[rollei_list] Re: OT: Antiques Roadshow... Photography Edition
- From: David Sadowski <dsadowski@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:31:29 -0500
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j2f9n7NC02rLPFNtita9WZOR-wdwD9H7MGIO0
It's interesting how Ansel Adams' grandson is so skeptical and
apparently uninterested in this treasure trove of glass plates. His
attitude seems to be the negs are worthless because of the way AA
manipulated his images in the darkroom.
It would not surprise me if this eventually leads to a lawsuit.
Adams' grandson is objecting to the use of AA's name with a commercial
enterprise.
This could lead to an interesting court case. I suppose it is
possible to own the negs but not own the copyright, in the same manner
that you can own a letter written by Salinger but not be able to
publish it?
So, on the one hand, if these negs are really by Ansel Adams, how can
anyone else besides the Adams Trust make money off them? Unless you
could demonstrate that he sold them? Or is it simply that they were
abandoned property if he left them at a place where he taught in the
early 1940s?
If I wrote a novel, and lost the manuscript, and years later someone
found it, wouldn't I still own the copyright? I don't get how this
guy can make $200m off Ansel just because he has these negs- unless he
backpedals on the claim that they are by Adams, in which case they
won't be worth that kind of money.
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
