Might I first say, I'm not innocent...i have shared the occasional file hear and there. Do I think it was "right"? probably not.
Clipart is a funny little item. If you bought a music CD and listened to it over and over, do you have the right to give it way when your done with it? What if you purchased a pice of clipart and used it once....or maybe even never used the piece of clipart at all. Wouldn't you have the right to give away a piece of clipart that you paid for but never used? When does it become "wrong"? If you used it many times, then gave it away? yet, clipart can be used over and over by the same person,but only the person who purchased it? When it comes to any other computer software, your legally only supposed to use it on one computer at any given time, even if you're the owner of the software. Clipart isn't quite the same? The same guy can use it on any machine he wants, as long as it's his or her machine? It's funny how the music industry hasn't went this far yet. You can let a friend borrow your favorite album, yet you can't let him borrow an item of clipart..clipart that you've never had the pleasure of using and probably never will.
After watching these arguments lately, I think I may have changed my opinion just a little bit in this area. I think if I bought an eps file of a can of tuna.....and I know that I'll never use it, I think I have the right to give it to my buddy. Now if I've used it before...that may be where the line gets crossed.
I see the term "royalty free" on a lot of the photo purchasing sites. What exactly does that mean? does it mean that when you use it over and over, the guy who took the picture will only get paid once? or does it mean the guy who sold it to you will only get paid once.
Let's say you design a logo for a customer. You charge him $250 for the design. You give it to him in electronic format. Does he have the right to let his printer use that file? What if the customer decided to sell that logo to one of his colleagues for $300? even though he's already used it for his business? Maybe he sold the business, along with the logo. Should you get money from it? What if you sell your sign business along with all your clipart cd's? The same cd's that you used to make tens of thousands of dollars. Your not gona be using those cd's anymore...is it ok to include them with the business???? Isn't that essentially giving away the clipart that you purchased?
I really thought it was cut and dry until I started thinking about it more and more.
Save the flames, opinions are welcome.
Posted by jimmy chatham (Member # 525) on :
and you can't give away your clothes that you have outgrown either.haha Posted by Golden (Member # 164) on :
Bruce, Maybe I can help you straighten this out. You have a few criss-crossed points here.
All clipart vendors have different rules about use on multiple computers in on business, but I'd bet most of them out be happy if you owned at least ONE licensed version. (not a bootlegged one)
To address one of your points, if you did buy a CD and used it a while, then decided to give it away or sell it, most vendors would not have a problem with the transaction AS LONG AS you deleted the entire disk from your hard drive and destroyed all photocopies of the catalogs. If you kept a full copy of it on your hard drive or on a back up CD, and then sold off the original, the net result would be a bootlegged copy out there.
The outlines on a CD would have been sold to you, or "licensed" to you to use on your computer. Those outlines have the value. Someone worked to make them and they would not be considered your property to give away to just anyone who asks for them. Most vendors understand that some of their artwork might end up as part of logo designs and production projects, and at least a small portion of their outlines might end up going to those clients as part of their design or graphic. (check out some of the copyright notices on HouseIndustries.com 's site) Some of their artwork is prohibited from use on commercial projects.
Music CDs are a little different in the fact you could loan the CD to someone to just listen to, but vendors prohibit the other person making a duplicate while they have it in their possession. Normally, the courts don't worry much about you making a cassette off a CD if you are the one using it...or making a backup.
I have emailed a few people a graphic or two from our CD's to help them get through a project. Obviously, we hope to make a sale as a result, but if someone else sends the files, we lose that chance. The conversation I have with the person lets the understand that we run a very small operation, just like the rest of you, and purchasing our CDs can help both parties.
Ultimately, you just need to turn the situation around. Visualize that you spent 600-700 hours digitizing a CD in hopes of selling enough to make it worth the effort. Then consider how it might feel when someone else gives your artwork and time to someone else who wants or needs it, but hasn't stepped up to the plate to make the purchase.
Hope this helps!
Posted by Amy Brown (Member # 1963) on :
UUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH! Will this clipart thing ever die!!!!!!!!
