Vivian Maier @ HGG

[Pioneer]

This is interesting to me, because my reaction to how all the non-lawyers have dealt with this is "how dis-respectful to ignore the distant family, and the interest we all share in protecting copyright".

The exploitation of Viviain Maier's legacy has been delayed by someone insisting on things bekng done properly. The legacy itself will survive, and be displayed and disseminated in due course.

I do understand your position Matt. But I have two concerns in this case.

First, before Mr. Maloof began to actively promote Ms Maier's work, there arguably was no legacy. Ms Maier created the work therefore the copyright belongs to her and any heirs that Cook County acknowledges. But Ms Maier did very little to position her work for herself or for anyone else. She lost the negatives and film before her death and knew that she had lost it. She had as much chance as anyone to find out who had purchased her work and to let them know who she was. But now all that work and investment by Mr. Maloof is "exploitation." Quite an interesting turn of phrase there.

Next, the only person who made any attempt at all to identify an heir and secure the right to market her work, oh I'm sorry, exploit her work, was Mr. Maloof. There were no lawyers jumping out of the woodwork to protect her legacy. However, once it became obvious that there may be something to be gained beyond a bunch of hard work, suddenly here comes this lawyer riding in on his white horse to save the day.

Now things are just wonderful. Ms Maier's rights are now protected. But for whom? Right now it looks like Cook County is the beneficiary.

 

[MattKing]

Dan:
The problem is, that John Maloof or the other negative holders almost certainly would have known or quickly learned that there was no way that the legal ownership of the copyrights could come to them except by starting a probate action, and having the issue determined by the court.
Even if there had been a valid Will, and no uncertainty as to who the heir was, there would still have had to have been a determination by the probate court before the copyrights could have been legally dealt with.
It may be that the negative holders knew about Ms. Maier's missing brother, or maybe they didn't, but it seems evident to me that they preferred to take the risk that no one would object rather than risk having the proper procedures either delay or frustrate their intentions.
I probably have a greater respect for the role of the probate court in estate matters than most, having worked so long with the isues, and seeing how well our probate law usually balances and protects the various, often competing interests.
It may be that using the word "exploit" is harsh, but I confess that my previously fairly positive opinion of Mr. Maloof was dealt a bit of a blow when I read (in one of the links I posted earlier) that he obtained the negatives approximately two years before Ms. Maier's death, that he knew approximately where she was, but that he made no attempt to contact her before she died. That makes me question how much Mr. Maloof values Viviain Maier's legacy.
And by the way, any benefit that Cook County gets will most likely be minimal - a few fees - as they are named as administrator, and are tasked with protecting the interests of the rightful beneficiary (ies).

 

[Bob Carnie]

I happen to know one of the negative holders, she bought 40 of them on E bay before anyone knew who Vivian Maier was, she has been collecting vintage negatives on line for over 20 years and I personally made early
contact sheets of her collection- Very beautiful street scenes with a couple of self portraits as well . This woman purchased the negatives because she loved the work, not because of any financial potential.
I am pretty sure that a lot of speculation is going on about this body of work and I sense some hostility towards the owners of the negatives and I feel this is a shame. The whole collection could have gone to the dumpster if it
had not been for John Maloof - what would we have to talk about now?

Oh yea- we could continue to bash Peter Lik.

 

[cowanw]

Regardless of who owns the copyright, the owners of the negatives will be compensated. Copyright owners cannot get the negatives back; without the participation of the negative owners nothing gets produced. Everybody is going to have to negotiate, knowing that if they can't come to a compromise, nothing happens.
Timing may be important however. If the work has enduring value, then perhaps it matters less when material gets revealed. But if this turns out to be another Arts flash in the pan, media sensation, soon to be replaced by the next, then timing is important. At least for money; if it is a short term phenomena then we really don't need to get our knickers in a knot.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Good Point- I do not think the current owners are in any fanatical rush to get rich on this body of work.. Right now the the negatives are in very safe hands.. Stephen Bulger and Howard Greenburg are mentoring the owners of this work and IMO these two gentlemen are at top of their respective fields and very honorable, with long history of competence behind them.

