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 

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]     

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]     

stopped short of typing the word ‘lube’- !!!!


[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