Posted by Mike Pipes (Member # 1573) on :
"Royalty Free" clipart is just that. You purchase a LICENSE to use the art, not the art itsself, and enjoy not having to pay royalties to the artist who created it every time you want to use it. In the case of this type of artwork, the artists sell their designs to the company that's producing the CD's (or the "publisher" contracts the artist to produce the art specifically for them) and thus, the artists loses rights over the artwork and the piracy problem becomes the publisher's... ala the music industry.
Now when the time comes to give up the artwork, say if you're done with it and don't plan on using it anymore, you have the legal ability to transfer that license to another person however you may not keep a copy for yourself. It's like purchasing a music CD, you buy a license to listen to the music however you may not broadcast it publically (radio stations have their own licensing programs) and you may not make copies of it for friends, however you CAN give your copy away as long as you no longer have constant access to it.
If you design a logo for a customer and charge $250 and hand him the source file, that's it, it's his and you no longer retain any rights to it unless you have a contract stating otherwise. The contract is the license, you license (or grant) the customer so many uses of the artwork so he may have other items produced from it, i.e: business cards, flyers, mailers, etc etc. If you have a contract (or license) with the customer, he can transfer the license to the artwork if he sells his business, however he better make sure the new guy knows about his existing contract with YOU since YOU still technically own the rights to the artwork. It's all in how the contract is written (or not written).
I've been researching this stuff lately cause I have GIG's worth of vectors that I've created, and have been contemplating selling my own artwork CD. Not wanting to deal with tracking piracy, I looked into setting up a Royalty program and figured out it's impossible to track licensee's use of the artwork to know how much they owe you. After looking into publishing firms to sell the artwork to so the piracy becomes their problem and not mine, I find out the artists that contribute to those collections are hardly compensated for their talents, seems they give up compensation for not having the headaches of keeping up with the problems.
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
Issues don't die, they get handed down with all the other knowledge pertinant to the "keepers of the craft" This issue seems rudimentary enough to some of us, but others still need to have the information shared in a detailed manner. Better this, then just blasting away to those who haven't grasped these points that Mike has so calmly & clearly stated. I know I have slipped into "blast" mode on occassion, although it was not that long ago that I was pretty naive about the whole thing myself.
Another point to add in response to Bruce's inquiry, (and one that has been said before many times) is the issue of the integrity of letterhead.com Although some of us may be more willing to bootleg one piece of art out of a collection, doing so in full view of the vendor who is being taken advantage of is not necessary, & hurts Letterheads reputation, not just our own.
Posted by Raymond Chapman (Member # 361) on :
Does that mean that I have to quit selling copies of The Broadway Collection for $5 a piece?
Posted by Golden (Member # 164) on :
Raymond, Be careful! Your email server might get overrun with requests for my bootlegged disks!
To the rest... Part of the issue here is the attempt by some to help another. Right? In this case, the person asking for the art is in need, however, in helping that person, people harm the person who did all the work. I can't see how helping the person with their hands out is more noble than hurting the artist.
To me, the idea of helping as a "Letterhead" revolves around education and direction--and not the free handout. When someone asks for help, it should be more in lines of teaching the person how to digitize the artwork, cut it on rubylith and scanning it for auto vectorization, or how to modify existing artwork (in their own collection) to suit their needs.
Vector Art has a nice feature on their site which allows people to just buy the image they need. It seems better to send the person to the specific page on their site than to just give that person the artwork without Vector Art getting the money and the artist getting their share. The question should be more like "How do I do it?, or "Where do I find it?" and not "Will someone send it to me". The first two questions above fit the Letterheads spirit nicely, and I'd love to see other readers on this site adopting the concept. (actually, quite a few readers here DO share the concept already)
I try to stay out of this discussion as much as possible, but it does help to offer the view from the other side of the fence once in a while. Knowing there will be people asking for clipart as long as this site is around, it becomes only a matter of learning how to HELP the person in a manner everyone can live with.
Mike Jackson - Letterhead since 1982
Posted by dispatch (Member # 1053) on :
I read several licensing agreements before posting this...
The general consensus seemed to be that to delete all files from your disk and transfer the license was acceptable, but I did not notice any provision for what happens when a customer returns a year later, with the files (his property - you sold it to him!) and wants more work done using it.
Or could one sell(or give away) the disk to another, who would use one (or more) files, and then sell(give) it back
Of course the agrements don't get into (usualy) how many items can be used or how often. If I used #1, #3, and #5 of a ten item set, and then sold the set to another user, could he/she only use the other items ???