Regardless of who owns the copyright, the owners of the negatives will be compensated. Copyright owners cannot get the negatives back; without the participation of the negative owners nothing gets produced. Everybody is going to have to negotiate, knowing that if they can't come to a compromise, nothing happens.
Timing may be important however. If the work has enduring value, then perhaps it matters less when material gets revealed. But if this turns out to be another Arts flash in the pan, media sensation, soon to be replaced by the next, then timing is important. At least for money; if it is a short term phenomena then we really don't need to get our knickers in a knot.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Dan:
The problem is, that John Maloof or the other negative holders almost certainly would have known or quickly learned that there was no way that the legal ownership of the copyrights could come to them except by starting a probate action, and having the issue determined by the court.
Even if there had been a valid Will, and no uncertainty as to who the heir was, there would still have had to have been a determination by the probate court before the copyrights could have been legally dealt with.
It may be that the negative holders knew about Ms. Maier's missing brother, or maybe they didn't, but it seems evident to me that they preferred to take the risk that no one would object rather than risk having the proper procedures either delay or frustrate their intentions.
I probably have a greater respect for the role of the probate court in estate matters than most, having worked so long with the isues, and seeing how well our probate law usually balances and protects the various, often competing interests.
It may be that using the word "exploit" is harsh, but I confess that my previously fairly positive opinion of Mr. Maloof was dealt a bit of a blow when I read (in one of the links I posted earlier) that he obtained the negatives approximately two years before Ms. Maier's death, that he knew approximately where she was, but that he made no attempt to contact her before she died. That makes me question how much Mr. Maloof values Viviain Maier's legacy.
And by the way, any benefit that Cook County gets will most likely be minimal - a few fees - as they are named as administrator, and are tasked with protecting the interests of the rightful beneficiary (ies).

OR John Maloof did not know the laws relating to copyright and copyright ownership. We have a legal statement in the US and I believe in Canada and the UK:

"Ignorance is no excuse for the law."​

 

[Pioneer]

Dan:
The problem is, that John Maloof or the other negative holders almost certainly would have known or quickly learned that there was no way that the legal ownership of the copyrights could come to them except by starting a probate action, and having the issue determined by the court.
Even if there had been a valid Will, and no uncertainty as to who the heir was, there would still have had to have been a determination by the probate court before the copyrights could have been legally dealt with.
It may be that the negative holders knew about Ms. Maier's missing brother, or maybe they didn't, but it seems evident to me that they preferred to take the risk that no one would object rather than risk having the proper procedures either delay or frustrate their intentions.
I probably have a greater respect for the role of the probate court in estate matters than most, having worked so long with the isues, and seeing how well our probate law usually balances and protects the various, often competing interests.
It may be that using the word "exploit" is harsh, but I confess that my previously fairly positive opinion of Mr. Maloof was dealt a bit of a blow when I read (in one of the links I posted earlier) that he obtained the negatives approximately two years before Ms. Maier's death, that he knew approximately where she was, but that he made no attempt to contact her before she died. That makes me question how much Mr. Maloof values Viviain Maier's legacy.
And by the way, any benefit that Cook County gets will most likely be minimal - a few fees - as they are named as administrator, and are tasked with protecting the interests of the rightful beneficiary (ies).

I agree. The fact that he (and others) knew her approximate location and did nothing is troubling. It is possible that he believed that the storage auction/transfer agreements were adequate but, if so, I am not clear why he would have chosen to search out a potential heir after her death.

A big part of the problem with this entire situation is that there is so much that is unknown, or the knowledge is so fractured among people it may as well be unknown. Even the authors of the articles you linked obviously had different sources and different information. It also includes most of us here as well.

I still believe that in his zeal, Mr. Deal has done more harm than good. I think he needed to conduct much more research before he headed off on his tangent. But of course, there were all those terrible people exploiting Ms. Maier's work.

Hopefully the probate court lives up to your expectation and is able to sort this out. I would certainly hate that this lady's amazing body of work be lost to the public. Unfortunately, though not at all certain, that is a possibility here.

