Memorial Portrait Commissioning Brief | Full Digital Checklist

Direct answer and scope

The written brief should identify what is being commissioned: a physical portrait, a digital portrait file, a hosted memorial, a QR-linked memorial, or more than one of these. It should also identify the intended deliverables without assuming a particular file format, resolution, color profile, layer structure, naming convention, or number of versions.

For the source material, document what source-image evidence exists and where it is located without placing the image, device, account, or file path into the brief. If multiple versions exist, ask which version the artist will use and record the answer as a question requiring verification rather than as a judgment about quality, authenticity, ownership, or restoration potential.

Separate delivery of a portrait or copy from the rights claimed for reproduction, editing, derivative work, distribution, public display, publication, archiving, and later authorization. Ask the parties to identify the claimed author, claimed copyright owner, any work-made-for-hire language, any assignment, and any license. A person who possesses a photograph, portrait file, print, or exported memorial copy does not thereby establish copyright ownership or permission.

The brief should also identify who approves revisions, what event constitutes approval, and what evidence records that approval. These are documentation questions, not findings about the legal effect of a contract or the ownership of the resulting work.

How to use the official evidence

Use the Library of Congress guidance to ask where important digital photographs exist, including computers, removable media, and web locations. The same guidance supports questions about descriptive names, tags, folder organization, and a short description of the structure. Keep those details private when preparing a checklist; the brief need only record whether the relevant documentation has been addressed.

For the handoff, distinguish a claimed master, an approved version, a display version, an export, and supporting documentation only when the parties identify those states. Ask what each supplied file represents and whether an independently readable preservation copy exists outside the commissioned service. Do not treat an unverified vendor copy as independent.

The Library of Congress recommends identifying important web content, exporting selected information, saving metadata such as a site name or creation date, organizing exported files, keeping copies in different locations, and periodically checking readability. These points support questions about what a hosted memorial export contains and what metadata accompanies it; they do not establish that a particular service provides an export or preserves website functionality.

The National Archives describes an optional alphanumeric naming approach using hyphens or underscores and recommends basic metadata describing who, what, where, and when. Decide privately which nonpublic metadata should accompany preservation copies and which should not be displayed. The 3-2-1 approach can be used as a planning reference: three copies, two different media, and one off-site copy, with each category recorded as an evidence question.

Decision framework

Start with scope: identify the memorial type, the portrait deliverables, the source-image question, and the intended display settings. Next, identify the document relied upon for each rights question. Copyright Office guidance describes the creator of an original fixed work as generally its author and owner, while also recognizing possible ownership through work made for hire or transfers. The brief should therefore preserve the claimed arrangement and its supporting document rather than select a classification.

For a claimed specially ordered or commissioned work made for hire, keep the relevant elements distinct: an eligible statutory category, an express signed written agreement, work-made-for-hire language, and signatures of all parties. A label such as commissioned does not provide enough evidence to resolve those elements. If the arrangement instead relies on a transfer or license, ask whether the rights are exclusive or nonexclusive, which rights are included, and which signed document is relied upon.

For digital continuity, treat the QR image, underlying destination, domain or account control, redirect control, human-readable fallback, export, independent copies, periodic tests, and continuity handoff as separate questions. A physical memorial should show a human-readable destination in addition to the code. Before opening a QR destination, inspect the visible destination for unexpected spelling or letter changes.

For privacy questions involving a potentially covered business, keep California residency and covered-business status separate and unresolved until verified. Ask the business to describe the purpose and retention basis for each data category and to identify processors, hosting, support, export, backup, and disposal participants. These questions follow official guidance without certifying a privacy or security practice.

Limits and what to verify next

No portrait artist, digital-memorial vendor, hosting platform, QR provider, domain operator, processor, product, feature, account-control arrangement, export, file-format manifest, backup, restore process, privacy practice, succession path, price, availability, review, or turnaround evidence is supplied for this brief. Vendor-specific values therefore remain unknown and require separate primary evidence.

Ask for written vendor-specific answers about the source material accepted, portrait scope, claimed authorship, copyright ownership, licenses, revisions, deliverables, metadata, hosting, account control, destination control, fallback wording, export contents, copies, readability checks, retention, disposal, incident response, and continuity handoff. Do not treat a statement that a feature exists as evidence of control, independent preservation, or future access.

Keep physical possession, a vendor-held copy, a commissioner-held copy, and an independent backup as different evidence states. Ask who can access each copy, where it is held, what can be exported, and when readability or destination checks occur. The answers should remain records to verify, not predictions about recovery, link operation, service survival, or succession.

This guide does not determine copyright, authorship, ownership, permission, work-made-for-hire status, privacy-law coverage, security adequacy, or contract effect. Current official guidance and the written agreement should be reviewed by the relevant parties, with professional advice sought when a legal or privacy determination is needed.

Questions people ask

A useful brief asks for evidence states rather than relying on a single statement that a commission or memorial has been arranged. Each answer should identify the document, party, or unresolved issue supporting it.

Evidence behind this page

Each point below is restricted to what the cited primary source supports. Administrative listing status is not a quality endorsement.