And speaking of "giving" away art, if a local church group asks me if I could donate a sign for their Fall Festival, can I use a piece of clipart? And could they re-use it next year
Another area altogether is the value of one clipart item. With a package of 5,000 images costing $25 that would put the value of one at $.005 (half cent) - Now I know everyone would disagree, for a variety of reasons, but is it reasonable to claim the value of the pieces is way more than the combined value? Or is the value in the compilation of the disk, not the images itself???? It's hard to argue a loss without any idea of value.
No Flames Please I agree that the artist deserves to be paid but I don't think that the subject has really been fully defined legaly.
Posted by John Thompson (Member # 2750) on :
I myself don't care if there are a million folks trading clip-art out there somewhere but I have seen other boards become a "clip-art/font" trading site basically and then the level of discussions seems to also go into the gutter. Next thing you know, all the "real" sign folks that we all come here to talk to and associate with will simply dissapear, growning tired of the BS. I think that if it is done here, it should be done at the private e-mail level. I really would hate to see this fine board become cluttered up with folks whose only reason for coming here is to trade clip-art and I guarantee that if it is accepted, about every other post will be about clip-art. There are boards specifically for trading clip-art but I don't think that is the purpose of this board and I really hate to see it get swamped by people who are just into sign business for a quick buck, don't care about being "professional", discussing the business or even socializing with folks here and then it getting dragged down like other boards that have gone that way. The only way I could see it not being a detriment to this board is if there were a seperate forum just for it and not here in this forum. It's going to happen, trading files that is, I just hope that it doesn't become the "thing" this board is for.
Posted by david drane (Member # 507) on :
Out here in Aus. recently, a group of volunteer computer geeks were repairing old donated pc's to a charity which was passing them on to special schools and poorer communities etc. After a while Bill Gates got wind of the scheme and decided that they were not to be given away with windows®.Was he protecting his business interests or was he being a miserable rich bastard? Posted by John Thompson (Member # 2750) on :
That is pure greed, Bill Gates needs one thing and one thing only.....a great big enima because he is so full of........well yall know! Makes me want an Apple even worse, then I could be in one of those MAC commercials. HA!HA!
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
Bob, If I saw a nice design on Mike Jacksons Broadway Collection that I could use to help me sell an expensive job & Raymond gave me that design (hypothetical I know Raymond's joking) then maybe I wouldn't buy Mike's CD. So this violation of the terms are not watered down to the percentage of 1 pc of art divided into the whole collection if Mike loses out on a sale of the whole collection. For $210 we could recover that money on one really noce job, so to buy it for that job is justified, & then we could continue to reap the benefits for some time to come
Posted by Mike Pipes (Member # 1573) on :
David Drane, who knows what Bill Gates was thinking? Given the alternative PC Operating System available (which incidentally is more stable, faster and robust than Windows, not to mention FREE) I'd think Gates wouldn't mind if they got donated copies of Windows.
Beware of the Penguin, Billy Boy! Posted by Gilead (Member # 158) on :
Quote
"Of course the agrements don't get into (usualy) how many items can be used or how often. If I used #1, #3, and #5 of a ten item set, and then sold the set to another user, could he/she only use the other items ??? "
Buying or even being given an original copy of a clip-art book entitles you to use as many of the images as you like as often as you need them. Generally the only real limitation that you have is that you can't make copies of all or part of the collection and give it away or sell it to someone else. Now this seems dicey because the very act of using the art in a sign involves copying it and selling it to someone else, but it's not as self contradicting as it appears. Using the clip-art in a sign is the intended application of the art, just as listening to music is the intended application of the album. You can use your clip-art CD or you music CD as many times as you like, you can sell them or give them away and buy them back. But you can't make a copy of your favorite Brittney Spears album for your friend because that would take lunch money out of poor brittney's pocket and she might get skinny. You can't make copies of Windows version anything now matter how rich Bill Gates is because it's still his not yours. And you can't give away clip-art from your Roland vector art CD because that's one less royalty buck in Gilead's pocket and I really can't afford it. I hope all of that was coherant or, at least, accurate.
