My father was an author who died in NY in 1973, intestate, my mother and he were still married, she became executor by default. My uncle paid his debts and no attorney was hired, his estate was never probated, I assume the probate period has long since expired per NY law. All posthumous contracts pertaining to his books' rights have named the copyright owner as "the estate of (his name)." My mother died recently, with a will appointing me executor. My mother's will makes no mention of his estate nor the copyrights, but does leave all her property to her three children, per stirpes.
There's a new offer pending at this moment, waiting to hear from me what entity or name(s) to which the contract should be written. I am seeking a new entertainment lawyer, but would like to avoid hiring estate council if I can make this decision properly informed on my own.
What are the benefits of continuing to refer to my late father's IP as the property of his estate? In actuality, it would have been inherited by his spouse per NY laws of intestate succession, and now by her heirs per her will, would it not? If his estate receives income, then the estate is still in probate, is it not?--and will remain so until the copyrights expire? It seems much simpler to me to have future contracts written in the heirs' names, or a partnership we form. Then, they can pay income taxes on the proceeds, for instance, instead of needing to file on the estate's behalf, etc. Yet, it seems to be the standard of the literary industry to treat late artists' copyrights as property of literary estates.
I know this question applies to both estate and IP law, but I posted it here, first at least. Any informed help is appreciated.

