Advice needed for selling prints!

[roxyfur.livejournal.com]

Hey guys! I have a question regarding selling prints of artwork I have done, but as commissions.

Is it legal for me to do this? And is this commonly done? Does this look bad on me as an artist? I haven't ever sold prints before, so I really have no idea. I haven't sold the customer the copyright to the image, just charged them for rendering the image like is typically done. Some of my commission pieces I would like to sell as prints at a future con because they turned out really well.

(I would obviously ask the commissioner if it's okay with them, since it's their fursona in the picture.)

Thanks!

Comments

[wolf-goat.livejournal.com]

You are ignoring the link I provided and the last sentence of my previous comment.

[fawkatronic.livejournal.com]

I understand, and already stated, that if someone has in their ToS that they retain all copyrights, including the right to sell prints, that it means just that. Because the commissioner is agreeing to it when they commission the artist.

I am talking about situations where the artist does not have such in their ToS.

[neolucky.livejournal.com]

You are confusing FREELANCE and WORK FOR HIRE, which are two entirely different subjects. Freelance is more under the custom work category, where as work for hire is industry (generally speaking), both use a different subset of laws to determine where the copyright goes.

Copyright automatically falls to the artist, not the author in this circumstance, in a freelance custom piece - which is what you are describing. An artists TOS doesn't always trump the law either. A tos can also say silly things like "I don't ever have to give you a refund!" and just because the customer agrees to it, does not mean it will hold up legally.

Note: Unless there is a signed document/contract stating there is an agreement between artist and customer, there isn't really any agreement at all. Simply HAVING a TOS does not save an artist, as the customer may not even know it exists. There has to be some sort of actual "agreement" in place, for the TOS to even matter.

An artist has natural given rights, ownership of reproduction and copyright of the created image is one of those. It is up to the client to purchase those rights - not the other way around.

[roxyfur.livejournal.com]

Thanks for all of your detailed info here. Now if I get anyone else arguing on my journal announcement about my TOS change, I can link them to the correct places haha. :]

[neolucky.livejournal.com]

This may explain it a little better and clear up your confusion. This explains the difference between freelance (Independent Contractor) and Work For Hire.

http://www.wendel.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=content.contentDetail&ID=9414

They are vastly different.

[enter-data-here.livejournal.com]

Thank you for this link. "That said, a business may still be able to use a work created by a contractor, even if the business does not own the copyright in the work, under the theory that there is an implied license granted from the contractor to the business. "

OT, bu, in the case of my relative in the advice post I made a while ago, I'm glad to see that I've got the same reading comprehension skills as a lawyer, lol.

[tealmoonxiv.livejournal.com]

It doesn't matter if the artists states in their TOS that they have the image's copyright.
They automatically have it unless the commissioner buys the rights or it's work for hire.