Posted by dispatch (Member # 1053) on :
Doug- I agree - the whole package has a value separate from the individual items and existing copyright law provides for that case in the example of a phone book, where the individual listings are not copyright protected (or you couldn't write down a phone number for a friend to call!!!) but the complete book is protected.
One big problem with any lawsuit is proving damages though, and for that you need to assess value -and convince a judge/jury to accept it.
Gilead- Three scenarios (playing devils advocate here)
1. I own a legitimate copy of a clipart collection disk, I sell it to you, you copy a single piece, and you sell it back to me. Did we do anything wrong???
2. I own the same collection disk, you ask me to produce the art for a sign, using a piece from that collection, being a friend of mine I decide to not charge you for a few minutes work, and I send you the artwork file. OK???
3. I just copy the file and send it to you. Legit ???
There are other arguments too... For example would letting someone have a single piece to use, encourage him/her to buy the whole set??? And if a person recieved one or more pieces of art from a collection "free" and later bought the collection, realizing how useful it would become, would that negate any possible earlier harm tto the artist???
(end playing devils advocate!)
The hardest part: Try writing the rules up in a complete and concise manner, in understandable language, covering all of the possibilities in a fair, reasonable manner.
Posted by Gilead (Member # 158) on :
Hi Bob. I'm not 100% sure how the court would answer your questions but I think it would go like this:
#1 Assuming we both did this as an end run around the rules then yes we did something wrong especially if I was keeping the files I copied.
#2 & #3 If you own an original copy of the CD you can't sell or give away any part of it because you still have it on the CD. I suppose if all you had was a book and you actually took a pair of scissors and cut the image out that would be another thing, but you couln't copy it. That would be like selling it and keeping it too which makes you a publisher.
I know all of this seems kinda funny when the end client may make a million copies of the art in newsletters etc, but that is the intended use of the clip-art so nobody's loosing money at that point.
Think of it this way; When you "copy" a file and send it to your cutter to make a sign you're not really COPYING it you're USING the product for it's intended purpose. But when you send a copy of the file to me so that I can make a sign then you're copying the product which is a form of bootlegging.
Posted by Checkers (Member # 63) on :
My 2˘... The people complaining about it being illegal to "share" these original files are probably the first ones to cry foul when their original design shows up on sign that was made by the shop down the street. But, then again, I could be wrong. Spending money on clip art is just part of running a legitimate business. Your company can pay for it or pass the cost on to the client. Imaging how embarrassing it would be for the client and how bad it would be for your business if they were shut down because you didn't spend the $100 on legitimate clip art. We spend thousands of dollars a year on clip art and it doesn't cost us a cent, the client pays for it all. In a somewhat related subject, typestyles can not be copyrighted. It's considered a restriction on your freedom of speech. However, the data or code used to create a digital font can be protected. I would assume that the same basic principals would apply to art that is unprotected or considered public domain. So, i.m.h.o., if you have an image that fits in these categories, take the time to scan or digitize it and swap away... but not here please. Havin' fun, Checkers
Posted by dispatch (Member # 1053) on :
Gilead-
If only it was as simple as using vs. copying/distributing a file!
If I design a business logo for a storefront sign, using a piece of clip art, it is very logical that the company will also need to use that logo for business cards, letterheads, envelopes, checks, vehicles, websites, advertising, and many other uses. I realize tthis when producing (and pricing) my work. I would want the customer to purchase the rights to the design, and many of the future uses would be totaly out of my field!
But that means that others would then be copying, modifying, and using the original clipart item that I sold, as part of a design, to them. The question is where along the line does it become a new original use of the old clipart ???
and at some point in the future the company may decide to modify their logo, reusing the portion of clip art I supplied, in a somewhat different manner. How should that be handled ???
My point is not that clipart from copyrighted collections should be made freely available, but that the many possible permutations of the transactions involved make many areas hard to predict, let alone define and plan for.
Of course the best thing for artists who do not want their work used, is not to ever sell any rights, and many artists do take this view, you may purchase an original painting - but not make copies. (but obviously that doesn't apply to creators of clipart collection disks!)
Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
Is the glass half empty or is it half full? or if the other half is in another glass is it 2 glasses?
Posted by dispatch (Member # 1053) on :
could it be all three at once??/ (or maybe none at all) Posted by Dave Draper (Member # 102) on :
I remember a year or two ago, we all got into this discussion. Some of you may remember.
