Question about art theft in a book

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

I have a question about art theft outside the realm of the internet. I have a little game I play in bookstores where I pick up new books and pick out as many altered images I recognize as possible. These images always have the original signatures removed and are presented as wholly new works, without credit listed anywhere in the book.

Several times now I've seen art that I recognize off of deviantart or art belonging to artists I recognize.

My question is whether or not it would be helpful to mention the companies and books that do this here, in case other artists want to see if they recognize their own art being used? And should I contact the original artists? Obviously I don't know for sure that they are using the images without permission, but I would venture to say that they do not, for the most part.

So in general, when you see theft in the "outside world" like that, is it worthwhile to take note of it and contact the original artists? Is there anything that can actually be done?

Thanks for any advice.

Comments

[tania.livejournal.com]

Out of curiosity, what kind of books are these?

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry, that would've been good information to include eh? :)

For the most part these are picture books about fantasy creatures. Mostly I've noticed it with dragon art. Most recently, I've seen Deligaris' work (his red dragon) being used in a children's book about dragons. The image really stands out against the background they slapped it on and does not match any of the other artwork. (http://deligaris.deviantart.com/) ()

[lindblut.livejournal.com]

These are sold for money, no? Then I guess it would be helpfull if you'd contact the original artists about them c:

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

True enough :3 I've seen people saying that it's not worth the effort to try and solve art theft outside of the internet, because the the inevitable legal issues, and wasn't sure how true that was. Thanks though, I'm inclined to agree with you.

[aaaamory.livejournal.com]

It's a good idea to just tell people. As a rule, try not to decide anything for someone without giving them an opportunity to decide for themselves. By doing that the opportunity is taken away from them (It's like that line, "I didn't ask you because you would have said no." "I could have said yes but you didn't give me the chance."). To them it might totally be worth it. You can never pretend to know anything about anyone. There are resources for artists who would otherwise have no power and anyone who you might have decided wouldn't be able to do anything might know how to use them.

This comment isn't necessarily for you but mostly for folks who usually tend to become skeptical about notifying people about stuff that's going on with their stuff.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

*nods* That's very true, thanks for pointing that out. I guess I have a slight fear that they'll feel I'm bothering them but you really are right, it isn't fair of me to decide that for them. Thanks, much appreciated :)

[furinari.livejournal.com]

On top of that we have countless Klaxon "fans" screaming "ZOMG ART THEFT" when the artist in question should be advocating himself/herself. Those fans just make the artist look foolish, and really make themselves look foolish, too.

So it's best to just let the artist know.

[kuwaizair.livejournal.com]

and yet the'd slam you for using something you scanned out of a book to put on Myspace.

how ironic

[oolong.livejournal.com]

they won't necessarily be able to do anything about it, but i would contact the artist anyway. on the chance that the publisher has integrity and their in-house artist was proved to copy or trace stuff, at the very least that person might get fired even if the book isn't pulled or the original artist receive compensation

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Hmm, makes sense. That's my main worry about contacting artists -- that they won't be able to do anything with the knowledge. But thanks, I guess if nothing else they'd be able to try. I'll have to start writing down titles, authors and publishing companies.

[thaily.livejournal.com]

Actually, the artist can take legal action.
Though it usually doesn't go that fact, an angry letter from the artist's lawyer will usually make publishers pay up the money they owe the artists for using their copyrighted material.

[oolong.livejournal.com]

that's what i mean, though. if an angry letter DOESN'T end up being enough, most artists don't have the time or means to litigate. it's well worth a try though, which is what i was advising the OP.

[hypsidium.livejournal.com]

Would it be possible to do class action since it would involve a lot of people, though?

[celestialwolfen.livejournal.com]

Sadly theft is quite common in the artist world (and just about anywhere now a days)
I doubt posting the names of the companies will do little.
Unless the image or character is actually legally copyrighted it's nontechnically free reign.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Well no, it's not free reign. :) From what I've read/understand, you automatically own rights to any image you create. The only common domain images are those posted on government websites or images posted before a certain date that I can't currently remember (at least, this the case in US law, I am not familiar with the way it works in other countries -- more information. (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wci)) But by all means someone please correct me if I'm mistaken in this.

