I'm not sure about those photos that you specifically have but I do know a lot of paparazzi photos are free game as they release the ones they don't use to the public domain and there are a lot of photos released on a public domain basis as well...
You know the answer... http://www.publaw.com/rightpriv.html.
^So does he.
Just skimmed through it. That means it's legal? Also, I have sports team logos showing on the site. Is this legal, or must I have rights from the 'owner(s)'?..
Why does Canada keep letting me down ?
I'm not going to tell you that something is/isn't "legal" - but I can tell you that it has the potential to cause you great trouble/headaches.
The question isn't about whether it is legal or not to have a celebs pics up, the question is, would I be violating copyright if I have the pic up? The Papparzzi OWNS the pics they take. They took the pics, they own the pics. I will tell you this, they do not "release" the pics to the public, they sell them to them.
Did you take the pic of the celeb? if not, then you may be violating copyright law unless you have expressed written permission to do so..
Does that help?..
And that's actually a completely separate consideration than the one I was going for - even if you took the photo yourself (Which you didn't), you don't have carte blanch rights to use it however you want.
Throwing in a disclaimer at the bottom of the site, "all pictures are property of yadda yadda..." or "courtesy of..." should save you some trouble...
JUst remember Tom Brady recently sued yahoo for a photo they used for there Fantasy Football. Because it violated some things. Just something to think about...
True, you can't do as you wish with the photo, but I was relating to the usage of the pic in the thread. But celebs are public domain, unless you invaded their privacy or assocaited their picture with commercial usage, they can be used if you took them yourself. Like I said, if you took the pic from somewhere else, there could be a copyright on it. If there is a TM matter (IE- a fake fansite), it would not be the pictures, but the usage of the site that causes problems. It is a very tricky area to get into.
About the Tom Brady photo, Yahoo used his picture to promote thier commercial services (fantasy football) without his consent, and that is a big no no. There is a difference between the two circumstances. As a unrelated sidenote, Barry Bonds likeness doesn't appear in fantsy baseball. He is not part of teh union, so each company must get his direct approval to use his image. So on many sites, he is #25 LF, Giants.....
Oh no doubt. I was just pointing out pretty much what you just said. Its tricky. If you start a site and have #1 NBA player in your graphics, then the site starts making an income there could be a problem..
I think you can buy the celeb pictures from reputable sources for a fee.
If you just take one from the web, slap it on your website with or without a link back to the author, it's still copyright infringement imo...