I was recently in a disappointing art fair (sales were very low and there was little to no advertising of the art fair). I do paintings for art fairs that I consider fine art and I was a part of this art fair because it supposedly emphasized art, not crafts. The ethical problem I encountered at this art fair was what a nearby artist was selling. She had prints of Warhol paintings attached to blocks of wood and she was selling them, quite a few of them.... doing very well. She had other other people's paintings and designed glued on other items too. Aren't the paintings of other artists, even dead artists, under some sort of copyright that would prevent that from being legal? I'm not sure about copyright law, which is why I asked, but I'm pretty sure if I sold art by someone else as my own stuff I'd feel bad about it, not thrilled, as she was feeling.
When it was over I congratulated her on her sales which were obviously great, and she said "we artists all have to get more commercial". Something I really don't believe in, but I was appalled that she considers taking other people's art and designs and attributing them into her own products as her being a more "commercial" artist. Stealing isn't being commercial!
I didn't mention this to the organizers of the art fair but now I think maybe I should have... but what good would it have done? I'm interested if other artists have ever seen this at art fairs and if you consider it an acceptable business practice. If it's considered acceptable, wow, the things I could sell . . . . .
Replies
Time to apply to better shows. I would have gotten crap like that thrown out, and if it were allowed, I would have thrown myself out.
Larry Berman
Speeding is also illegal, but yet people do it everyday. Copyright protects Warhol's images unless they are used to the point where it is not recognized. But really it takes someone to catch them to stop them. There was an artist in Mesa, AZ that did Disney characters in sexy poses and sexual acts. He did this for a while and started to gain recognition and ended up with gallery representation. Years later Disney found out and sued him, he's no longer selling art. It's really up to the show to stop allowing this and up to fine artists to research and stay away from these craft shows that call themselves an art show!
Back to the original post, go ahead and blow the whistle. Stomp your feet and write angry emails, forward them to the city board, contact the directors, have a meeting with the jurors who let the artist in, contact the Warhol foundation, provide photos, video footage of the crime, research the latest revision of the copyright law and research the semantics of how clauses of the law are worded. In other words knock yourself out to this noble cause.
You will be the big winner in the end right?
The show director will love to have you back. You will be admired and thanked by every party involved. Your sales of your art will increase once patrons know that you worked for a solid two months trying to shut down the booth three doors down. Everyone will suddenly find your art more appealing with one less booth to compete with the following year.
Or.
Not apply to that crappy ass flea market the following year and go on with your life.
Thomas, I don't know why you are imagining that I'm angry and stomping my feet and all of that... that's ridiculous. Somehow you took my discussion and turned it into an attack on me personally, and I don't appreciate it. I'm done with this topic.
Shelly.... Tom was making a point and his approach felt very personal so you missed it.
By complaining you make a lot of enemies and don't win the war. It is easier to move on and find a better run show. Additionally, the rights to an image all have a level that is directly correlated to the fees involved in filing and bringing an lawsuit. Just because someone owns the rights doesn't mean they have the money to defend them.
Of course well behaved women rarely make history, and I am more of a history maker myself. I would weigh this one. It is worth it to blow that whistle? Or is it worth it to move on?
Etsy has this going on often. People point it out to those who do it when they post on the forum, and the person who is using copyrighted work typically acts dumb about it.
I can print a picture of Martin Luther King's face and place it in a "hoody" to show the connection Trayvon Martin had to the black movement, and sell it all day. But did I take the photo of Martin Luther King's face? Nope. Some other photographer did that... But isn't that stealing "that photographers" image?? He took the picture, right? I doubt it. I'm pretty sure most judges will side with the artist who is manipulating the image.
Pop culture and current icons are used all the time by everyone. I can create a Facebook meme of Donald trump and write a funny slogan and it's all mine. I can print it on t shirts or anything I want.
I agree that this doesn't seem like fine art and should not be juried into shows with, but calling and complaining to the promoter "after a show has already taken place" will only make you look like a cantankerous old pill. If the show sucks, just move on and let them keep their flea market status.
Thomas, the King family will not let you do that, they own the rights to all MLK images and even his speeches so you cannot legally sell anything with his image or words on it.
Yes the photographer owns some rights to the image too, see the case of the Obama "Hope" poster and Shepard Fairey, the artist who did that poster, who was sued by the photographer. I believe he lost that case.
See this article...
Obama ‘Hope’ poster artist dodges jail time, socked with community ...
Shepard Fairey, 42, apologized to the Associated Press as he's sentenced to 300 hours of community service.....
Not true. The photographer owns the copyright as long as Disney owns the copyrights to the images of their characters. The more famous the images, the more aggressive the photographers will be to protect their images.
There was a case a few years ago where someone scanned a Miles Davis album cover and used the image of Miles Davis. Cost him $30,000 to settle with Jay Maisel, the original photographer. Peter B. Kaplan makes more money from lawsuits than he does from taking pictures at this point in his life. He was a Time Life photographer and was the official photographer for the Empire State Building.
Bottom line is unless you are an intellectual property attorney, never give someone advice to use someone else's copyrighted images.
If I were a juror, I'd never let copyright infringement get accepted.
Larry Berman
http://BermanGraphics.com
412-401-8100
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next