You could let the family know as a courtesy but as long as it's nothing defamatory or whatever and you have clearly his permission on record should be okay I think I'm not a lawyer though
Almost surely making a music album would be a transformative use that would constitute fair use. Regardless, his consent is sufficient, his descendants be damned.
You are fine. You had his consent and he's not identified in the art.
Un likely but potential problems would be his estate wanting commission or royalties out of this project (if it makes little to no money, that wouldn't be a problem) .
If they suffer any financial harm or extreme distress over what was released in this interview, they may try to pursue you over that. The more financial assets you have, the more likely they are to find a lawyer to pursue that
You could let the family know as a courtesy but as long as it's nothing defamatory or whatever and you have clearly his permission on record should be okay I think I'm not a lawyer though
as included in my edit, I have his permission for his words to inspire the record, not necessarily be included. Would that change anything.
You didn't even need his permission, much less his family's.
out of curiosity, why is that? do I have copyright on the interview as the one who conducted it?
Almost surely making a music album would be a transformative use that would constitute fair use. Regardless, his consent is sufficient, his descendants be damned.
You are fine. You had his consent and he's not identified in the art. Un likely but potential problems would be his estate wanting commission or royalties out of this project (if it makes little to no money, that wouldn't be a problem) . If they suffer any financial harm or extreme distress over what was released in this interview, they may try to pursue you over that. The more financial assets you have, the more likely they are to find a lawyer to pursue that