Thursday, 2 February 2017
Tuesday, 28 August 2012
tattoos, copying and art theft
A very interesting article about being 'ripped off' as an artist, tattoos, and a great review of my book on art copyright, preview:
Article by Jo Whitfield
It was lovely summer's evening and I
was happily walking home through the
warm sunlit streets of Glasgow after
a busy day in the studio. My route
home took me through the creative
corner of the city where galleries, cafes
and tattoo parlours reside in all their
splendour. I adore the work of many
of the local tattoo artists and I often
stopped outside each window to look
at the freshly drawn flesh.
While admiring the sharp line work and the garish
subjects that people chose to have adorn their
bodies for life, my attention was drawn to not yet
another cheeky red devil with a pitchfork but by a
very familiar piece of artwork.
I was stunned. It was a direct copy of the
artwork I had created the previous month for the
burlesque club which I run with my partner and it
was now part of a tattoo artist's portfolio and for
a mere £85 I could have it emblazoned upon my
now furious body. I stormed into the parlour and
demanded to talk to the manager.
...
Eventually the manager agreed to remove the
design from their window and promised to avoid
repeating the same mistake in future. The whole
incident made me realise that if could happen to
me it could happen to anyone.
By putting their work out into the world, artists,
photographers, designers, illustrators and other
creative groups are at risk of having their work
copied, misused or abused. So what can be done
about it?
The best thing to protect yourself and your work
is to become better informed about Copyright
law and how it affects you. As they say knowledge
is power and a little time spent researching the
law will pay dividends should you find yourself in a
similar situation to the one I found myself in with
the tattoo parlour.
Where to begin?
Well luckily help is at hand. Author and artist,
Gillian Davies, has produced an excellent title –
“Copyright Law for Artists, Photographers and
Designers”. The book covers the basics of the
current laws governing copyright in a clear and
easy-to-digest style.
Offering examples of copyright infringement
throughout, the book highlights the key
aspects of the law that are of interest to artists,
photographers and designers in particular. One
of the most interesting features of the book is a
chapter discussing an individual's rights over a design
as well as an enlightening overview of the often
sticky area of intellectual property rights.
Publishing the work of others is an area where
publications such as newspapers and blogs often
fall foul of copyright law and a quick search of
google news will reveal the extent of legal action
being taken by photographers and designers
against copyright infringements.
Gillian covers this in a very concise and easy-to-understand way
giving the reader the knowledge they need to stay
within the law when publishing on and offline.
As a basic introduction to the complexities of
copyright law, this title is a 'must have' reference
for all professional and amateur creatives alike.
***
Copyright Law for Artists,
Photographers and Designers
Gillian Davies
Published by A & C Black
ISBN 978-1-4081-2474-1
You can find out more about Gillian Davies at -
http://carouselmonkey.blogspot.com
www.carouselmonkey.co.uk
www.aoiportfolios.com/artist/gilliandavies/
Article by Jo Whitfield; 200x200 art magazine forthcoming (September 2012)
Essential Guide:Copyright Law for Artists, Photographers and Designers [http://t.co/tAQxtzn]
Thursday, 23 August 2012
Great review of my new book on Copyright for writers
She got it: it's meant to be anecdotal and informal and plain English and also journalistic, in the 'accessible' sense. It's not for lawyers: it's for writers, editors and publishers.
Learned Publishing, 25: 235–239
Book Reviews
Book Reviews
LEARNED PUBLISHING VOL. 25 NO. 3 JULY 2012
Copyright Law for Writers, Editors
and Publishers
Gillian Davies in association with
Ian Bloom
London, A. & C. Black Publishers,
2011, 128pp.
ISBN: 978-1408128145, £14.99 (pbk)
This book follows on from Gillian
Davies’s Copyright Law for Artists, Photographers
and Designers, and is very different
from normal academic textbooks
on copyright or publishing and media
law, being somewhat personal and anecdotal.
It is an engaging case study in
itself, right down to Davies being the
joint copyright owner for the cover illustration,
presumably because she is also
an artist as well as a writer with a law
degree and a law editor.
