and permission should be obtained from the person.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Will SebergerDecember 30, 2010 at 4:35 PM

    Interesting. I'm not a lawyer of any kind, but I'd think that since he was an employee of the government (NASA and/or USAF), on official government business AND the photo was made by an employee of the government on government business, that he has no grounds for a complaint (legally, anyway) at all.

    He still certainly owns his own likeness, but I fail to see how this is a commercial appropriation of his likeness - it's not an endorsement for anything. And as far as I know, that photo of him on the moon is about as far into the public domain as something can get.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brandon BarteeJanuary 11, 2011 at 10:40 AM

    Thanks for sharing! My only question is this, more than one astronaut has walked the moon. What is it in this ad that points directly to Aldrin? The marketer (and photographer) cannot be held responsible for people's assumptions about who the subject of a photo is, especially if the only identifying factor is that he is doing something that has been done by several others.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Craig B.January 19, 2011 at 1:11 PM

    Good points. However, some corrections are needed. Buzz Aldrin has been much more visible than Neil Armstrong, who has remained well out of the limelight in comparison. Unlike Aldrin, Armstrong hasn't been on "Dancing With the Stars" . Aldrin was also the second man on the moon (Armstrong was first), so the picture of Aldrin is by Armstrong. There are only a very few pictures of Armstrong on the moon as he had the camera most of the time. Remember, they were only walking on the surface a short time to collect samples, set up a few experiments, and get back into the safety of the LM.

    ReplyDelete

COMMENT GUIDELINES

Every month, tens of thousands of visitors come to Photo Business News, and approximately 2,000 readers get PBN via RSS feeds. As we approach three years of blogging (in one form or another) PBN has matured, and has, as one might expect, attracted some less-than-mature readers, which, in turn, turns to commenters with their own agendas.

Following are our Terms of Service (TOS) for commenting on the blog posts:
-------------------
1. Comment Spam - we have had a ton of spam from countries like Russia, Japan, China, and so on. It interferes with the discourse, and is one of the prime reasons we are moving to moderation. All one need to is look back a few months to see the blog posts I haven't had time to clean up from this type of spam to see that moderation is needed for this reason alone. In addition, if your comment is not germane to the point being discussed, it too becomes spam. It will be deleted.

2. Over time, some pretty irrational challenges and attacks have been levied against me, and that's ok if you disagree with me, just don't make it personal on me, or anyone else. Doing so means your comment won't make it out of moderation, so don't waste your time. In addition, it would be a shame for you to make a really great point that everyone would benefit from reading, and include personal attacks on me, or other commenters, because we don't edit comments, they're either in, or they're out.

3. Over at the Photo Business News Flickr forum, (here) there are almost 2,000 members and a good opportunity to get your questions answered there. If you have a suggestion for a blog topic, there's a link to make that suggestion on every page of the blog.

4. It is the policy of Photo Business News that if there is a YouTube, Vimeo, Viddler, Hulu or any other video service online, we can post it here using the embedding players for those services (which often insert ads into the playback). We can't know if what might normally be considered a copyrighted work that you would think might not be allowed on, say, YouTube, in fact has been agreed to between the copyright holder and YouTube. So, if you have a question or concern, visit those sites, and flag the content you believe is problematic. In addition, we adhere to standards for quoting and citing other content, with attribution and where possible, a link to that content.

5. ANONYMOUS COMMENTS - For several years now, we've given free reign to anonymous commenters, and a small fraction of those were beneficial to the readership. It is our opinion that anonymous commenters would best be from someone who, for example, should their identity be revealed, could pose job security or economic problems for them. So to that end, unless your comment is significantly beneficial, anonymous comments won't get moderated in. If you wish to make an anonymous comment and you want to send me an e-mail identifying yourself (which I will not reveal), that would be helpful, and will increase your chances of getting your comments posted. Oh, and don't go creating a fake Blogger ID just to get in - blank Blogger ID's are just one step removed from plain anonymous postings. The more discourse where people know who each other are, the better. David Hobby, of Strobist fame summed it up best in his TOS: "Nothing looks more weenie and pathetic than sniping, critical, anonymous comments."