Legal row escalates over “lost” Adams photographs
Owner of unauthenticated negatives accuses University of Arizona of conspiracy
By Charlotte Burns. News, Issue 222, March 2011
Published online: 09 March 2011
CALIFORNIA. The legal fight over negatives alleged to be “lost” works by Ansel Adams, purportedly worth $200m, has taken a new turn. The owner of the negatives has added the University of Arizona as a defendant in a lawsuit against the Ansel Adams Publishing Rights Trust, alleging conspiracy and defamation.
Rick Norsigian, a wall-painter from California, stumbled across a cache of negatives in a Fresno garage sale a decade ago. The wrangling began last August when the trust sued Norsigian and his legal representative, PRS Media Partners, for trademark infringement after Norsigian advertised prints and posters for sale as “Ansel Adams’ Lost Negatives” on his website. Norsigian’s team has launched a counter-suit, alleging slander, defamation, unfair competition, trade libel, civil conspiracy and wrongful interference with a prospective economic advantage.
The Ansel Adams trust has held a monopoly on the reproduction and distribution rights of Adams’s images and the use of his name since the photographer’s death in 1984. The Center for Creative Photography (CCP) at the University of Arizona, which Adams helped establish in 1975, is a publicly funded
institute that houses the largest archive of Adams’s work in the country. An irrevocable provision provides 10% of the trust’s publishing royalties to the CCP, according to Photo District News.
William Turnage, managing director of the trust, is accused of defaming Norsigian and his team by calling them “crooks” and “con men” in comments reported on CNN. Turnage likened “Norsigian’s authentication efforts to the propaganda techniques used in Nazi Germany by Adolf Hitler,” say court papers.
The conspiracy claim centres on emails Norsigian’s attorneys retrieved from the CCP after serving a public records request. These are being used as evidence that Turnage pressed the centre to support the trust in discrediting Norsigian’s claims that the negatives were by Adams. Turnage said it was “essential” for the centre to tell press that “the ‘lost’ negatives are not Adams negatives”. CCP director Katharine Martinez told Turnage she had decided to “remain silent about the claim”, in an email dated 15 August. Turnage called this a “cynical BS cop-out”.
Two weeks later, the centre issued a statement saying it had “no reason to believe” the negatives were by Adams, and that “we support the efforts of the Ansel Adams Publishing Rights Trust to protect its rights in this matter.” Turnage called the statement “anodyne”. The centre’s dean, Carla Stoffle, replied: “You got the best we can do and are going to do. Probably more than we should have.”
Norsigian’s team claims that this is evidence of “an ongoing conspiracy to interfere with the counter-plaintiff’s economic activities…and use a public entity as a proxy to serve a private business interests [sic]”, according to court papers. The centre declined to comment.
Norsigian’s team question whether the CCP officially provides authentication consultations. “They claim not to be in the authentication business,” said Norsigian’s attorney, Arnold Peter. “This runs contrary to the statement where they express their views about the negatives.”
Norsigian is keen to prove the negatives are by Adams. “I wish someone would hook me and Wild Bill [Turnage] up to a lie detector. I am telling the truth.” Asked why the negatives have not been forensically tested, Norsigian said: “It costs thousands of dollars. I can’t afford it. If someone else wants to do it on their dime, it would really be a pleasure.”
Bob Steiner of law firm Latham & Watkins, representing the trust, said: “We don’t think they will be able to authenticate the negatives. But the suit is not about whether they are authentic or not. We have a problem with them using the Ansel Adams name as if they are Ansel Adams-endorsed products. We need to protect his legacy.”
The cases are scheduled for hearing in May 2012.
Submit a comment
All comments are moderated. If you would like your comment to be approved, please use your real name, not a pseudonym. We ask for your email address in case we wish to contact you - it will not be
made public and we do not use it for any other purpose.
Want to write a longer comment to this article? Email email@example.com