As an example of book-as-case-study,
in the chapter ‘Quoting/ Extracts’
Davies takes us through her tribulations
in getting permission to use lyrics from a
song by the band Pink. The lyrics are
quoted in the book just so that Davies
can take us through the ins and outs of
obtaining permission. I really enjoyed
that: it brings the whole point and process
of getting permission to life in a way
that a theoretical dissection of the law
could not. Davies’s blunt comment ‘the
point about copyright law is that you are
supposed to ask for permission to use
something that someone else created
first’ is a really important back-to-basics
point and is very pertinent to our
Internet culture where free to view is
wrongly assumed to be free to use. I am
quite tempted to ask permission to use
that quote in the signature line of my
work emails!
Davies is rightly at pains to point out
that she is not a lawyer (and not the
Gillian Davies who is a barrister and
academic writer on copyright), and this
perhaps explains the pragmatic approach
alluded to above. A nuanced academic
immersed in the philosophy of intellectual
property might not want to put
things so boldly and might not be in a
position to know how the quirks of copyright
play out on the ground in everyday
life (as opposed to the seminal court
cases). The audience for this book is in
its title – and what to do in practice
(never mind the legal subtleties) is what
writers, editors and publishers need to
know. This book delivers this outcome
in a way that I have not found before.
The chapter by her co-author, Ian
Bloom (a solicitor), ‘Going to Law’
(which should in his words be called
‘Not Going to Law’) is essential reading
for anyone who feels they have a principle
to prove. The advice and commercial
reality is that principles are
dangerous things to get attached to, and
that is it is far better to mediate and
compromise.
As its title suggests, the book provides
a practical overview of the most pertinent
aspects of literary copyright covering
the ideas/expression dichotomy,
substantiality and fair dealing. It also
covers moral rights and the law of privacy
and defamation. Very practical
aspects are covered: looking at additional
ways authors might make money
from their copyright (e.g. signing up to
the Authors Licensing and Collecting
Society) as well as advice about royalties,
income tax and VAT, none of which
sound thrilling but are nevertheless
interesting if they affect you.
For all the practicality of the work it is
not without its interesting forays into
case law. It often surprises me that in
books intended for laypeople, writers
leave out the cases – the very things that
breathe life to the theory of the law.
What is there not to understand about a
case skilfully summarised and explained?
With literary/artistic works we have the
advantage that the players are often
colourful characters and we actually
know about some of subject matter.
Luckily Davies seems to agree and gives
us the Da Vinci Code, the Spear of Destiny,
the Alan Clark Diaries as well as
what seems to be a personal favourite of
hers, Confetti Records v Warner, a case
from the music industry about moral
rights which involved bewigged appeal
judges deciphering rap lyrics. For the law
fans the case citations are given too.
I do not have many criticisms of this
book.
The most disappointing part is the
chapter on plagiarism, although it was
instructive to learn that plagiarism is a
distinct common law cause of action.
Bloom admits some cynicism in his comment:
‘the difference between plagiarism
and research is this: plagiarism involves
copying someone else’s work; research
involves reading several different
sources and copying bits out of each of
them’. This definition seems to predominate
in trade publishing. However, there
are less cynical definitions that this
chapter could have gone into. In my
experience of academic publishing, academic
editors and publishers take a more
principled view. Academia bases its existence
on the integrity of the academic
record which brings knowledge forward.
Within this context other people’s
research must be acknowledged. Of
course, it is always a difficult area – at
what point does a theory become so
developed as to move away from its original
creator?
The book’s authors might
have be advised to consult the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) about
plagiarism in the academic world for a
more thoughtful chapter on this topic.
