Comments on: They did what with your postcards?!

By: om joshi

Fri, 02 Mar 2012 11:34:43 +0000

I read with interest the whole story.
I am a poor creator and make Wild life cards and publish, people appriciate these but I do know where to sell. These are interesting for children too. Kindly giude me.
Om

]]>

By: Andy

Thu, 08 Apr 2010 14:50:38 +0000

I’ve only produced one postcard and I designed it in such a way as to suit being framed, with black and gold border and title. If someone wanted to sell one, I can’t see that it would be any of my business unless they are misrepresenting it.
I’m not really sure I can see a problem in the story related above unless there is a clear case of the work be misrepresented in some way (did the postcard include a signature on the image?).

]]>

By: Suzette Fram

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:25:33 +0000

Yes, education is key. Not just for the public in general, but for artists too. I see artists violating copyright laws all the time by using someone else’s photographs that they simply copy rather than using it to learn about the subject and then making their own compositions. Especially with wildlife art. Few artists have actually stood in front of a tiger or elephant to take a photograph so where do they get their reference material? It’s important for everyone to understand these issues.

]]>

By: Angela Fehr

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:10:17 +0000

I think what you said at the end about educating the customer about art and artists is so central to many of the troubles we have in this business. All artists benefit when we work together to express the value of what we do. Unfortunately, many artists are uninformed about copyright law and the ethics of the business.
While this issue may not have been truly illegal, that doesn’t mean it was ethical, and I think the artist’s plans to handle it are exactly right.

]]>

By: Amy Grossman

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 03:37:15 +0000

My “day” job is a development director for a non-profit. What this women did is not ethical. Does the 501c(3 know that they received profits on your art without your knowledge? Did they have a release from you? Even though the persons intent was to benefit the organization-you have control over your images. You also have the right for a tax deduction for an auction item, which by law you must get a receipt for and they must supply to you.
I would write to the development office of the non-profit and ask for a in-kind donation form. I would also advise them to deal with you directly for future items and you would like recognition for your art that they directly benefited from. Can they issue a press release to thank you for the auction items.
I would not let this women continue to use your cards. As a an artist we all want our work out in the public but not in an this manner

]]>

By: Ann Teliczan

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:18:32 +0000

This reminds me of two separate situations that happened to me. In the first one, I was shopping at one of my favorite gift shops in Geneva, IL and noticed there was a small frame for sale with a image that looked exactly like one of my prints. I took it to the store owner and she told me that she had done this. She said that liked my work so much, she cut it out of an invitation to an art show for me and replaced the photo that came with the frame with my work.
The second situation I had like this was when my neighbor came back from a women’s retreat up north with about 30 attendees and proudly showed me the folder that was handed out. The guest lecturer had taken postcard invitations to one of my solo exhibitions and pasted it to the cover of all of the folders. Without contacting me or asking my permission.
In the first case, I considered this totally unacceptable, but in the second case, I would have at least appreciated a request. I would have probably been okay with it, if they had included information about where to purchase my work and said that the cover art was courtesy of the artist Ann Teliczan.

]]>

By: Lainie

Sun, 07 Feb 2010 23:41:16 +0000

why are women always so worried about being nonthreatening and gentle? The woman was a professional, and if she doesn’t know that she violated both professional courtesies and ethics and, possibly, copyright law, she should. I don’t think you do her any favors by being manipulative, and the artist doesn’t do herself any favors by being so fearful about just straight-out telling her it wasn’t okay. I’m not advocating meanness, but it would be so refreshing to see someone advise directness and honesty that isn’t couched in all this nonsense.

]]>

By: Maureen

Sun, 07 Feb 2010 22:25:07 +0000

The law for copyrighting an image changed in 1991. I have seen the actual documents from Washington. The law is, that by the meer fact that the art was created, makes it automatically copyrighted.

]]>

By: Matthew Scarlett

Sun, 07 Feb 2010 21:16:41 +0000

Surely this ‘buyer’ knew full well what she was doing. the whole story sounds iffy at best, however the above comment makes a lot of sense.

]]>

By: Patrice Federspiel

Sun, 07 Feb 2010 16:11:39 +0000

Jen could offer to sign some of the postcards, thus making them more valuable in the eyes of potential buyers, possibly increasing the price the nonprofit can ask, and helping to ensure her name is prominently included on the framed postcards.

]]>