Art Biz Blog

Don’t leave your artwork without a piece of paper

Let’s say you take your work to a venue (gallery, home, business, etc.) because someone has asked to see it in person. After you arrive, you’re asked to leave your art at the venue so that other people can see it. It’s fine to do this as long as you have something in writing.

Image ©Jeannette Cuevas, Triple Crown.

Always get your art business transactions in writing! In this scenario, while you didn’t exchange money, you did agree to leave a valuable asset in the care of someone else.

The piece of paper (which might be called a loan agreement) you draw up should state your name, the title, dimensions, and value of each piece you’re leaving. Your agreement should also be clear that you retain ownership and copyright and that the venue agrees to insure the work while they have it in their possession. The art should not leave that venue without your written consent. It would be terrific if you have a photo printout of it--either attached to the document or printed on the same page.

You could also add a schedule for pickup--the deadline or date when you would like to retrieve the work.

Include a space on the document for both parties to sign.

Consider creating this document ahead of time and taking two copies with you so that you don’t have to hunt down a copy machine. You would then have two originals--one for you and one for the borrower.

What else am I forgetting?

(Note: Please consult with an attorney for your specific situation.)

Learn how to license your art--from the comfort of your own home

“Hot Trends in Art Licensing & the PR Tactics to Turn Up the Heat!”
Presenters: Jeanette Smith, J’net Smith Inc. and Regina Cooper, freelance editor/PR consultant
Date: April 30th, 2009
Time: 10:30 am to 12:30 pm (Pacific Standard Time)
Price: $60.00

For details and information on a variety of upcoming licensing classes you can take from wherever you are in the world, click on Continue Reading.

If you're interested in licensing your art, read on

I'm a little late sharing this information with you, but if you're interested in licensing your art, this is a terrific opportunity to learn about licensing from the comfort of your own home.

This four-part series of classes begin next Wednesday, but special pricing is available until Sunday. It is being presented by Jeanette Smith, the powerful face behind the Dilbert™ brand.

The Professional Creators' Licensing Series

Introduction to Art Licensing—Creating Continuous Cash Flow
Wednesday, March 4th, 2009 — 11:00 am -12:30 pm PST  $20
Topics include: What exactly is licensing and how does it work l Types of licensing l What you MUST know about the retail marketplace BEFORE you start l Protecting your rights l Royalty rates  l Artist requirements l Agent services l and much more!

NOTE: Special $100 Complete Four Class Series pricing available only until March 1st.  If you want the special pricing, sign up for PCLS-5, which is the entire four-class series, rather than purchasing each class separately. This is my affiliate link for all four programs.

For more details, click on "Continue Reading."

Ethics and using other people’s photographs

Monday’s Art Marketing Action newsletter about artist ethics created a stir in some circles. William Pilch took issue with this:

1. Don’t copy someone else’s art and try to pass it off as your own. Painting directly from photographs that were taken by someone else is not only unethical, it’s a copyright violation.

What I should have said is:

1. Don’t copy someone else’s art and try to pass it off as your own. Painting directly from photographs that were taken by someone else is not only unethical, it might be a copyright violation.

William was right that I should have double checked on my wording before issuing the newsletter. So I consulted with attorney Kevin Houchin to get the skinny. He says this.

If the photograph is not in the public domain, and the painting does not add substantial additional artistic expression (basically the difference between “copying” and “inspiration”) then the painting is a derivative work from the photo. If the painter does not own the photo, or does not have permission, then we’re looking at a possible copyright infringement.

It’s kind of a gut check on the copying v. inspiration, and it’s important to note that it’s not the “subjective” intention of the painter, but rather the opinion of a (an artistically challenged) Judge or Jury that will make that call on if there is enough additional artistic expression.

There’s no % or other objective standard. It’s case-by-case.

Bottom line: Ethically, it's always best to use your own photos or to get permission to use someone else's. Legally, it's up to a judge or jury.

Image ©William Pilch, Along the Canyon Walls.

The Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008

I have been strangely silent on the Orphan Works Act--the piece of legislation that passed the Senate by unanimous consent (!--not even a record to know how your Senator voted). I have not been silent with my Congressman and Senator. I have voiced my opposition to the Act to both of them.

As a former U.S. Senate staffperson, I know there are many subtleties in a piece of legislation and many changes made when it makes it to a joint committee (House and Senate members combined) to work out differences. I just haven't felt knowledgeable enough to carry the standard for this issue. I'm glad others have done so. I've heard from lots and lots of you and I'm mostly writing to leave a space for your comments.