Bloom talks of plagiarism again in the
chapter ‘The Death of Copyright?’ and I
am not sure that I entirely hold with the
bleak view of this chapter in an academic
context. There is deliberate plagiarism
which falls under the heading of
copyright infringement; however, more
forgivably, some academic authors get
confused where the academic definition
of plagiarism does not correspond to
copyright law. For example so long as
academics credit sources they are not
always so concerned about obtaining
permission and the moral respect for
other people’s intellectual creations and
ideas remains. And this is, I suppose,
where Copyright Law for Writers Editors
and Publishers is useful: I would recommend
it to writers and publishing professionals,
and particularly to publishing
students, graduate and undergraduate
alike.
Anji CLARKE
Sage
Anjali.Clarke@sagepub.co.uk
© Anji Clarke 2012
doi:10.1087/20120312
Learned Publishing, 25: 235–239
Book Reviews
Book Reviews
LEARNED PUBLISHING VOL. 25 NO. 3 JULY 2012
Copyright Law for Writers, Editors
and Publishers
Gillian Davies in association with
Ian Bloom
London, A. & C. Black Publishers,
2011, 128pp.
ISBN: 978-1408128145, £14.99 (pbk)
This book follows on from Gillian
Davies’s Copyright Law for Artists, Photographers
and Designers, and is very different
from normal academic textbooks
on copyright or publishing and media
law, being somewhat personal and anecdotal.
It is an engaging case study in
itself, right down to Davies being the
joint copyright owner for the cover illustration,
presumably because she is also
an artist as well as a writer with a law
degree and a law editor.
As an example of book-as-case-study,
in the chapter ‘Quoting/ Extracts’
Davies takes us through her tribulations
in getting permission to use lyrics from a
song by the band Pink. The lyrics are
quoted in the book just so that Davies
can take us through the ins and outs of
obtaining permission. I really enjoyed
that: it brings the whole point and process
of getting permission to life in a way
that a theoretical dissection of the law
could not. Davies’s blunt comment ‘the
point about copyright law is that you are
supposed to ask for permission to use
something that someone else created
first’ is a really important back-to-basics
point and is very pertinent to our
Internet culture where free to view is
wrongly assumed to be free to use. I am
quite tempted to ask permission to use
that quote in the signature line of my
work emails!
Davies is rightly at pains to point out
that she is not a lawyer (and not the
Gillian Davies who is a barrister and
academic writer on copyright), and this
perhaps explains the pragmatic approach
alluded to above. A nuanced academic
immersed in the philosophy of intellectual
property might not want to put
things so boldly and might not be in a
position to know how the quirks of copyright
play out on the ground in everyday
life (as opposed to the seminal court
cases). The audience for this book is in
its title – and what to do in practice
(never mind the legal subtleties) is what
writers, editors and publishers need to
know. This book delivers this outcome
in a way that I have not found before.
The chapter by her co-author, Ian
Bloom (a solicitor), ‘Going to Law’
(which should in his words be called
‘Not Going to Law’) is essential reading
for anyone who feels they have a principle
to prove. The advice and commercial
reality is that principles are
dangerous things to get attached to, and
that is it is far better to mediate and
compromise.
As its title suggests, the book provides
a practical overview of the most pertinent
aspects of literary copyright covering
the ideas/expression dichotomy,
substantiality and fair dealing. It also
covers moral rights and the law of privacy
and defamation. Very practical
aspects are covered: looking at additional
ways authors might make money
from their copyright (e.g. signing up to
the Authors Licensing and Collecting
Society) as well as advice about royalties,
income tax and VAT, none of which
sound thrilling but are nevertheless
interesting if they affect you.
For all the practicality of the work it is
not without its interesting forays into
case law. It often surprises me that in
books intended for laypeople, writers
leave out the cases – the very things that
breathe life to the theory of the law.
What is there not to understand about a
case skilfully summarised and explained?
With literary/artistic works we have the
advantage that the players are often
colourful characters and we actually
know about some of subject matter.
Luckily Davies seems to agree and gives
us the Da Vinci Code, the Spear of Destiny,
the Alan Clark Diaries as well as
what seems to be a personal favourite of
hers, Confetti Records v Warner, a case
from the music industry about moral
rights which involved bewigged appeal
judges deciphering rap lyrics. For the law
fans the case citations are given too.
I do not have many criticisms of this
book.