What would be very helpful is if some historian actually took the time to gain access to all her documents and to build an unbiased historical account of Ms. Maier.

 

[MattKing]

Bringing back to life this 5+ year quiet thread, I thought it appropriate to add a postscript.
I just finished reading a 2017 book by author and photography professor Pamela Bannos titled "Vivian Maier - A Photographer's Life and Afterlife".
It is absolutely fascinating.
Professor Bannos seems to have exhaustively researched information about Vivian Maier and her life and photography, along with the activities of Mr. Maloof, Jeffrey Goldstein and others who obtained so much of her photography.
If I understand correctly, it was as a result of Professor Bannos' research that the fate of Vivian Maier's brother was ascertained - he apparently pre-deceased Ms. Maier, having died while a resident of a psychiatric institution.
The original 5 storage lockers of her photography, documents and books were sold at auction for $260. The contents together weighed four tons!
Those contents were subsequently re-sold at auction, in various lots, the sale proceeds of which totaled to $20,000.00
The purchasers then set about spreading the contents into the hands of many, many people, including Mr. Maloof and Jeffrey Goldstein.
The historical information about Vivian Maier presents her as a much more accomplished and interesting person and photographer than Mr. Maloof's movie presents.
And it is unlikely that Mr. Maloof's choice of "heir" for the estate is the only heir.

 

[CMoore]

I think Vivian Maier is one of the "best" photographers that has ever walked the face of the Earth.
She is certainly one of photography's most interesting stories.
"Vivian" is a singular event, that we shall not live to see again.

 

[Ariston]

Ha! I saw this thread pop up, and I must confess that I thought Vivian Maier was a portrait photographer that a lot of people seem to revere. I didn't think she was dead, though. I evidently got the two confused.

Anyway, I googled Vivian Maier's work to find that she is just like every other photographer: She likes taking pictures of her own reflection! Such common ground makes for wonderful community.

 

[CMoore]

Ha! I saw this thread pop up, and I must confess that I thought Vivian Maier was a portrait photographer that a lot of people seem to revere. I didn't think she was dead, though. I evidently got the two confused.

The two of what.?
Are there two, popular, photographers with the name of Vivian Maier.?

 

[Ariston]

The two of what.?
Are there two, popular, photographers with the name of Vivian Maier.?

No, there is some popular portrait photographer I have come across before. I'll have to try and find her when I get a chance, because I thought her name was Vivian Maier. I think she has photographed a lot of celebs.

 

[MattKing]

Interestingly enough, Vivian Maier did like to photograph famous people and big events. Professor Bannos' book relates numerous examples where Ms. Maier appears to have been mistaken for a professional photographer and obtained access to things like movie openings with the stars being present and newsworthy events like the aftermath of the 1969 Chicago riots.

 

[mshchem]

We went to an exhibition of Maier's work. I think the prints were made by Hank's Photographic Services. The prints are amazing, I don't know if these were optically printed, digitized, whatever?
What struck me was this woman's ability to construct, pre visualization, whatever you want to call it, without much, if any feedback. So much of her work was unprinted, many later rolls were not even developed. There's a couple amazing artists here, Maier that made the photographs, and the printer that executed the final work on paper.
Amazing. I hope that the legal mess is resolved, I am not sure what institutions are willing to aquire her work until it's all settled.

 

[MattKing]

One thing I learned from the book is that until the latter years she did print or have printed a lot of her work. Our perception is skewed because when the four tons of her belongings was distributed as a result of successive auctions, the prints (including contact sheets) and the negatives and the movie films and the undeveloped film from the five storage lockers were separated and went to many different recipients. John Maloof received less of the prints than others did.
There were also other storage lockers that didn't get sold at auction, because the rent payments were kept up by some of the people she had cared for when they were kids.
She was a regular customer at a number of Chicago and New York and Los Angeles camera stores (depending on where she was living at that time) and there were staff at those stores who remembered her, including remembering the film developing and printing she had done through them.
It is true that during her last few years of photography, she left a lot of film undeveloped, but prior to then she shot and had developed very large quantities of black and white negative film, colour slides and colour movies.