I wanted to write an article about the do's and don'ts of clipart usage. But the magazine I write for got extremely nervous. I chucked all my notes in the trash can.
I have yet to see anyone get sued over illegal use of clipart. Just an opinion but it would be a no win situation for the vendor of clipart to sue a person. It would cost so much in leagal fees and they wouldn't recover a dime from a local sign guy who has breeched his use of the artwork. ( The vast majority in the sign biz today have trouble making their car payment!
However, legal action taken aginst a Fortune 500 company, for buying 1 CD clipart collection and then passing it along to 400 of their designers might be a very profitable law suit.
Just FYI, I was asked to fill in for speaker at a sign show to teach advanced vinyl applications. The Sign Supplier had a construction trailer to be lettered. They gave me "Chicago Bears logos, Edge prints, to put on the trailer.
I proceeded to install the graphics, but turned to the audience and told them: "You do know that these graphics are illegal, and the moment you choose to sacn them, or any licensed logos into your computer, you are in violation. Just FYI."
The sign supplier big shots got a little nervous to say the least. If some disgruntled sign guy at the show turned them in, there could be hell to pay! Then next day we had some generic artwork to put on!
I agree with MJ on this one. Lets help the guy learn how to create his own artwork or plead the moral and ethical values of business honesty. Some will listen, and some will be thankful.
Posted by GARY CULY (Member # 3130) on :
I had to chime in on this one. For some reason , younger folk have no scruples. All the younger kids are swapping clip-art C.d.s daily ,with no clue in their mind of anything wrong with it. Iread a comment earlier on the fact that crap is now the norm and sign making is no more than another computer skill? That man may be right. Fortunatly Ido buy fonts/clip-art cause im old and have morals to rest with at night.aaaaaAnd i applaud all you letterheads who know right from wrong. Love you guy and gals that believe all this is more than just another computer skill!
Posted by Mikes Mischeif (Member # 1744) on :
Fortune 500 companies open small offices offshore to avoid paying taxes and fees (stanley tools did it this year to save 22 million) Is this wrong? Are you still buying stanley tools?
To follow this logic, we could all chip in and buy all of the cd's, set up a server where copywrite laws don't exsist and download anything at anytime without fear of anything.
If I where the government (irs) I would impose a tax on these jerks just to do business in the USA.
If I were a clip art designer, I would only allow downloads that had time imprints on them that would disappear from any computer after the expiration date and create the worst virus for that computer if they where tampered with.
No one is going to use all of those clips anyway, so why put the temptation to trade them. All future needs of the same clip art could easily be "redownloaded" for free by checking the history data from an ISP.
Think of them as U HAUL trucks, when the job is done, you don't need 'em anymore.
Posted by Andrew Holmes (Member # 2064) on :
Hi folks,
Of all the different aspects of "the clipart issue" the one that perplexes me the most is the incredible level of interest in this topic generally. Typically, once the topic is opened on this board a very lively and lengthy discussion follows. Is this because clipart is such an important part of the day to day activities of an average sign shop, or does the topic represent larger issues about honesty and ethics? Why so much interest in clip art and how it is used and misused?
Regards,
Andrew Holmes Vector Art Inc.
Posted by dispatch (Member # 1053) on :
Technology has changed the situation faster than we can keep up. I remember computer typesetting with machines that needed an expensive separate disk for each font style, weight, and size. And those disks were treated like gold, one scratch and you lost a letter- had to buy a whole new disk to replace it. NOw a few moments online to download a font set (many free ones out there) and if the file gets messed up just reload it.
The newspaper's ad dept had huge piles of printed clipart books, new ones arrived monthly, 99% was never used, but the ones used saved a lot on custom art. Sure we could have copied the whole book, but it would cost more than buying the new ones!
When computer disks were first available for PC's (and Apple's, among others) they only held a sliver of todays DVD's - When CD's were first used it was unlikely that most people have copied 600 Meg of files onto 3-1/2" floppy disks, it would have cost $500 - again it was cheaper to buy the original one. Now CDR disks are 50 cents and the burners are less than $50. DVD burners are dropping in price too. Technologly is changing the situation - faster than we're keeping up.
