MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Question about release for artwork  (Read 3095 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 12, 2016, 11:31 »
0
I'm an artist and I started submitting some simple artwork in b&w line work. (Hand drawn and inked with real ink, brush on paper.)
here's a sample:
https://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photography-image78444129#res1454312

The problem is, some MS sites are asking for a property release. Property releases I see don't seem to apply to my situation; I am artist/creator of the art I'm offering. The property release forms I see are between buildings etc and photographers.

Anyone have advice or a form hat suits my needs? I can't be the only one doing this?


« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2016, 14:22 »
0
Nice. DT is the only site you need a specific form for in this case. Everyone else will take a photo of the original with a note saying "created from scratch with pen and ink" or something similar. DT  will insist you use their property form. Just fill it in as the owner of the property and again write an explaination and a photo of the original piece of paper. Initial sketches also useful.

« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2016, 15:38 »
0
Nice. DT is the only site you need a specific form for in this case. Everyone else will take a photo of the original with a note saying "created from scratch with pen and ink" or something similar. DT  will insist you use their property form. Just fill it in as the owner of the property and again write an explaination and a photo of the original piece of paper. Initial sketches also useful.

Actually DT asked for nothing. Its BigStock thats problem and FL.
One site claimed it was "copyright enfringment". I guess they think I'm not capable of drawing simple art. However ALL the others were accepted.
I did extremely complicated comic book art, the Reaper illi is a doodle. Ha.

« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2016, 18:29 »
0
The specifics vary a bit from one agency to the next but they are all concerned about people uploading only items they don't have full rights to. It's not uncommon to be asked for releases, even for your own art or pictures of yourself.

I have a property release for my own artwork - if I include it in a photo, for example. I can sign as artist and photographer and have my husband witness it.

For illustrations that were based on a photo, several sites require you upload the photo (which you need to have taken) in place of the model release. For things that were drawn from scratch online (vectors drawn freehand) they want to see screenshots of work in progress.

If you are photographing or scanning your own art, I'd give them a property release for the art (you should be able to use a generic one for all your own hand drawn art rather than having to do one for each piece).

« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2016, 13:47 »
0
Nice. DT is the only site you need a specific form for in this case. Everyone else will take a photo of the original with a note saying "created from scratch with pen and ink" or something similar. DT  will insist you use their property form. Just fill it in as the owner of the property and again write an explaination and a photo of the original piece of paper. Initial sketches also useful.

Actually DT asked for nothing. Its BigStock thats problem and FL.
One site claimed it was "copyright enfringment". I guess they think I'm not capable of drawing simple art. However ALL the others were accepted.
I did extremely complicated comic book art, the Reaper illi is a doodle. Ha.
Okay. Just saying the others don't usually insist on a full property release for your own original artwork when they decide they want proof, just a note and any screen grabs of photos of sketches you can provide. If DT decides you need proof for a drawing they will insist on a full form. I do submit forms most days to one agency or another for this so trust me :)

« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2016, 11:53 »
0
The specifics vary a bit from one agency to the next but they are all concerned about people uploading only items they don't have full rights to. It's not uncommon to be asked for releases, even for your own art or pictures of yourself.

I have a property release for my own artwork - if I include it in a photo, for example. I can sign as artist and photographer and have my husband witness it.

For illustrations that were based on a photo, several sites require you upload the photo (which you need to have taken) in place of the model release. For things that were drawn from scratch online (vectors drawn freehand) they want to see screenshots of work in progress.

If you are photographing or scanning your own art, I'd give them a property release for the art (you should be able to use a generic one for all your own hand drawn art rather than having to do one for each piece).

Where can I get a copy or template to use as a release for my own hand drawn art?

« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2016, 15:17 »
0

« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2016, 02:30 »
0
the example you give show how clueless the stock agencies are in regards to releases. you do not legally need a property release, it is just something the stock agencies invented because they do not understand copyright law.

your property release, in this case, is essentially a form releasing rights to yourself. it makes no sense and would not be taken seriously by a court, it has no legal bearing.

in addition, if someone contests your ownership, they would have to prove it is their work, meaning they would have to possess the original hardcopy or legal documentation for, which they don't.

property releases in the case you describe are an example of stock agencies not understanding copyright laws.

the only legal evidence that you own the original work is a filing with the US copyright office. stock agencies should be asking for that as proof, but they don't because they don't even understand what copyright filings are. the copyright upon creation laws has now prevented people from filing copyrights.

perhaps it would help if you sign your work, by hand, beneath the work, so buyers can remove it if they want?

