Well in the strictest sense..yes. However for the family it is a fine line. On one hand the family has to make sure that the name isn't being used in a way that degrades the "legacy" of the person. Also they have to decide how much money can/will be made if the name isn't protected and if it is protected. They then have to weigh them against each other. Look at it this way..let's say the family says "all items (cars,shirts,hats, web sites..) that have the name "Dick Harrell": must be licensed through us." What happens to any legacy? On one hand the family might run the risk of a tarnished legacy (through "outsiders' misuse) or not "reaping" the financial rewards of the name. However if they take complete control of the name and its' usage, they could be preceived as "greedy' and of "hyjacking" history, and any perceived "legacy" dies as a result.

Putting everything into perspective..Go to the drag strips today and ask teenagers, hell even 30 year olds (which are the future of car collecting and of keeping whatever "legacy" alive) who Dick Harrell is? How many will be able to say?? Go to a basketball court in BFE..ask a kid (even one 6 or 7) who MJ is? Get the point... I think too many people are loosing sight of the bigger picture here.

The correct answer to all of this is that both sides (the families and the owners/marketers) need each other...That is the family can't keep any legacy alive without someone using the products and getting them exposure to the masses (espcially since they don't even own the things by which the name is recognizable in the first place). Conversly without the families support through documenting and attending functions the owners of the cars loose out as well. Just my take on it.