Solutions will be worked out - but there will always be changes
Posted by Golden (Member # 164) on :
Andrew, This topic comes up on this board regularly because Steve Shortreed (the Mayor) has a rule against people asking for it. Since a lot of people don't take the time to read the rules, this board gets the normal number of requests for them, followed by a stream of replies telling them they shouldn't ask...then followed, by a bunch of rhetoric supporting both sides of the issue. This is one of the better boards, as far as I am concerned, in the fact that a fairly good number of the readers have come to realize how much it hurts the vendors when they attempt to help a person with their hands out. I'd love to see the "No Clipart- No Font Exchange rule" more visible on the main page of each BB page, and that might help a bit.
As you know, some people buy the CDs and are still quite protective of their investments. They simply won't share them because they spent the bucks and can't understand why they should give them away to a moocher. Some buy the CDs with the intentions of sharing. One person buys a CD and shares it immediately with three friends. Three of the four have no money invested in the data, and they will quickly share it with a bunch more. Once in the "bootlegger vein", many sales are lost.
I occasionally like to get involved in the clip art discussion because I it will often enlighten one or two more people on the edge. We are a very small company of one (me). So when someone bootlegs my CDs, it takes money from my pocket and away from the kid's shoes, college funds, and so forth. I figured up the hours on the last CD and it came to between 600-700 hours to get it ready for market. It can make you weak at the stomach to think that some ****** is making a copy to give to someone for free.
As long as people ask for clip art, this will continue in some form or another. The questions raised, often considered gray areas, are not that gray. I mean, if someone thinks selling the CD to someone for $5, and then buying it back a week later for $5 solves the issue, people are fooling themselves. The net result of that set of transactions would be that there would be at least two copies of the CDs after the second week. Loan them the booklet, but not the CD disk! Don't share! (please!)
Take care, Mike Jackson
Posted by bronzeo (Member # 1408) on :
Here is how I feet about the whole issue:
I will support any and all producers of clipart that I feel are from legitamate sources and recommend the purchase of them to my peers. They know who they are.
MANY to MOST clipart volumes have been compliled from illegitamate sources. Not all....
Clipart has done more for the client (by far) than it ever has done for the artist/designer/signmaker. It has basicly destroyed the livelihood of a competetant artist.(Some would say we did it to ourselves)
It has allowed basicly anyone enter this industry without proper skills, and put salesmanship at a much higher level than craftsmanship (which really sucks).
We can own 10,000,000 pieces of clipart and still not have what we need, and don't have a clue of what clipart disc to buy to get it.....
Todays competitive prices DO NOT allow me or you to get proper design fees to create this. If they do for you, consider yourself extremely lucky.
I am glad to help people by sharing what I have, and hope they might do the same. I would rather give than get clipart from someone else.
In closing, I know some of these statements are argueable, but they are how I view what has happened to my industry (Art in general) and am not happy with what I see (generia) . I am happy to share my stuff, and hope others will too. I have been in the business too long to believe that there is any part left that is sacred. My work has been stolen and plagerized at least a hundred occasions over 30 years, and not one of them left room for reasonable legal recourse. One of them in fact was for over 50,000.00, and the lawyers said that it wasn't worth persuit (just last year)... I could go on for days, but you that have been there know, and you that are going there beware. bronzeo
Posted by cheryl nordby (Member # 1100) on :
Bravo Jack!!!!!!!!!!! Extremely well said.
*clap* *clap* *clap*!!!!!
Posted by Janette Balogh (Member # 192) on :
I'm pretty bent on people doing their own work, and using their own tools. Technology has made some folks lax in their work. I just don't care to feed that.
quote:It has basicly destroyed the livelihood of a competetant artist.(Some would say we did it to ourselves)
By exchanging clip art freely, I feel it perpetuates this thinking Jack. I have also seen that things that come free and easy are less appreciated, and are regarded with less value. Thus the decline in societies', and sadly, some of our own trade's thinking towards the value of our work.
quote:It has allowed basicly anyone enter this industry without proper skills, and put salesmanship at a much higher level than craftsmanship (which really sucks).
Again I say ... why enable it by making it easier for folks without not only the proper skills, but the drive to attain them?
quote:Todays competitive prices DO NOT allow me or you to get proper design fees to create this. If they do for you, consider yourself extremely lucky.