As I understand it, the House has its own version, but is also considering the Senate version. If you are so inclined, now is the time to (1) voice your opposition to both to your Congressman, (2) voice your opposition to one version, or (3) voice your support. You can find information and take action here.

I must also study the second bill that passed the Senate AND then immediately passed the House right after the Orphan Works Act: Enforcement of Intellectual Property Act of 2008, which I'm just guessing (without having done any research) was written and passed to appease those opposed to OWA. If you have a good resource on this and how it plays with the whole story, please leave a link in the comments below. I think it's important to know what kind of effect this might have if and when OWA becomes law.

It has been incredibly interesting to watch how this issue has galvanized artists. I hope the spirit isn't lost and that you continue to work together on issues of major import. In particular, I'd like to see artists become strong advocates for improved health care--something that affects most working artists in America today.

Art licensing workshops in San Francisco and New York this fall

Art licensing expert Cheryl Phelps, who has been giving workshops since 2000, is announcing fall workshops in San Francisco and New York City.

              THE "GREETING CARD, LICENSING & ART BIZ" WORKSHOP
              One Jam Packed Day Full of Info and Inspiration!

               San Francisco, CA
               Saturday October 25, 2008

               New York, NY
               Saturday Nov 8, 2008

Click on "Continue Reading" for all of the juicy details.

If you're interested in licensing some designs

This came to my inbox.

LICENSE YOUR ART FOR JEWELRY
Earn Extra Cash While Keeping All Rights To Your Work

Bite Size Jewelry is looking for good artists, designers, illustrators, and photographers to feature their work on an interesting, new type of jewelry they call "scrabble pendants."  These unique accessories are hand-made from reclaimed wooden "Scrabble" game tiles, and coated with a jewelry-grade, high-gloss resin.  Each pendant is tiny, measuring about .75 x .75" square, and features a unique design or miniature work of art on one side, with the "Scrabble" game lettering on the other.  According to Jed and Brandy Steen, the young couple starting the new venture, these petite works of art are becoming very popular!

Bite Size Jewelry is offering royalty payments through a non-exclusive licensing agreement to artists who send in their designs.  This means that all artists who participate will maintain all rights to their work, while earning $1.00 on every item sold at retail with their design, and $0.50 for wholesale.

Interested artists should read the agreement on the Bite Size Jewelry blog. And send in their artwork to art@bitesizejewelry.com

This is an easy new venue for artists to earn "extra cash" on their designs, without giving away any rights. For more information you may also contact Jed or Brandy at info@bitesizejewelry.com

Taking care of art while it's in someone else's hands

Okay, first I read this article about rip-off auctions on cruises. Amazing! I guess I'm slightly amazed that people on a cruise buy $30,000 art at an auction. But I'm flabbergasted that naive bidders have no problem dropping $30,000--on "fine art" they know nothing about. And I'm dumbfounded that an auction house would tell bidders that the values are 5x what they actually are.

That led me to the Fine Art Registry, which I confess I've never visited. Great site! I got caught up in this article: Gallery Damage to Consigned Work. Yikes! Can you imagine leaving a piece of art and having the gallery cut out a square (to be tested) without your consent? Artists, beware! This is why you need to put everything in writing. Which led me to . . .

The Andenken Gallery site. It's here in Denver and they post their contracts online (click on PDFs in the left column). Also, don't forget about the wonderful Professional Guidelines from the Society of North American Goldsmiths. They have a model consignment contract under Contracts.

When certificates of authenticity are necessary

Laura Milnor Iverson mentioned on Monday’s post something about California law and Certificates of Authenticity. She was right--partially. California law does require COAs, but only with the sale of multiples or fine prints.

This site, which says several other states have similar laws, outlines the guidelines for the use of COAs with respect to the sale of multiples and fine art prints in California.

Please note that I am not an attorney. If you are selling multiples, you’d better look into your state laws to see if COAs are required with each sale.

Web site design is copyrighted, too

This week I found out that the entire Web site design of one of my subscribers had been copied by another artist. Not just the look and feel, but the code! It looked identical except for the art. Apparently, the artist was innocent and it was her lazy designer's fault. But this is bad mojo. You don't copy someone else's Web site design! It's copyrighted just like your art is.

Lessons to be learned:

--The offending site was discovered because the artist whose site was copied was paying attention to his stats and noticed something fishy that took him to that site.

--Stay on top of your designers. Where are their ideas coming from? And are they charging you for stealing someone else's ideas?!

--React with class. I heard about this only second-hand, but from what I understand, both the artist who was ripped off and the artist who unknowingly ripped him off responded professionally. The offending site was taken down immediately.