 

[awty]

The historical information about Vivian Maier presents her as a much more accomplished and interesting person and photographer than Mr. Maloof's movie presents.

I found her far more interesting once I discovered she was a grumpy old French feminist socialist spy. Be interesting to see more of the pictures we haven't seen.

 

[CMoore]

I found her far more interesting once I discovered she was a grumpy old French feminist socialist spy. Be interesting to see more of the pictures we haven't seen.

Absolutely.!

 

[CMoore]

One thing I learned from the book is that until the latter years she did print or have printed a lot of her work. Our perception is skewed because when the four tons of her belongings was distributed as a result of successive auctions, the prints (including contact sheets) and the negatives and the movie films and the undeveloped film from the five storage lockers were separated and went to many different recipients. John Maloof received less of the prints than others did.
There were also other storage lockers that didn't get sold at auction, because the rent payments were kept up by some of the people she had cared for when they were kids.
She was a regular customer at a number of Chicago and New York and Los Angeles camera stores (depending on where she was living at that time) and there were staff at those stores who remembered her, including remembering the film developing and printing she had done through them.
It is true that during her last few years of photography, she left a lot of film undeveloped, but prior to then she shot and had developed very large quantities of black and white negative film, colour slides and colour movies.

She is, simply, Fascinating.!
She is every bit the photographer as Winogrand, Frank, Berenice Abbott, or Mary Ellen Mark.
Vivian should be discussed in every Art/ Photography class from now, until our sun becomes a Red Giant and destroys the planet.

 

[Bob Carnie]

One thing I learned from the book is that until the latter years she did print or have printed a lot of her work. Our perception is skewed because when the four tons of her belongings was distributed as a result of successive auctions, the prints (including contact sheets) and the negatives and the movie films and the undeveloped film from the five storage lockers were separated and went to many different recipients. John Maloof received less of the prints than others did.
There were also other storage lockers that didn't get sold at auction, because the rent payments were kept up by some of the people she had cared for when they were kids.
She was a regular customer at a number of Chicago and New York and Los Angeles camera stores (depending on where she was living at that time) and there were staff at those stores who remembered her, including remembering the film developing and printing she had done through them.
It is true that during her last few years of photography, she left a lot of film undeveloped, but prior to then she shot and had developed very large quantities of black and white negative film, colour slides and colour movies.

I should get this book,, I had a couple of long conversations with Pamela Bannos when she was researching ... does the book mention a Canadian woman who purchased negatives from John?

 

[Bob Carnie]

Ron Slatterly has a large collection of vintage prints.btw. he was involved.

 

[DonJ]

No, there is some popular portrait photographer I have come across before. I'll have to try and find her when I get a chance, because I thought her name was Vivian Maier. I think she has photographed a lot of celebs.

Annie Leibovitz?

 

[Ariston]

Annie Leibovitz?

Yes, that's it! I clearly don't know either very well.

 

[MattKing]

I should get this book,, I had a couple of long conversations with Pamela Bannos when she was researching ... does the book mention a Canadian woman who purchased negatives from John?

I think so - but I can't be sure, because it relates information about a huge number of people who ended up with a huge variety of Vivian Maier "stuff". And many of those sales were through eBay. If you would like to send me her name by "Starting a Conversation" I can check the extremely detailed index to see if she is listed there.
There is a few mentions of Canada in the book. Besides Stephen Bulger's connection with her dispersed materials, there are descriptions of her travels in Canada, including a photo taken in Vancouver in the early 1950s that could be mistaken for one of the FSA photos during the Depression.
By the way, I borrowed the book from my public library.

 

[jtk]

Sad to see that she's known here more thru legal scandalizing than for her photos and the way she lived.

 

[MattKing]

Sad to see that she's known here more thru legal scandalizing than for her photos and the way she lived.

When this thread started, very little was well known about the way she lived, and the photos which were known actually were a very small (and slightly misleading) subset of her photography.
Professor Bannos' book reveals so much more about her, and a lot of it makes John Maloof's efforts seem calculating in the extreme.