Anyone can make their own luck in this vein. It's there for the asking. You can spend your time "selling" your customer something lickety split, or invest it training them to know the value of something worthwhile.
Janette
Posted by dispatch (Member # 1053) on :
To set the record straight (I've received a few emails!) I do not advocate the free exchange & use of copyrighten artwork. My point is simply that there are many parts to the issue, and it is obvious that there are many different views on the various situations.
Even where a hand-painted sign with original art is concerned, could another painter make repairs to it??? The questions started long before computers, but technology has changed the scene at an amazing rate. (Guttenberg changed the publishing industry many years ago, it hasn't destroyed it)
"He that will not apply new remedies must expect new evils." -- Francis Bacon
Posted by ScooterX (Member # 2023) on :
ok, most clip art (as well as fonts, photos and other bits of art) is sold with a "license" to use it. a license is a "permission to do, or use, something."
some people don't seem to understand artwork licenses, so here are some other examples to help you out:
a fishing license gives you the "right" (the permission) to catch UP TO 10 fish. so, what if i only catch five fish, does that mean i can sell me license to somebody else for half price? NO.
a drivers license gives you the "right" to drive whenever you want on all public roads. does that mean you can "loan" your license to somebody else when you aren't driving? NO.
the same is true for a Contractors License, a business permit, a sales tax ID, or any other number of "legal permissions". the owners of tthe clip art (the artists or the people who paid the artists for the work) are SELLING you "permission" to use the art. the BUYER can't give, loan, trade, extend or sell that permission to anybody else without the SELLER's agreement.
Some licenses "follow the thing", meaning that whoever owns the disk (the disk, the book, the downloaded file, whatever the "thing" is) is the one who has the license to use it. You can sell the "thing" and the license with it. If you keep a copy of the thing for your own use, then YOU are stealing.
so, it really is that simple. the rest of it is all a game to see if you can justify to yourself why you can steal. if you're going to steal, just do it. You obviously need the money more than everybody else.
Posted by Andrew Holmes (Member # 2064) on :
Hi Mike,
Congratulations on your great new products! I am, as you might imagine, very aware of the time and money involved with preparing "cuttable" artwork. We at Vector Art have been doing this since 1989 and now keep 3 full time editors busy preparing new products. We have had a good success with the Mega Collection and have sold quite a few thousand copies in the last few months. This fact is no secret to anyone because each of the 52 artists to whom we pay royalties each get a sales statement every quarter.
What has become apparent in the last few months is the shocking and depressing fact that very, very many people who call 1-800-597-0688 and try to wrangle some "upgrade" price for the Mega Collection, based on "ownership" of some older version of Vector Art products, have pirated copies. This is very obvious when we try to document purchase info or identify codes on the actual CD's.
I try not to get too upset about the inevitable aspects of life, death and software theft, but it does make me feel bad that there is really not much to be done about it, at the practical level.
I have decided the best thing to do is put my time, energy and money into new products, and to offer those new produts in a professional way to those professionals who are willing to pay the asking price. I am therefore mostly able to ignore the petty theft and shody ethics of the rest. As we all know, most folks recover their full investment the first time they use our products anyway, so why bother to steal them anyway?
Best regards
Andrew Holmes Vector Art Inc.
Posted by Janette Balogh (Member # 192) on :
Jack (bronzeo) tried to email you a little note, but it got bounced back to me. I had sent you a photo with it and wonder if possibly that's why it didn't make it?
Let me know if your email server is down or something. cheers! Nettie
Posted by dispatch (Member # 1053) on :
----------------------------------------------- >a fishing license gives you the "right" (the >permission) to catch UP TO 10 fish. so, what if >i only catch five fish, does that mean i can >sell me license to somebody else for half price? >NO. ----------------------------------------------- I've seen rules limiting catch size to a group also used with this. Otherwise people would bring a bunch of non-fishing friends along to "pad" the limit!
----------------------------------------------- >the same is true for a Contractors License, ----------------------------------------------- Many areas are pretty lax about contractors permits, allowing many other, non-licensed persons to do work, virtualy independently, under a valid license holder, who may be held responsible, but have no knowledge of what is being done under the license! (very common for electrician's, plumber's, builders, etc in several areas I have been in)
---------------------------------------------- >the owners of the clip art (the artists or the >people who paid the artists for the work) are >SELLING you "permission" to use the art. the >BUYER can't give, loan, trade, extend or sell >that permission to anybody else without the >SELLER's agreement. ----------------------------------------------- But that requires precise definition of the permission and that is what I have been pointing out!
