Beautiful Gogos up for auction at Heritage

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
captainmarvel1957		#21	[-]
(06/30/08 4:43 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Thanks, Count. But, was I right about the Three Stooges case?
Count Gamula		#22	[-]
(06/30/08 5:30 PM) Burgomaster Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	I'm not really familiar with that case. The law does seem to lean heavily toward the artist's side these days concerning rights to images. But I don't see how someone could legally sell a Three Stooges t-shirt without the okay from the Stooges rightsholders whether they created the image themselves or not. There are gray areas in all this can can get pretty sticky. Kerry Gammill Last Edited By: Count Gamula 06/30/08 5:33 PM. Edited 1 times.
gjpatry		#23	[-]
(06/30/08 7:16 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	When I purchased the Ygor art from the art house they didn't mention anything about copyright law with respect to the painting. Is that assumed or does the sale need to explicitly say that ownership is for the original art and not for any subsequent reproduction? I purchased it from Illustration House in NYC and I would have thought they would have mentioned that to me but perhaps it's general knowledge for most folks who deal in art.
captainmarvel1957		#24	[-]
(06/30/08 8:00 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Thanks, Count. gipatry, Frank and the Count are right. You may own the piece of art, but you don't have any right to exploit it past your ownership. When I was a kid back in the 1970's I went to some comic book conventions and bought some original art. I took them to school and showed them to my art teacher. At the time there was a portfolio of Jack Kirby art that was being sold. I commented to my art teacher that if I could get three or four more pieces by each of the artists that I had bought work from I could do the same thing, release a portfolio. He was a pretty smart fellow, had several copyrights on collapsable hunting bows that he had designed with pulley systems built into them. He explained to me that just because you own a piece of an artist's work it doesn't give you the right to exploit that work for profit. You have only purchased the tangible property, the artwork, and not the intellectual property that it took to create it. In other words, the artist's intellectual property is his and his alone to exploit on the open market.
Carl Eyesnheart		#25	[-]
(06/30/08 11:06 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	This is quite fascinating. Let me get this straight, I run a music 'zine, Sonic Ruin (link in my signature...ha), and if I commission a piece from an artist for the cover, I do NOT have the right to do anything with that piece outside of the cover? But the artist, that I paid for the commission, can do as he/she pleases? This is all a moot point for me in particular, as the artist I have doing the cover I told beforehand that I only want it for the cover and that he is able to do anything he chooses with it. So without my knowing I was agreeing with the law. But I just want to make sure I am getting this all right. It seems that the law backs the graphic artist in the ways it should also protect the music artist. My fanzine all about Rock N Roll: www.sonicruin.com
captainmarvel1957		#26	[-]
(06/30/08 11:54 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	If you commission the piece you would have to spell out in advance what you expected your ownership of the piece to entail. If you want to own the piece outright for exploitation in all media in perpetuity that would have to be spelled out. Otherwise, I believe the term would be the publishing of the piece only. I think that's referred to as "serial rights" or "first serial rights." Like, most contracts for writers stipulate what rights are involved in publishing a piece. If a writer does a regular column for Rolling Stone and becomes popular and it is decided, for example, that a collection of his columns might make a good trade paperback who owns the rights? What if both Rolling Stone and the author decide to do just that at the same time? Unless Rolling Stone paid the author for that right as part of their initial contract then the author is the only person who can authorize the republication of his work.
Count Gamula		#27	[-]
(07/01/08 2:29 PM) Burgomaster Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Many artists, by nature, are not good businessmen so sometimes what rights are included with their art is unclear because they haven't made it clear to the buyer. There are several legal guides for artists to help them negotiate the specific rights that are included in a sale and know how to charge accordingly. For a piece commissioned for publication, sometimes the artists is paid only once because the publisher bought all rights. Sometimes the artist is paid an additional fee every time the art is re-printed. It all depends on the deal made between the artists and the buyer. As a comics artist, I own many pieces of my own art that I don't own the rights to. As for the Gogos piece, sorry, but art sold at an auction house like Illustration House is not going to include all rights to the art. You're buying a physical piece of original art for your collection, not an illustration to be put used commercially. I would assume you received some paperwork or a receipt with some fine print containing a disclaimer stating that no rights were given or inferred in the sale. Kerry Gammill Last Edited By: Count Gamula 07/01/08 2:38 PM. Edited 3 times.
HalLane		#28	[-]
(07/05/08 9:10 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	I used to sell my own art at conventions, via auction or whatever. As sometimes it was camera ready line art, some customers might have an eye toward using it in fanzines, prozines or whatever, so I always needed to specify if publication rights were included, and to reflect that accordingly in the quick sale prices. I'm sure our own Frank Dietz would have some practical insight to offer in such matters.
sielskim		#29	[-]