The most disappointing part is the
chapter on plagiarism, although it was
instructive to learn that plagiarism is a
distinct common law cause of action.
Bloom admits some cynicism in his comment:
‘the difference between plagiarism
and research is this: plagiarism involves
copying someone else’s work; research
involves reading several different
sources and copying bits out of each of
them’. This definition seems to predominate
in trade publishing. However, there
are less cynical definitions that this
chapter could have gone into. In my
experience of academic publishing, academic
editors and publishers take a more
principled view. Academia bases its existence
on the integrity of the academic
record which brings knowledge forward.
Within this context other people’s
research must be acknowledged. Of
course, it is always a difficult area – at
what point does a theory become so
developed as to move away from its original
creator?
The book’s authors might
have be advised to consult the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) about
plagiarism in the academic world for a
more thoughtful chapter on this topic.
Bloom talks of plagiarism again in the
chapter ‘The Death of Copyright?’ and I
am not sure that I entirely hold with the
bleak view of this chapter in an academic
context. There is deliberate plagiarism
which falls under the heading of
both plagiarism (of any definition) and
copyright infringement; however, more
forgivably, some academic authors get
confused where the academic definition
of plagiarism does not correspond to
copyright law. For example so long as
academics credit sources they are not
always so concerned about obtaining
permission and the moral respect for
other people’s intellectual creations and
ideas remains. And this is, I suppose,
where Copyright Law for Writers Editors
and Publishers is useful: I would recommend
it to writers and publishing professionals,
and particularly to publishing
students, graduate and undergraduate
alike.
Anji CLARKE
Sage
Anjali.Clarke@sagepub.co.uk
© Anji Clarke 2012
doi:10.1087/20120312
Wednesday, 15 August 2012
The world's craziest legal cases....
I'm editing some international law materials to do with product liability and tort (negligence).
This case caught my eye...for some reason!:
in relation to the question of causation (did the thing cause the problem)... the courts are sometimes asked to look at whether the damage or injury was a consequence of the excessive use of a product:
For example, the courts said 'no' to that question in a German case to do with the excessive consumption of sweets
- where a judge claimed his daily consumption of chocolate bars caused his diabetes and therefore sued the chocolate bar producer (district court of Mönchengladbach, decision of April 24 2002, 3 O 217/01)........ !
Thursday, 12 July 2012
Donoghue v Stevenson eat your heart out!
I am editing a legal textbook about product recall and safety. I am now in the 'Argentina' chapter, written by a lawyer whose first language is Spanish. His English is 'not good'. And I have to do 20,000 words a day of this for the next month !!!!! Amusing cases in Argentina though!
For example. Donoghue v Stevenson eat your heart out!
Argentinian lawyer: Anyway, it is worth mentioning that in a recent precedent, a judge ordered a beer company to pay AR$ 2,000,000 (€400,000 approximately) to a consumer who find a package of an intimate gel inside the bottle of beer.[1]
stopped
short of typing the word ‘lube’- !!!!
For example. Donoghue v Stevenson eat your heart out!
Argentinian lawyer: Anyway, it is worth mentioning that in a recent precedent, a judge ordered a beer company to pay AR$ 2,000,000 (€400,000 approximately) to a consumer who find a package of an intimate gel inside the bottle of beer.[1]
My rewrite
but note here that in a
recent case, a court ordered a beer producer to pay AR$ 2,000,000 (€400,000 approximately) to a consumer who found a pack of intimate gel inside a bottle of beer.[2]
[1] Juzgado de 1a Instancia en lo Civil y
Comercial de 5a Nominación de Córdoba, 23/03/2011, “Teijeiro ó
Teigeiro, Luis Mariano c. Cervecería y Maltería Quilmes Sy G.”
AR/JUR/12898/2011.
[2] Juzgado de 1a Instancia en lo Civil y
Comercial de 5a Nominación de Córdoba, 23/03/2011, “Teijeiro ó
Teigeiro, Luis Mariano c. Cervecería y Maltería Quilmes S
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)