Artist Transfer Rights and Sales Agreements ?

[NelsonAI]

California State Tax Dollars hard at work.

[rednalsram]

Most individuals do realize that it's 15% of the profit not gross sales price. For those that are not in favor of the agreement, it's a matter of principle rather than the dollar value itself. His artistic talent is not in question.

 

As far as coin graders or comic graders for that matter, it's a one time fee at the time of slabbing. It's not a perpetual fee everytime the coin or comic is resold.

 

BWS receives royalties on poster sales, reprints, lithographs, etc. This agreement is more of a I can't decide what to charge for my art but I want to squeeze every last dollar I can.

 

I do respect the opinions of other even if they differ from mine.

 

The debate does present a new issue ......

 

Artists such as David Willarson and Tom Everhardt license Disney and Peanuts characters respectively so they can sell paintings featuring those characters.

I believe publishers such as Marvel and DC allow artists to to sell convention sketches of their trademarked characters because it is a 1 time sale for personal use of the buyer.

 

Some of the art BWS sells are characters he does not own (i.e., Conan) so does this mean the owners of the trademarked character are also entitled to a piece of the action if BWS continues to profit from the art beyond a one time fee?

 

Does the Artist Transfer Rights and Sales Agreement pose any conflict when the artist does not own the the trademarked character?

 

Cheers!

N

 

I am responding to the italic/bold sentence of Mr. Nelson's posting-

The reason artist's (and people who think they are artists) can sell their sketches, or

a painting, drawing of a copyrighted character, is because that rendering is

original artwork, it is when that image that was created is reproduced, that action

can be taken.

[adamstrange]

Most individuals do realize that it's 15% of the profit not gross sales price. For those that are not in favor of the agreement, it's a matter of principle rather than the dollar value itself. His artistic talent is not in question.

 

As far as coin graders or comic graders for that matter, it's a one time fee at the time of slabbing. It's not a perpetual fee everytime the coin or comic is resold.

 

BWS receives royalties on poster sales, reprints, lithographs, etc. This agreement is more of a I can't decide what to charge for my art but I want to squeeze every last dollar I can.

 

I do respect the opinions of other even if they differ from mine.

 

The debate does present a new issue ......

 

Artists such as David Willarson and Tom Everhardt license Disney and Peanuts characters respectively so they can sell paintings featuring those characters.

I believe publishers such as Marvel and DC allow artists to to sell convention sketches of their trademarked characters because it is a 1 time sale for personal use of the buyer.

 

Some of the art BWS sells are characters he does not own (i.e., Conan) so does this mean the owners of the trademarked character are also entitled to a piece of the action if BWS continues to profit from the art beyond a one time fee?

 

Does the Artist Transfer Rights and Sales Agreement pose any conflict when the artist does not own the the trademarked character?

 

Cheers!

N

 

I am responding to the italic/bold sentence of Mr. Nelson's posting-

The reason artist's (and people who think they are artists) can sell their sketches, or

a painting, drawing of a copyrighted character, is because that rendering is

original artwork, it is when that image that was created is reproduced, that action

can be taken.

 

This is not what I've understood. Carl Barks, for example, was unable to paint the Ducks for several years due to issues with Disney legal.

[NelsonAI]

July 27, 2014

Time to revisit this issue?

 

I noticed certain BWS art hitting the marketplace recently but did not see any mention in the seller's (or auction house's) description of an artist transfer agreement as part of the sale.

 

In the case of an auction house, I would not want to place a bid on an item and finding out about an artist transfer agreement after the fact.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Cheers!

N.

 

[Bird]

The artist transfer contract for BWS does not apply to all his art. Only works that meet certain rights criteria. Even then I don't think he actually uses it;I own two pieces of BWS Storyteller art bought directly from the Studio and was never asked to sign the agreement on either occasion.

[Dan.Adrians]

If you're referring to the couple comic art pieces on HA, it's possible those were bought and sold privately years and years ago before Barry started implementing the transfer agreement.

[heartened]

Correct. Essentially all the vintage art was before he had this "idea". For me, I'd rather not buy the art period if it has that type of agreement, on principle.

 

[Eric Seffinga]

For the folks that were out, be sure to take a look at this article from last week about congressional legislation to try and get royalties for all artists as pieces increase in value at auction.

 

Personally I don't think anyone would ever be able to get such a thing through, but it could have some serious impact if it did go through, and not just for the handful of folks consenting to a contract.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7887050#Post7887050

 

 

 

[alxjhnsn]

Okay, but the artists should accept a share of the loss, too.

[Bird]

Do any other commodities return prior fees paid for loss of value? I am not a player in that field but in general I wouldn't think so. Royalties, or whatever this would be called, would generally come from the seller (tacked onto the buyer or not) anyway, so when there is a sale at a loss the seller would never pay the fee.

 

In a previous example of this type of bill I think it worked something like this: I buy "X" for $5000 and pay the associated artist fee. I sell at $4000, no fee paid on that transaction as it is less than highest value paid previously ($5000, as I often pay above market unfortunately). No fees would be triggered in subsequent sales until sale price exceeds $5000.

 

Also, they usually have a date to start at. Like "this law applies only to art created after ...". And comic art is not an obvious participant in such a law due to it being commercial production art.

 

It is too bad this article had no real facts about what the law would actually apply to.

[Ares]

Sell/buy the art in another country and bring it into the US...What happens then?