19-07-2021, 09:51 PM
I *think* in cases such as the above, copyright is generally owned by the photographer and extends for his/ her lifetime + 70 years (under the 1995 revision).
This might not be the case if, for example, the photographer was hired to take the picture for, say, a periodical - then it would be subject to terms of contract.
The person who bought it from eBay bought a print, not the copyright to the photo.
Where it might get complicated is that the above image is not in fact the original photo, but a photo of the photo taken by the eBay seller, who may or may not have held the right to copy it...
Splendid picture anyhow. I suggest the way is to make use of it and be ready to back down if (unlikely) challenged. It's probably not wise to use 'borrowed' images commercially.
This might not be the case if, for example, the photographer was hired to take the picture for, say, a periodical - then it would be subject to terms of contract.
The person who bought it from eBay bought a print, not the copyright to the photo.
Where it might get complicated is that the above image is not in fact the original photo, but a photo of the photo taken by the eBay seller, who may or may not have held the right to copy it...
Splendid picture anyhow. I suggest the way is to make use of it and be ready to back down if (unlikely) challenged. It's probably not wise to use 'borrowed' images commercially.