If this is not the case then I will begin making and selling Beatles T-shirts tomorrow.
Oh, what the hell...I'll buy a Beatles shirt.

Actually the photograph should be under copyright as per Australian law...
This site may or may not be a bit helpful in terms of copyright infringement.
http://www.copyright.org.au/information/cit014/wp0125 "A work is protected automatically from the time it is first written down or recorded in some way, provided it has resulted from its creator’s skill and effort and is not simply copied from another work. For example, as soon as a poem is written, or a song is recorded, it is protected.
Australian copyright works are protected in most other countries, and copyright works from most other countries are protected in Australia."
By looking at the site it seems as though Australian copyright law is pretty similar to the laws that we have in effect in the US. A photograph as a creative work is just automatically under copyright by the fact that it was created (fixed) and is an original piece.
The only sticking point here is who
actually has the rights to that image. If it was photographed by a freelance photographer they would own the image copyright but there could be another party who has rights to license said image. Plus the original owner of the copyright might have transferred it as well. Plus you can have multiple owners, etc. etc. etc.
Eeeesh, hope this helps a bit. My brain hurts now, back to lurking.
-Robin