The title basically says it all. I would think that if some company was using your likeness in an ad to sell their merchandise, that it would be illegal to do so without that persons express permission, in writing, such as a standard contract/agreement, would it not? My guess is that they would have to compensate you and it would have to be retroactive to when the ad started. The point here, is that my picture, with my name above it, was used in both a printed catalog, and also online. No one ever contacted me in any way; I only found out when someone brought it to my attention.
I totally agree with you!
I’m interested in their answer!
Or didn’t you get one yet?
But what are we talking about, what product?
Anti-Fear creme?
Never-tired capsules?
Or unicycle related?
Help me!!!
Does anyone else see the irony in this thread, or is it just me?
Believe me, it’s not just you.
irony, that’s sort of like steely right?
Sort of. 
It’s illegal to publish someone’s image without their permission. Unless the photo is of a public person in a public place. They also need permission of the photographer. If it’s a photo from your website you have them on those grounds as well.
Have a lawyer call them. If the company is small the most you’ll probably get is a cease and desist. But if it’s a big company there could be a payout for you.
Hopefully it’s not about the payout though.
SUE THE CRAP OUT OF THEM. my ¢2
What is a “public person” and why would they be treated any different from any other person?
The public person public place clause allows Paparazzi to take pictures of celebrities and sell their photos to tabloids.
It also applies to politicians and to some extent people who are currently in the news.
Someone could probably argue that Terry is a public person because he has to some extent made himself a local celebrity.
Additionally to whether or not they have a right to publish his image, there is also the right to endorsement. It is also illegal to insinuate that Terry endorses a product that he does not.
No, I’m not looking for any kind of payout. Mostly I’m just curious to know why they didn’t contact me first. But I’m still pretty sure that anyone selling a product-and using your picture in the ad-would have to get written permission (for legal purposes) before using that person’s picture, and that normally there would be some kind of agreement for compensation.
They must have known who I was since they printed my name above the pic, which was taken by me using my timer. There is another unicyclist in the pic, standing next to me. It was just a routine pic I had taken while doing a beach ride on 36er’s. It is also possible that he had a copy of the pic I took, and gave permission, but I have yet to ask him about it.
They also could have found it on my website, although it’s not there now as I change them periodically. I also probably posted it in “pictures of my latest ride” a while back, so they may have found it there too.
I’m not a lawyer and so I’m not qualified to provide legal advice, but it seems like this part of the California Civil Code might be relevant to your situation:
California Code - Section 3344
(a)Any person who knowingly uses another’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising or selling, or soliciting purchases of, products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person’s prior consent, or, in the case of a minor, the prior consent of his parent or legal guardian, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof. In addition, in any action brought under this section, the person who violated the section shall be liable to the injured party or parties in an amount equal to the greater of seven hundred fifty dollars ($750) or the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the unauthorized use, and any profits from the unauthorized use that are attributable to the use and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages.
What damages do you suffer when someone uses your image?
Were Terry making a living off his image, he’d have been able to calculate the rates he’d have charged for such usage. There’s your damage claim.
Alas, Terry does not claim copyright on his photos. Nor does he charge for the use of his likeness. In light of these facts, I doubt he could build any court case around the claimed misuse.
Had he some foresight, Terry might’ve trademarked UniGeezer, copyrighted his photos, become a YouTube partner, and he’d be raking in some $$$ by now. Funny that a guy who has worked in the entertainment industry hasn’t figured this out yet…
Not exactly. It’s absolutely legal to publish it, such as in a news image, but not to use it in a business-related purpose. Something like that (I’m also not a lawyer).
Unless they’re rinky-dink, don’t settle for the cease and desist. If you didn’t sign a release, they do not have the right to use your likeness. I’m pretty sure you have a case.
This is about your likeness, not about photo ownership if the pictures are not at least marked with a copyright. To truly protect ownership of your photos, you need to register them with the US Copyright office. I get this from reading a copyright column that’s in every issue of Photoshop World magazine. Mostly the theme in those articles is how not to undersell yourself or otherwise give away your work.
Yes. Legal for news-type purposes, not legal for revenue-producing (advertising) purposes.
Yes they could, unsuccessfully. Sorry, even though I’m seeing you every night during the Tonight Show, I still couldn’t say which rider(s) you are.
Does he actually have some sort of statement on his site that says “use my likeness all you want”? The likeness shouldn’t be free.
So who’s the advertiser?
Our local photographers, SproutDaily.com have taken a couple of photos of me on the unicycle (they are short of subjects when there isn’t any surf). On one occasion, I found the photo on the back page of a flyer for one of the local hotels. I tried to put on a pretence of annoyment, but no one believed me. I was really flattered that they would use a photo of an old geezer on a uni. You can see the photo on http://EasternMining.com.au/PublishingImages/Richard%20Unicycling%20Manly%20Beach.JPG
I guess it depends on how you feel about your image being used, and whether it takes away any revenue opportunities.
If the advertiser is the new UDC (at least one of my images is on their site), I believe you signed away your (certain) rights when you entered the KH photo contest. And you probably already figured this out as there haven’t been any additional posts from you in here…
who it be?
If it is the UDC photo, you already knew this, made a topic about it, it even said “photo’s provided by krisholm.com” if i remember correctly 
It doesn’t seem like it is UDC, unless they have printed a catalog. And I think the original post may have been before the UDC update.
The one on UDC didn’t have a person standing next to him.
It seems like Terry is not talking about UDC. And since he is not looking for compensation, it seems fair to ask the question- isn’t it normal to ask first before using someone elses property? Same goes for if someone wants to borrow my unicycle- it is more respectful to ask first.