However I agree with you, I'm worried that it would not be much help to post this information.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Ah, here's the tidbit in particular I was looking for when I replied:

"The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently misunderstood. No publication or registration or other action in the Copyright Office is required to secure copyright."

I hope that helps explain my point.

[celestialwolfen.livejournal.com]

I understand your point, I'm just saying that if you brought the case to a lawyer and they asked for proof of it being copyrighted and you say "well I drew it" they MIGHT not take the case due to all the other cases they have.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Oh, alright -- sorry then, I didn't mean to explain what you already knew. ^^; That's a fair enough point, I have no idea how it would turn out if taken to court or if lawyers would take it at all.

[armaina.livejournal.com]

Actually, it is a form of proof, bringing them the original pieces, and if it's digital, showing them the work in it's original format, with all the layers you used to work on it.

Also, if you have uploaded your image to say, a place like deviant art, it is considered a form of publishing, it has the date it was submitted upon, and it's not something that can be 'faked' to look earlier (which is why I keep all my art on deviant art, it make a good archive)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_copyright_law
"While copyright in the United States automatically attaches upon the creation of an original work of authorship, registration with the Copyright Office puts a copyright holder in a better position if litigation arises over the copyright."

All artists DO have their art copyrighted, registering it only gives them the paperwork. All the papers do is make the progress faster, not having them just requires more investigation. I mean, the publishers will have to have to also show proof that they own the rights to use the image.

Seriously, if you show the judge your 300 DPI 5 layer PSD, and all the book company has is a smaller, 72 DPI jpg and no papers that prove of any legal transactions that gave the publishers the rights to be able to use the image, who do you think the judge will side with?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_1976

[sunhawk.livejournal.com]

Unless the image or character is actually legally copyrighted it's nontechnically free reign.

That's a misconception.

[thaily.livejournal.com]

No, any original piece of artwork/text/music you create is automatically copyrighted to you. You just have to get the copyright registered before taking it to court.

Dear lord people, third parties aren't just allowed to take your shit without your permission! O_o

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

*nods* I suppose the knowledge itself if nothing else is good for them to have.

[armaina.livejournal.com]

See
this is the kind of art theft I CARE about
there's no debate here, what they're doing is illegal.

Yes, contact the artists, they will be greatful that you did.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

heh, agreed. I care about all art theft but this in particular really burns me :S But thanks, that appears to be the consensus -- I will definitely start contacting artists with information, even if it turns out they can't do much about it.

[thrivis.livejournal.com]

I'd contact the artists. They have a right to know where their work is being displayed, especially if it's without permission.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

*nods* From now on I will be contacting them. I suppose I was worried that they'd just tell me there wasn't anything they could do, but you're right -- they do have a right to know. Thanks :)

[susandeer.livejournal.com]

Do the infringments all seem to come from the same publisher? Or maybe 2 or 3? Could be class action lawsuit time.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

You know, I'm not sure. I hadn't really thought much on it. But I plan to keep pencil and paper with me next time I visit a bookstore (which, inevitably, will be soon...) and take down as much information as I can. If I start to notice any one publisher doing this repeatedly, perhaps at that point I'll make a post about it here.

[thaily.livejournal.com]

Contacting the original artists is definitely the way to go!
That way they can contact the publisher who ripped them off, they can threaten with or take legal action against the publisher and legally force them to pay them for use of their art.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Heh, alright :) I'm going to start doing just that -- if nothing else, as someone else pointed out, it's at least their right to know it's happening. Thanks!

[alcyione.livejournal.com]

It's not possible that the artist sold them the piece? I'm just curious as to whether that's a likelihood or not.