In many cases the compiled volume of work is vastly more valuable than its pieces! A large collection of basic arrows, simple borders, and standard elements contains little that one could not easily produce themselves, but can be useful to someone producing those type of signs, as a tool, guide, and visual aid. A more elaborate custom designed sign would be another category (and price range) altogether and the specific design has a high intrinsic value, but would not be appropriate for most other uses. Unfortunately there's a lot of gray area in between. Posted by Scott Moyer (Member # 1433) on :
I understand mike's jacksons point about all the hard work put into it but it takes alot of work to make anything tv's cars etc.If I buy it I should be able to do whatever I want with it if I am dumb enough to give away expensive clipart It should be my choice, if you see a sign with clip art that wasn't paid for who do you go after the hapless dupe that got it without reading the lisence agreement or the idiot that gave it to him?I have given a few pieces here and there to a good friend but that's it. I don't belive in giving away hard earned clipart to newbies.But If your fool enough to do it then do it.
Posted by Bob Burns (Member # 268) on :
There's clip art and there's "clip art". All that 100,000 pieces of clipart crap, like Corel and CLICKart, I USE WHAT i've bought, and have no qualms with sharing THAT. But stuff like MIKE JACKSON'S and the BUTLER stuff,took lots of work, and it cost enough, and it puts my work on a little higher plain in my area, than the competition. So, if THEY cant or wont purchase the tools they need, I sure aint gonna GIVE it to em. Posted by Doug Allan (Member # 2247) on :
I bought my first copy of Adobe Illustrator from a friend who said he never used it. I got the blank "Transfer of Ownership" agreement from Adobe, filled it out, had it signed by the former owner along with the other identifying info they required on him, & sent it in. I am the only registered owner for that software. & I have used that status to upgrade at least 3 times. Did the former owner burn himself a copy? I don't think so, but of course have no way of knowing. I do know that he has no tech support or upgrade pricing available to him, & I do. Adobe got his money first & now mine on a regular basis. If he's using a bootleg on the sly, it's not my worry.
Some people steal. Almost everyone pays for locks, insurance, & alarms. We also pay higher prices for goods & services to cover vendors costs of doing business, including theft. Since theft won't go away I'd rather worry about my own morals, reputation, & freedom.
Most people know right from wrong, even those who don't care do right, know wrong. Laws are about the current agreement to what is right, but lawyers are about proof & loopholes. Two completely different things. Why split hairs in attempt to muddy the waters over legal enforcability ?
In my agreeably opinionated view, those who can't figure right from wrong need to quiet themselves & look within, not on the bb.
Posted by Pat Foley (Member # 2683) on :
Happy Friday! You know what really got me, was that I bought some vectorized art from Ebay. "Completely new!" "No duplicates!" I was new at doing signs and saw what I thought was a good price. When I got the CD's, my mouth hit the floor... some were really vectorized and things I hadn't seen, but I had just bought VectorArt that I had already owned! Now to me, that's where the line is really thick!! Sharing once in a while, I don't think is a big deal, whether I made it or bought it. I do draw the line though at making new CD's and making a profit on someone elses work... that's criminal. What I think has helped me a great deal is VectorArt selling just one vectorized item. So you have to buy five at a time, and they are $1.00 each. Compared to buying the whole volume, yeah, they cost more, but some of us it works. I'd like to see Aurora and others do that too. Most of us are adults or like to pretend we are, and when I really think about it, I know what's right and wrong and I think most of us do, although I guess just about anything can be justified with enough babble.
Posted by Amy Brown (Member # 1963) on :
Pat, I think you hit the nail on the head. I don't steal clipart or ask for it. I may ask for suggestions where to find something. Everything I own is legit. There are tons of things I would like to have like The Mega Collection, Mike Jacksons CD's, etc. but I can't afford them. So for now I live without it. I wish, like you, that I could buy one thing at a time when I need it. It would help my designs look much better and make my business grow. I $300 will feed my family for months. No one ever needs everything that is on a clipart CD. I would be happier to pay $5-10 a pop for what I need.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)