sorry, I misunderstood that. I thought you was getting rid of them and wanted
to preserve images for broadcast. I see now that the purpose of the broadcast
is to sell
is an agreement between you, it seems that you are allowed to sell the
paintings provided you give him one third of the profit.
think it would be implied into that agreement if this went to court, that if
someone was thinking of buying the picture they would want to see it and if
they wanted to see it, short of them travelling from wherever they are to look
at the picture personally, they would want to see an image of it. So either he
is agreeing for you to sell it, or he is not.
other issue, of course, is that by not allowing you to do what you are proposing
to do, he would be severely prejudicing any money that you get the paintings
and he would also of course we are limiting the amount that he gets.
course, if these paintings are worth tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds or
millions of pounds and prospective buyers will travel all around the world, but
they will want to see a picture of what they are buying. If your brothers
(potential) argument is to have any credibility, then known one would be able
to see anything other than the original painting. It makes selling them an
said, if you are selling the pictures, then evenly be objects to it because you
are breaching his copyright, he is only entitled to damages and the damages
would be the amount of money that he's getting for the sale of the paintings in