headsup on artist's rights

[aimeekitty]

Link to Drawn.CA (which has links to all relevant information.

So. basically, some shady company (probably in china), grabbed a bunch of 72 dpi illustrations off the internet (and interviews and text, etc...) and slapped them together into a big artbook. (WITHOUT PERMISSION of course) and has been selling these books... they're actually in stores. The artists who had their work stolen are having a very hard time finding any solid information on the company who made the book, or getting any legal recourse.

As a little added information, I've had this happen to me to, not with my artwork but with my doll photos. More than once they've been taken for use in a book or stickers or bags or whatever. (and I'm just a casual doll photographer! I'm sure more accomplished folks get stolen even more often!)

Makes you want to take all your work down, huh? I won't, but I might seriously reconsider the size of the watermark on my images. :\ I've NEVER been a fan of big watermarks, I don't like to mar the artwork and irritate the viewer like that, but this is just ridiculous. I'll have to give it some thought.

Comments

[actionflakes.livejournal.com]

Wow. That's pretty ballsy. They ripped off some big names in the toy community. :C

And here I thought kids claiming my work on Gaia was bad.

[kayjkay.livejournal.com]

That's just...asinine. Ugh. I hope they get the book pulled, and have the artists compensated. Yeah I know, fat chance eh? *sigh*

[april-art.livejournal.com]

Usually... if the files are low-res enough, they shouldn't be good enough for print...

OR one can try to tastefully, but obviously watermark... I've seen some that are smack dab in the middle, but still allow you to see the work.

It's sad, but there's a LOT of theft out there... It's just something everyone needs to do unless they don't mind their images being stolen and used.

[aimeekitty.livejournal.com]

if you have some examples of "acceptable" watermarks, I'm all ears!

yeah, all my stuff is always 72 dpi, and so was these guys, and you'd THINK that would deter them, but it doesn't deter them "enough"

[kittytreats.livejournal.com]

Wow I'm surprised that's in stores. I hope the person who did all the interviews gets help. Well it's good to know it hasn't popped up on Amazon *LOL* Almost every single DA journal on my friends list keep complaining about the orphans work thing.. it's bugging the crap out of me because no one is citing any information >.>

[miss-jane.livejournal.com]

The best way to leave a watermark, is, unfortunately, right smack dab in the middle. However, you can play with the opacity of the type in Photoshop so that it is opaque enough for the viewers to see but not to "ruin" the drawing.

It's for your own protection. If someone out there can do stuff like this, then I wouldn't mind at all seeing a watermark on your work. I'd completely understand!

[uniformgrey.livejournal.com]

I read all about this nonsense yesturday and its unbelievable the gall that some people have like no one would find out. I hope the ones responsible (both the publishing complany and the nit who swipped) get their collective ass handed to them somehow.

[enigmadoll.livejournal.com]

This makes me sick to my stomach! I've had my photos taken and distributed without my permission but it was never for profit. A book of stolen works is just beyond belief!

I think the watermark might be a really good idea. *sigh*

[kaijou-akai.livejournal.com]

I agree with the above comments, a watermark placed directly over the artwork is the safest route to go. I usually make my watermark about 10-15% opacity and adjust the layer said watermark is on to either "Overlay" or "Multiply" (Makes the artwork easy to see, while the watermark is still visible enough).

[jinyo.livejournal.com]

Damn, that is messed up!
It shouldn't be that impossible to track down the publisher of the book. The book stores had to order it from a distributor, and the distributor had to get it from a publisher, who had to have contact with the author.

It should be possible to sue any of those parties, though the best targets would be the distributor and publisher.

This highlights the importance of registering the copyright on your work. If your copyright is NOT registered, you can sue the infringer, but you can only get "actual damages," which would be their profits and/or whatever profits you lost due to their actions. Both of those amounts *could* be difficult to prove in court. Plus you'd have to hire a lawyer to take care of it for you, which would be expensive, and you'd be relying on the less-than-100% chance of winning money from the infringer in order to compensate you for the money you pay the lawyer.

If your copyright IS registered, you can sue for both "actual damages" AND "statutory damages," which is a set fee of hundreds or thousands of dollars you can get for each of your artworks they stole, ON TOP OF whatever "actual damages" you can prove. And since the "statutory damages" ensure that you will get a decent amount of money even if your "actual damages" are zero, you will have a much easier time getting a lawyer to work for you on *contingency.* That means they won't charge you any money up front, and they will only get paid if you win (usually like one-third to one-half of your winning amount).

That will also give you an idea of whether you have a case that could be won in court. Because a lawyer working on contingency will only take cases he is pretty certain will be winners.

Although it seems like a pain in the ass to register a copyright on each of the many many pieces of art you create, I think you should be able to register a bunch of pieces as a collection, like one sketchbook of work. The only kicker is, you have to register the entire completed collection before you "publish" any of the sketches, or at the very least within three months after "publishing". "Publishing" includes posting on the internet in your LJ or DA.

To sum it all up:
Gotta register the whole thing before posting any part of it, in order to get the "statutory damages."
"Statutory damages" are the key to getting a lawyer.
Registering your copyright is the key to getting "statutory damages."

I'm sure you know all this stuff already, but I thought some of your readers might not.

More info from the gub'mint: http://copyright.gov/

PS: If you use some recurring characters in your art, it may be worth the extra expense of registering each of your characters individually, so you have grounds to sue for the use of your characters. This would protect you from unauthorized use of your characters regardless of whether they steal your actual artwork.

[mattymorgs.livejournal.com]

Woah what the heck? China steals and pirates stuff?! ∑O_O

It is sad, though, and what's worse is that their government only perpetuates this sort of thing. China is to Asia as Mexico is to North America to put it in a bit of a broad analogy.