This story surfaced several days ago and then disappeared without further comment. The King family's Intellectual Properties Management Inc. extracted $761,160 from the Martin Luther King Jr National Memorial Project Foundation in return for use of King's words and image on a memorial planned for the Washington mall link here and here. In addition it received $71,700 in 2003 as a "management" fee. All that in turn has come from a $10 million Congressional appropriation for the memorial.

Applying copyright to a dead person's image seems strange, but one must assume that the lawyers already know what the established law. However, where is "fair use" in this?

It seems odd to write a blog, and have such strong opinions, on a topic you seem to know so little about.

Curious (or whatever your name is),

Okay, what pray tell is it that John Bennett seems "to know so little about"? Presumably you know more about whatever it is that he doesn't, so perhaps you can enlighten him and others of us who read this site.

AFAIK Copyright in a photograph belongs to the photographer, not the subject.

Nevertheless, I believe that use of Einstein's name and image are controlled - from Wikipedia's page on Einstein:

"Einstein bequeathed the royalties from use of his image to The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Corbis, successor to The Roger Richman Agency, licenses the use of his name and associated imagery, as agent for the Hebrew University.[104][105]"