PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Lucifer on December 21, 2016, 06:44:41 PM
-
Apparently if you buy some artwork from an artist, then later on he disagrees with that person's father, the artist can demand the artwork be removed from a wall in a private residence.
Really? :o
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4057004/Artists-tell-Ivanka-Trump-work-walls.html
A growing group of artists is hitting back against Ivanka Trump, with some even demanding the president-elect's daughter take their work down off her walls.
-
Numbnuts people with no class at all.
-
Apparently if you buy some artwork from an artist, then later on he disagrees with that person's father, the artist can demand the artwork be removed from a wall in a private residence.
Really? :o
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4057004/Artists-tell-Ivanka-Trump-work-walls.html
Really.
It's called copyright. An artist retains the right of where their art is displayed unless it is signed away. If you buy from an artist, it's a good idea to have a lawyer request transfer of the IP rights.
-
Really.
It's called copyright. An artist retains the right of where their art is displayed unless it is signed away. If you buy from an artist, it's a good idea to have a lawyer request transfer of the IP rights.
You are so full of... well. Stop and think about what you said. You go to the drug store and buy Playboy...Hustler... GQ, or Barnes&Noble to buy a book...Wally World and get a DVD...Are you really gonna tell me, because it is copyrighted, I can't read that book, or watch that DVD I just bought anywhere I want to? I can't even display that book of Renoir's paintings on my coffee table? All a copyright does is give someone the right to not have their work reproduced without their permission. Damn...I'm guessing I oughta start writing royalty checks for every signed aviation print I have on the walls of my house. Who do I send the checks to?
Noah W
-
Really.
It's called copyright. An artist retains the right of where their art is displayed unless it is signed away. If you buy from an artist, it's a good idea to have a lawyer request transfer of the IP rights.
(IANAL) There is also this thing called fair use. I don't believe for a second that copyright laws would allow the IP owner to prevent someone from hanging a picture in their own home.
-
Now I have to take down that painting of the dogs playing poker, and all of my velvet Elvis paintings.
Life is so unfair!
-
(IANAL) There is also this thing called fair use. I don't believe for a second that copyright laws would allow the IP owner to prevent someone from hanging a picture in their own home.
This is just a question and not meant to be argumentative, but how about hanging that same painting in a museum or other public place?
My gut feel is that once you bought it, it is yours, but I am sure some lawyer somewhere has screwed that up.
-
This is just a question and not meant to be argumentative, but how about hanging that same painting in a museum or other public place?
My gut feel is that once you bought it, it is yours, but I am sure some lawyer somewhere has screwed that up.
Software IP has flown in the face of traditional transfer of ownership.
-
Guys, I'm not full of anything. The the Berne Convention of 1886 and US Intellectual Property (IP) laws since 1976 have specified this years. This isn't new, it's just new to you. I'm not a lawyer, but I did take a class from a lawyer about this topic in b-school. This is a big deal in business because IP rights can be worth millions.
Copyright gives the creative author
• reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords
• prepare derivative works based upon the work
• distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other
transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending
• perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual
works
• display the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural
works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other
audiovisual work
• perform the work publicly (in the case of sound recordings*) by means of
a digital audio transmission
The answer is that unless it is otherwise specified, the artist always controls the art, even if you buy it. Certainly there are cases where this is not true. The two that come to mind immediately are 1) when you commission a work then US Law understands that it is a you are buying the creative rights or 2) When the IP rights are specifically sold.
Now - I've highlighted the piece that the artist is claiming. Note that the artist is not entitled to take the art back into his possession. He cannot prohibit her owning it.
On reflection, he also cannot prohibit private display of his art. It is not one of his rights. If she hangs it in her house, then it's private. If she puts it in the lobby of Trump Tower then he can complain.
This is why I'm not a lawyer. But I will agree that she is entitled to hang it in her house.
-
Guys, I'm not full of anything. The the Berne Convention of 1886 and US Intellectual Property (IP) laws since 1976 have specified this years. This isn't new, it's just new to you. I'm not a lawyer, but I did take a class from a lawyer about this topic in b-school. This is a big deal in business because IP rights can be worth millions.
Copyright gives the creative author
• reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords
• prepare derivative works based upon the work
• distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other
transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending
• perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual
works
• display the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural
works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other
audiovisual work
• perform the work publicly (in the case of sound recordings*) by means of
a digital audio transmission
The answer is that unless it is otherwise specified, the artist always controls the art, even if you buy it. Certainly there are cases where this is not true. The two that come to mind immediately are 1) when you commission a work then US Law understands that it is a you are buying the creative rights or 2) When the IP rights are specifically sold.
Now - I've highlighted the piece that the artist is claiming. Note that the artist is not entitled to take the art back into his possession. He cannot prohibit her owning it.
On reflection, he also cannot prohibit private display of his art. It is not one of his rights. If she hangs it in her house, then it's private. If she puts it in the lobby of Trump Tower then he can complain.
This is why I'm not a lawyer. But I will agree that she is entitled to hang it in her house.
nice summary... but don't overlook the limitations on copyrights because of fair use.
-
I think Fair Use would allow display in TT. It's still private property.
-
Liberals NEVER give a second thought to inconvenient laws.
-
I would accommodate the artist by publicly burning said artwork, but that's just me.
-
Copyright gives the creative author
• reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords
• prepare derivative works based upon the work
• distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other
transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending
• perform the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual
works
• display the work publicly, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and
choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural
works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other
audiovisual work
• perform the work publicly (in the case of sound recordings*) by means of
a digital audio transmission
In your original post you wrote "An artist retains the right of where their art is displayed unless it is signed away." That sentence makes a broader claim than is supported by the text you highlight. There are more sections to the copyright law - the entire relevant chapter is here, with 6 sections that limit those rights: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-1 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-1)
The pictures are in Ivanka's home, not a public place, so the artists have no rights in the matter. If a photo of the art appears on the net then the violation is by whoever posted the photo, which probably isn't Ivanka.
-
In your original post you wrote "An artist retains the right of where their art is displayed unless it is signed away." That sentence makes a broader claim than is supported by the text you highlight. There are more sections to the copyright law - the entire relevant chapter is here, with 6 sections that limit those rights: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-1 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-1)
The pictures are in Ivanka's home, not a public place, so the artists have no rights in the matter. If a photo of the art appears on the net then the violation is by whoever posted the photo, which probably isn't Ivanka.
Yes and that is exactly how I corrected myself in my second post.
-
I would make that spot my favorite place to have published pictures taken.
-
In your original post you wrote "An artist retains the right of where their art is displayed unless it is signed away." That sentence makes a broader claim than is supported by the text you highlight. There are more sections to the copyright law - the entire relevant chapter is here, with 6 sections that limit those rights: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-1 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-1)
The pictures are in Ivanka's home, not a public place, so the artists have no rights in the matter. If a photo of the art appears on the net then the violation is by whoever posted the photo, which probably isn't Ivanka.
..but, but, but.... TRUMP!