Although I can't imagine a publisher not giving due credit on the title page. o.O

[thaily.livejournal.com]

That's a possibility, they could just have forgotten to mention the artist.
You could still contact the artist and say "Hey I saw your art in [book], it's a really nice picture!"

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Well, it is a possibility -- that's very true :) I just have a hard time believing that's always the case... better safe than sorry I guess. But I'd be relieved to find out they did sell it.

And yes, I agree! I was absolutely baffled the first time I saw it, but there was no credit to be seen :( What's worse, at some point I found one that credited all the art to a single artist, when it was painfully obvious that there were at least 5 artists who deserved credit from that single book. It's pretty horrific what some of these publishers seem to think is acceptable.

[snapesgirl34.livejournal.com]

I would say definitely yes. If someone is publishing and making money off of someone else's work the artists should definitely know, regardless of whether or not it's on or off the internet.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Thanks :)

[spiffystuff.livejournal.com]

My 2c: I'd like to see it posted here, although please include what publisher info you can, so we know what to avoid. However, there is always the question of whether they ARE stolen, or if they were legitimately bought; the best bet is to ask the artists in question.

Sometimes something does come of it. Like, the whole Shmorky vs Todd Goldman (aka "david and goliath" company) (http://www.miketyndall.com/todd_goldman/). The guy stole a frame of Shmorky's webcomic ("purple pussy") and put it on several paintings that sold for over 1K! After much hassle, Shmorky did manage to get the full proceeds for the paintings, and Todd Goldman's had his art taken down by several galleries and, last I checked, is in a heap of trouble for numerous other copyright violations!!

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

That's true, I remember that case, heh! I am going to start notifying the artists in question, and if I find that any one publisher is doing this on a regular basis I will post about it here.

[spiffystuff.livejournal.com]

Ahh, just realized that the wikipedia entry for Todd Goldman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Goldman) might be an easier place to get a summary of what happened and the result

Cool :)

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Oh, thanks! *browses the article*

[nambroth.livejournal.com]

This is the MOST important kind of theft I want to know about! Internet reposting is petty beans in comparison to other companies publishing and selling physical merchandise with stolen art on it.

There is always a chance that the artist in question sold it to said company, but I know as an artist I ALWAYS appreciate and am never bothered when people say "Hey I saw your art here, is it supposed to be there?" Chances are it's not. This kind of theft is way more important to me than e-theft. Anytime someone is selling my art illegally I have to do something about it.

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Hmm, thanks for the thoughts :) I'm kinda relieved to know most artists would want to know -- I know I get angry just seeing it, and it isn't even my art. Heh!

[chenneoue.livejournal.com]

Defiantly tell the artist, and give them as much info as possible. Leave it up to them to deiced what to do. Its not really up to you to decide for them. :P I always appreciate it when people are looking out for me, and always want to know if there is anything questionable, even if it is nothing. :)

[semisonicstar.livejournal.com]

Thanks, will do! I'll take down the publisher's name, the title of the book, the author and perhaps the page the image is listed on -- surely that would be more than enough :) But it's good to hear from other artists!

[chenneoue.livejournal.com]

I would hope that would be enough information. And as another artist, it is comforting to someone else watching our backs. :)

[risperidal.livejournal.com]

Most of the time the best you can do is write the name of the book down and tell the original artist. :/

[monogato.livejournal.com]

I've had a similar experience. Once while shopping around in the international district of Seattle I found a card deck box (the kind people purchase for their Magic the Gathering decks so they can carry them around without them getting scuffedup) that had this image (http://garun.deviantart.com/art/Angel-of-Fire-1377260) on it. I recognized it immediately, took down the name of the company that distributed the cards, and came home to see if it said anything about it in the description of the piece. The purpose mentioned in the description was for a calendar, so I sent the artist a note with a link to the website that has the deck boxes on it, asking if this was something he was aware of. Turns out, all was well and the company had permission.

So yeah. Just write down the information as you see it, and contact the original artist. That's my advice.