Pictures and public domain

[Paul Belard]

My question is about how some old pictures are still owned rightfully or not by some individuals or corporations.
If Elvis records fall into the public domain after 50 years, why his pictures do not? This may show my naivete in this domain!
It seems at times they are a free-for-all grab. In recent years, Getty, Corbis and Alamy have put their names on tons of pictures. Anybody knows if they are allowed to do it, or is it just money talking and let’s see if anybody would sue companies with deep pockets?
I have a similar problem with Wertheimer’s pictures. Until the turn of the century, they were not copyrighted as far as I know. Then, all of a sudden, they all are although quite a few have been appropriated by Getty and Alamy).
When an employee works for a company, the work which he performs belongs to the company. For the Dorsey shows, he was hired by RCA, these pictures are therefore RCA’s property. I do not know for sure whether he was hired by RCA in June-July 1956, but if he was, the same rule applies. If he was paid by another entity, they do not belong to him either. If he did it free of charge, he owns them.
Still, at one point, they fall in the public domain.
As you can guess, I’m not an expert on picture rights. If a lawyer or an authority in this field could shade some light on this, I’d be grateful.

[francesclopez]

https://www.canto.com/blog/what-are-public-domain-images/

[rlj4ep]

https://www.canto.com/blog/what-are-public-domain-images/

Thanks very much francesc..., that was a helpful article. I was unaware of the information provided. Thanks again.

[tinseltown]

My question is about how some old pictures are still owned rightfully or not by some individuals or corporations.
If Elvis records fall into the public domain after 50 years, why his pictures do not? This may show my naivete in this domain!
It seems at times they are a free-for-all grab. In recent years, Getty, Corbis and Alamy have put their names on tons of pictures. Anybody knows if they are allowed to do it, or is it just money talking and let’s see if anybody would sue companies with deep pockets?
I have a similar problem with Wertheimer’s pictures. Until the turn of the century, they were not copyrighted as far as I know. Then, all of a sudden, they all are although quite a few have been appropriated by Getty and Alamy).
When an employee works for a company, the work which he performs belongs to the company. For the Dorsey shows, he was hired by RCA, these pictures are therefore RCA’s property. I do not know for sure whether he was hired by RCA in June-July 1956, but if he was, the same rule applies. If he was paid by another entity, they do not belong to him either. If he did it free of charge, he owns them.
Still, at one point, they fall in the public domain.
As you can guess, I’m not an expert on picture rights. If a lawyer or an authority in this field could shade some light on this, I’d be grateful.

Wertheimer was very particular about the use of his photos and the rights to them.
He owned them. Not RCA or whoever (Getty etc.) while he was stil, alive.
You had a deal to make with him to use photos from him. Even before 2000. They were his.
I doubt he sold the rights to Getty etc. while he was still alive.

[jekhb76]

So everything posted in forums like this one and Facebook is ilegal?

[tinseltown]

No, why should it.

[Swedish]

My question is about how some old pictures...

Site like GettyImages & Alamy do not own images, they just provided a platform for rights holders to sell or licensing their photos.
They manages the business between a customer & the owner and to control that images are used as intended.
They only watermark pic so nobody steal and use it without first have a contract that give you a pic without the watermark