(07/23/08 8:22 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Very intersting thread on reproduction an artistic rights. I commissioned two works from Basil earlier this decade, one came with a contract regarding all limitations of use and the other did not. However, at this point, I wonder if it makes sense to have Basil generate a contract for second piece. I realize that the painting cannot be used for any type of commercial purpose, but in the event something would happen to me it'd sure be good that my heirs have the facts. At this point in time, some 6 years later, do you think a contract could be made or is it after the fact?
Jeff Preston		#30	[-]
(07/25/08 2:49 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	The contract you received is merely stating what is already a given. As Kerry said you were purchasing a piece of art , not it's commercial use. A second contact is really not necessary because by copyright law Basil is already covered, but to clarify things for you and your heirs it might not be a bad idea. Rights protecting artists are not wide spread Intel and you'd be surprised just how many artist are also unaware. Just because you buy a CD that doesn't mean you "own" the songs, you can just listen and enjoy. Right now we artists are fighting the "Orphan Works Bill" which would strip us of many of our rights...it ain't pretty.
sielskim		#31	[-]
(07/25/08 10:36 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Hi Jeff - thanks for the reply. I think I'm more concerned about the passing of my collection and artwork. It's great that the artists rights are covered, but a written contract, even after the fact, seems that it might be worthwhile. In a Heritage Magazine recently, I read this horrible story about how the government confiscated a Picaso painting from an owner who had originally purchased it in the 1970s until ownership could be verified - yikes I thought! My 2 paintings bear very close resemblance to 2 pieces done in the 60s/70s. These were omitted in the Art of Basil Gogos book for obvious reasons. The Picaso story got me thinking I should have more documentation. Cheers, Mark
M F Berry		#32	[-]
(07/28/08 11:36 AM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	This is utterly hypothetical at this point, but a question occurred to me while reading this fascinating thread and I thought I'd post it while so much expertise is present. Say I bought an original "classic monster" themed painting, by Gogos, or you, Frank, or anybody. I'm going to be setting up a table at a monster convention, hawking/selling something that's obviously monster-related (otherwise I wouldn't be selling it at such a convention), but that has nothing directly to do with the painting, and does not contain any reproductions or representations of the painting. I bring my beautiful original monster painting with me, and set it on an easel next to my table. I'm not charging anyone anything to look at it; I'm just simply using it as an eye-catching lure to get people to come to my table. Okay ... or not?
Count Gamula		#33	[-]
(08/01/08 12:00 PM) Burgomaster Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	As far as I know there's nothing wrong with displaying a piece of art anywhere you want. It's when you reproduce the art that you have to be concerned about copyright infringement. "Copyright" is literally the right to copy. Kerry Gammill
sketchyfrank		#34	[-]
(08/01/08 12:49 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Kerry's right. Mark, let's say that you had bought this original pencil drawing from me: You then had it framed and brought it with you to Wonderfest or some other convention where you had a table and were selling copies of THE DINOSAUR FILMOGRAPHY. Displaying the piece as way to lure in potential customers would be fine. But, if you were to make prints of that piece and started selling them, either there at the con or on eBay, that would infringement of copyright. Or if you used that image in your book without expressed permission, that would also be a no-no. Just yesterday I had to send a letter of permission to McFarland & Company, to grant them one-time use of 15 images created for Bill Warren's revised KEEP WATCHING THE SKIES. Even though Bill paid for the original drawings, McFarland needed expressed permission from me to publish them in the book, because I still retain the rights to the images. Frank Dietz www.sketchythings.com
M F Berry		#35	[-]
(08/01/08 2:36 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Thanks very much, Frank and Kerry, for the great input. What you said is pretty much what I thought, but it's great to hear it from you and know for certain. Just FYI, the reason this question occurred to me ... at WonderFest -- the first year that Joe DeVito attended as a guest -- Dave Conover delightfully set me up with a table full of Dinosaur Filmographys in the exhibit room, right next to where Joe had all his amazing stuff. Joe had brought along ten or twelve original oil paintings done for his great book, Kong: King of Skull Island, including the huge master painting that adorns the cover. For two days, I'd sit at our table and watch people pass the doorway, then a second later reappear, leaning backward to crane their necks and peek back around the door frame and get a better look at Joe's art that they had just glimpsed in passing. Then of course, they'd have to come on in, and come over, and see it all up close! I am convinced that I sold and signed at least eight or ten books that weekend simply because of people being drawn over by Joe's amazing Kong and dinosaur oils. Well, I mean they liked my book once they saw it, but they likely would never have ambled over had they not been drawn in by Joe's work. Wow, I was signing books, I got to share a table with and get to know Joe DeVito, and I had the original Land of the Lost "Grumpy" stop-motion puppet about ten feet from me ... [sigh] ... that was a good weekend! And ... that's also where I met David Hedison, too! And, Frank ... I can't tell you how much I wish I had bought that absolutely gorgeous dinosaur drawing from you, and had it on my wall right now ... oh, man. Ah well, at least I have my wonderful Ardath Bey ...

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

Beautiful Gogos up for auction at Heritage

Quick Reply