Wow. I think someone needs a nap. Some of us may not have gotten this far in our reasoning, but asking around a community of professional and amateur artists is part of the research process. Without addressing anyone in particular, especially anyone who's login begins with a Q... It's a bit reckless to assume that no one else knows anything about a given subject just because you don't. The licensing options I've suggested will stand up to international property protection laws as well as any. That having been said, they're also just a starting point... I certainly wouldn't suggest (and haven't suggested) that anyone sell a legally sensitive product like this without seeking the paid advice of an attorney who specializes in copyright and intellectual property issues. Further... No amount of protection or backside-covering will stop you from getting sued, or being threatened with a suit. Threatening suit is a very widely used first step, even if no real infringment of intellectual or real property exists. Ralph Lauren, for example, is famous for this. It's like that urban legend thing about the ghost... Mention the word "Polo" three times and his attorneys will come running. A polo player created a magazine called "Polo" about - can ya guess? - Polo... an internationally organized sport with centuries of tradition... RL and co. sued, and initially won, even though thier claim was ridiculous. The case is doing well in appeal, of course, but it illustrates well that, A) someone can threaten to sue you without a good cause, B) they can even go ahead and sue you without said good cause, and C) they might even prevail if you don't cover your bases well, use capable counsel in courtroom, and keep pushing until you're heard. Not everyone can afford that, so the initial threat of legal action is very often enough to stop someone. Ratteler: "Okay, but James Bond is not a celebretry, he's a fictional charactor and covered by different laws." No... The laws are essentially the same, unless you're confusing infringment issues with slander/libel issues. "James Bond" is intellectual property, just as a celebrity's professional personna is a sort of intellectual property. There are two sorts of legal issues that can come into play over the use of a name or likeness: The first is when your use of the likeness (or name) damages the person in some way, and can be categorized as slander, defamation, or libel... The second is when your use of the likeness (or name) allows you to profit by "trading on" or implying directly or indirectly an association with the name, image, or reputation of the other party, and is typically categorized as infringment. If your art or product doesn't fall into either of these categories, then it's usually safe. This doesn't mean you can't be sued... Only that you'll probably eventually win. For example: If you say "Celebrity Bob is a communist and a wife beater." That's Slanderous and defamatory, and it thus typically matters very much whether he's a real person or a fictional character. (Unless you can prove it's true... then it's just reporting. Use a picture of C.B. or a poser model with the legend "artist's rendition" and you're as safe as it's possible to be in these waters) If you say "Celebrity Bob uses Meelg toothpaste, and so should you!" the laws are essentially identical whether he's a real person, a corporation, or a fictional character. Either you'd better have an aggreement in place, or be ready to prove that he does, in fact, use the product. As for "Click here for nude pitcures of Celebrity Bob!" I could see it going either way... Typically, it's a form of copyright infringment if he's fictional, and slander/defamation if he's real and the pictures aren't, or were taken / sold / licensed in a specific, private setting... Poparazzi style candid photos can be classed as reporting ("C.B. caught skinny dipping in CanCun!!") but there's a lot of grey area and room for legal interpretation. So... If you use a morph like the ones under discussion to create an image, post it on your web page, and say "Look... This looks like Cameron Diaz!" we can almost guarantee that no suit will harm you. We can't guarantee that the lovely MIss Diaz or her agents or assigns won't threaten to sue you, or in fact do so... But we can essentially assure that, properly fought, you can eventually win. If you say, however, "Look! This is Cameron Diaz!" we can almost as easily guarantee that any such suit will prevail against you in the long run. If you accompany the image with "Cameron Diaz endorses X product!" we can all but guarantee that she or her agents will be awarded damages, should a suit occur. So... FWIW, there's my advice. As I understand the potential product under discussion, it's not a tool that specifically allows you to re-create the face of a specific celebrity, but rather a tool that is flexible enough to allow you to create a broad range of faces, some of which "might resemble certain celebrities, as illustrated in reference folder X" So, go ahead and make plans to sell the product, but first... Write a good, solid, strong exculpatory EULA that clearly denies any connection, endorsement, or affiliation with any celebrity or the holders of the intellectual rights to any fictional character, and specifically admonishes the end user against using a specific likeness in a potentially illegal or unethical way. Second... Seek the paid advice of an attorney who specializes in copyright and intellectual property issues, just in case I'm some crazy chick in a shack in northern Montana, and I'm making all this cr@p up. ;-) You're not going to get a risk / no risk answer that you like... There is always a risk... Celebrity Bob could sue you for making a picture of your cousin Louie, if he thinks the picture looks like him instead. Just seek competent counsel and determine the level of risk you're willing to expose yourself to. ~Honor