In a message dated 5/4/2006 3:14:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, pasher@ee.net writes: Unless you can demonstrate a "commercial value" for the use of the image, the posessor of the photograph is probably free to republish it if the photographer's copyright has expired. --- This is just an observation but it seems to me the pertinent paragraph from the link you listed (and thanks for the link) is: "While an individual's right to privacy generally ends when the individual dies, publicity rights associated with the commercial value connected with an individual's name, image or voice may continue. For example, many estates or representatives of famous authors, musicians, actors, photographers, politicians, sports figures, celebrities, and other public figures continue to control and license the uses of those figures' names, likenesses, etc." I think the above paragraph pertains primarily to the commercial value of a likeness of the celebrity and not those who just happened to find themselves included in a group photo with him. Since apparently it was the celebrity's own heirs/family who shared the photo to be placed on the website I'd say they agreed to it being done. I can give an example of this very issue from personal experience. A very famous celebrity--movie and TV star, graduated from my high school some years before I went there and many school photos from the yearbook and elsewhere that include the star and other students have been published over the years -- some identifying the "friends" and others allowing them to remain anonymous -- but the only "commercial value" to the photos involved the fact that the star was included in them. Without him there was no commercial value. Even though the "friends" were "private" and "living" I never heard about any of them who actually complained about the use of their photos--they rather got a kick out of it--there 15 minutes of fame! Joan