I had copyrights filed with the US government, with certificates, and a stock agency told me it wasn't proof enough because stock agencies don't understand copyrights.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2016, 02:34 by unnonimus »

« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2016, 15:57 »
0
I see so much wrong with your argument...

You said if someone wants to contest your ownership of that painting, you have the original to prove. You're only speaking for yourself...because not all artists keep originals. I explain why:

SCENARIO -

I can lose all my paintings in a flood, or fire or maybe goats ate it.
If I'm a fine artist I will probably sell my paintings in galleries or sell to collectors and keep my files.
It is Standard practice for fine artists to sell originals. Yes they also sell giclee reproductions, plus they license the artwork either with traditional agencies or places like fine art america etc

Artists  will always be the COPYRIGHT OWNERS AS A DEFAULT BY law---UNLESS they transferred copyright TITLE to a new owner. But that will not stop other people from bringing up claims to an agency.


A property release will release the agency from any claims from say a collector who purcahsed an original painting and thinks he owns copyrights, and will ensure that a person who inherited someone's Estate has the right to upload images to the gallery, and there are many other scenarios I can think of.

Physical paintings are property just like a car or a house and agencies are treating them as such.


They require a different approach from computer generated paintings.
 


« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2016, 16:38 »
+2
I see so much wrong with your argument...

They like to pull up old threads to post incorrect or irrelevant information.  I don't know why.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2016, 17:32 »
0
I see so much wrong with your argument...

They like to pull up old threads to post incorrect or irrelevant information.  I don't know why.

Incorrect, irrelevant or parochial information, as s/he does't seem to realise that the US does not equal the World. Given the low selling prices of the micros, necessitating fast inspections, it makes sense for them to take the LCD of international laws. Inspectors can't be expected to know the minituae of the laws of every country. 

« Reply #11 on: December 28, 2016, 12:35 »
0
the example you give show how clueless the stock agencies are in regards to releases. you do not legally need a property release, it is just something the stock agencies invented because they do not understand copyright law.

your property release, in this case, is essentially a form releasing rights to yourself. it makes no sense and would not be taken seriously by a court, it has no legal bearing.

in addition, if someone contests your ownership, they would have to prove it is their work, meaning they would have to possess the original hardcopy or legal documentation for, which they don't.

property releases in the case you describe are an example of stock agencies not understanding copyright laws.

the only legal evidence that you own the original work is a filing with the US copyright office. stock agencies should be asking for that as proof, but they don't because they don't even understand what copyright filings are. the copyright upon creation laws has now prevented people from filing copyrights.

perhaps it would help if you sign your work, by hand, beneath the work, so buyers can remove it if they want?

I had copyrights filed with the US government, with certificates, and a stock agency told me it wasn't proof enough because stock agencies don't understand copyrights.

Wow! It's good that you've come here to educate us all about how stupid these companies are. Maybe you should write them and explain to their team of lawyers, how they don't know anything, but you do?

« Reply #12 on: December 28, 2016, 12:41 »
0
Getty releases are a good start

https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article_public.aspx?article_id=1834


Good one Jo Ann and here's another from Shutterstock which should work for BS as well.

http://www.shutterstock.com/blog/shutterstock-property-release-policy

Make sure that any release is generic, has no agency name, or anything that will get it rejected by one place when another is willing to take it.

I make one signed release have a friend witness sign. Don't forget the date. Add a small reference image pasted on the release, with a description. You can use the same release over and over. Change the description and the reference image. You don't need a new release for every new image.

Make a blank signed and witnessed release for your own work, create new for each image, but save the blank, signed and witnessed, master.

http://www.shutterstock.com/blog/contributor-resources/legal/stock-image-releases/

Read this too

http://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/kbat02/000006656
« Last Edit: December 28, 2016, 12:47 by YadaYadaYada »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
1999 Views
Last post October 04, 2007, 22:08
by hatman12
4 Replies
2377 Views
Last post October 12, 2016, 14:31
by FastRacer
0 Replies
719 Views
Last post August 23, 2015, 12:36
by Hildegarde
2 Replies
1201 Views
Last post March 16, 2019, 05:41
by YadaYadaYada
0 Replies
350 Views
Last post February 07, 2020, 17:52
by umdash9

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle