Artist > Art for free/trade/donation

Anyone have this dump truck?

<< < (4/10) > >>

Chadwick:
Exactly.
See, I posted that skeleton shirt awhile back as an admission, that, in my daily job,
I get called upon to rip people off, whether I do or not, is up to me.
Or whoever is telling me to.
But it's still up to me.

I did that one cause, well, the design made me laugh, and it was seriously old school printed ( well, not that old , but old enough I suppose, 80's garage-ish )

I just added a bit of my 'thing' while keeping it true as some sort of cheesy tribute to a funny shirt.

The dude didn't order a whole bunch, but he got a few over a couple orders.

Is it right?
Is it legal?

Not really.

Was it more work that it was worth?

Definitely.

The damnation depends on whether you're cool about it , or act like a douche.

Chadwick:

--- Quote from: Prosperi-Tees on December 21, 2011, 03:05:08 PM ---Need a dump truck like this? Anyone got one?

--- End quote ---

The funniest thing here is this, and although I added to the confusion,
He actually asked if anyone had a make/model dump truck picture similar to his pic.
That was all.

See?

Dottonedan:
And the douche can be either the one wanting you to do it...or the one who is being a stick in the mud about doing it. It all depending on how one looks at it.  I think it really is about money. People are rarely offended that the art got used without permission, they are offended that they didn't get a cut. In a perfect world, Artist can say they want control so that the art does not get abused. (e.g.) used in a negative way that the art was not intended. That does happen, but mostly it's about money.

If Bobby comes in to a shop and wants you to duplicate a tee he had done 3 years ago for his tire shop by a guy who did a hack job on printing and the art was simple and some generic clip art or even original art that is somewhat simple, then most people in there right mind won't care nor blow the whistle or go into an hour long discussion with the customer on why he can't do it.  There are many options to offer rather than duplicating that same art, but if the customer specifically wants THAT art, then you can still offer the previous printer some cash for the use of the art. Who wouldn't want that?  Wouldn't you like another printer to call you and offer you some money on the art you did on a job 3 years ago rather than to see that art o a new order one day and you got nothing for it? Thats how that should go down.

On occasions, I get asked to dupliacte tees.  Some are on my website. The Spiderman, T-rex Bates Motel, and most all Universal Studios stuff (except for the one coming through the fence. Thats our original art.  All that was done by another printer. IN this case, te printer went out of business and nobody thought to get the old films before they were destroyed so when it came time for reorders, all those jobs needed re-done but not art and no films. So I re-separated them from the tees. It was a task and fun. A challen to get it to be as close to the opriginal as can be. They were approved at the first sample for each one.

So re-producing art from tees can be done and can be necessary and legal.  Each case needs to consider all the details of the job before coming to a conclusion. In this guys case, Prosperiti-tees job looks to be hand done. Not normal clip art (but we don't know that) and it could be from someones clip art collection. Thats one reason to not have it re-produced exactly. The other reason, is that even if it was hand done and not clip art, it still does belong to the original creator (or the other print shop (if not one and the same).  So, to protect ourselves here on this forum, we have a policy to not permit nor promote that practice.

Imagine one of these members here that do the fancy high end car art. Those printers who are also artist that draw up the cars and then print them.  They do a job for someone and charge a simple $100.00-$200.00 for art (or not at all) to get the order. So the do the first order but the customer thinks the price is too high (cuz you got $100.00-$200.00 built into the price also). So, the customer gets a quote from XYZ printing and wow, they are $1.50 cheaper. So they go to them and they have no art charges. The customer provides them with the shirt to duplicate.  It's a small garage shop just starting out who doesn't know these things. So no art charge and no re-draw charge. He's happy, he got a new order. So one day, you, (the original artist) are walking down the street and you see what looks identical to your art but it's all hacked up. You neither got the re-order nor the compensation for that printer using your art and your art is hacked up.  Are you pissed?  What do you do in a case like this?  Is it just part of the business?  I think not. I think you would want to either educate that other printer by giving him a what fer, and/or have a talk to your customer about compensation.

I think we should have a industry customized cease and desist forum uploaded on here for just such an occasion for everyone to download that would cover most all bases in a professional manor (to use as a reference or inspiration point). We might look into something like that.  Frog? Pierre?


Oh and Chadwick,  We do'nt care about the small details of what he originally asked for,  I'm on a roll here.    LOL

Chadwick:
 
Don't let me stop ya.
Carry on.

Fresh Baked Printing:
I know I create art art that the customer could very well take to the next printer. For me it becomes a question of the "hassle factor". Do I really want to formally try and protect my Copyright each time another uses my art? No. I know I'm not going to get rich from my art and in the end I know that my art isn't where the money is. The money for me at least, is in pulling the squeeze for a happy customer.

All that being said, I get why this place doesn't want to get involved in the open swapping of possibly copyrighted images. However...how many of the linked YouTube videos here are technically copyrighted and aren't really supposed to be linked anywhere?

Isn't there some controversial legislation in progress right now that will make everybody a copyright criminal anyway?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version