|
|
Post by aitch on Apr 23, 2023 8:52:07 GMT
...of a frivolous nature.
Had a walk out early this morning to get a pic of the recently finished mural under the south side of the Iron Bridge replacement, without someone walking in front of it.
More info on it here - though it doesn't mention the artist, Nathan Evans (fortunately, he put his Twitter tag on them).
So, the bridge is owned by Network Rail, the murals were commissioned/paid for by Surrey Council and painted by Nate. Does the copyright reside with the council as a commissioned work? Does NR have a share? And what about Nate? Or will it all be covered by secret negotiations between them?
|
|
|
|
Post by zou on Apr 23, 2023 10:23:45 GMT
I would assume copyright sits entirely with the artist but image rights to use as agreed with the commissioning parties.
|
|
|
|
Post by aitch on Apr 23, 2023 10:35:18 GMT
I would assume copyright sits entirely with the artist but image rights to use as agreed with the commissioning parties. So I would have thought too, and looking at the Gov.UK page on the subject, it probably does. But I suspect the lawyers would have a field day if there was any dispute... |
|
|
|
Post by peterob on Apr 23, 2023 11:46:09 GMT
I would assume copyright sits entirely with the artist but image rights to use as agreed with the commissioning parties. Depends on the contract(s). I'd think it very likely that any paid commission would require ownership rather than permitted use but it is on a case by case basis. Complicated with three parties. Probably two contracts, council vs rail and council v artist. |
|
|
|
Post by zou on Apr 23, 2023 11:50:28 GMT
I would assume copyright sits entirely with the artist but image rights to use as agreed with the commissioning parties. Depends on the contract(s). I'd think it very likely that any paid commission would require ownership rather than permitted use but it is on a case by case basis. Complicated with three parties. Probably two contracts, council vs rail and council v artist. I'd be surprised if an artist saw fit to pass all rights to the commissioner. Certainly they could do what they like with the piece they commissioned (subject to any terms agreed) but usually the creator won't sign it over lock stock and barrel. |
|
|
|
Post by Kath on Apr 23, 2023 12:17:24 GMT
I would also be hugely surprised if the copyright didn't still sit with the artist but it wouldn't be unheard of for an organisation to commission work and insist on having the copyright as well. I know of at least one photographer who hadn't read the fine print when photographing a council run event and only realised too late that they had signed away their right to use their own images. And not for the amount of money you'd think either. I have a client who insisted that he owned the copyright on my images - that this is what he was paying for. I had to put him straight. He disappeared from my inbox for a while but came back after about eight weeks. I strongly suspect he went to other local photographers and was told the same thing. I hope this Nate has negotiated a decent deal whatever the details!
|
|
|
|
Post by peterob on Apr 23, 2023 13:28:39 GMT
Depends on the contract(s). I'd think it very likely that any paid commission would require ownership rather than permitted use but it is on a case by case basis. Complicated with three parties. Probably two contracts, council vs rail and council v artist. I'd be surprised if an artist saw fit to pass all rights to the commissioner. Certainly they could do what they like with the piece they commissioned (subject to any terms agreed) but usually the creator won't sign it over lock stock and barrel. Depends on the contract. I'd be amazed if the contract template didn't have an "own everything" clause. The Intellectual Property section usually distinguishes between pre-existing and new and claims the latter. I've never seen a contract for the creation of artwork but I'd be surprised if the position wasn't to own all new work. As Kath said, agreeing or not to this is part of the negotiation. It wouldn't be safe to assume what IP rights would be agreed - will depend on the case. |
|
|
|
Post by willien on Apr 23, 2023 14:13:36 GMT
In the UK copyright stays with the artist unless the contract provides otherwise.
In france (certainly in the case of commissioned computer software) copyright vests with the commissioner unless the contract provides otherwise.
In the USA I believe the position is the same as the UK.
|
|
|
|
Post by willien on Apr 23, 2023 19:36:32 GMT
Generally artists want to retain copyright. The biggest exception in Scotland is that when the Kelvingrove bought Dali's Crucifiction they bought the copyright as well as the painting. They are believed to have made a great deal of money from the sale of cards, mugs etc.
|
|
