Pioneer
Member
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.