Project commitment. How is that possible to keep such a commitment?

[RyderSK]

That's easy for you... as you understand all of that samples and GI talk, but it's like Slovakian to some of us!

 

I still think that there are question's of IP, when you are paid to provide a representation of somebody else's design, the original designer would hold the majority of rights over the content. These are intangibles remember so I feel the same logic as applies to photography can't apply here.

 

I'm sure you've looked into this in far greater depth than I have (or haven't) but I really can't see the legal system feeling that as a default the contractor holds more rights over the image than the designer that employed that contractor. Obviously if this is expressly agreed to in a contract between parties then that should hold, but otherwise my feeling is the law would side with the concept designer or architect.

 

I can't really see such case but I neither have studied every opportunity. I guess such case could happen if the architect sucessfuly claimed illustration be a "derivative work" but I doubtfully see this happen, as architecture doesn't fall under medium itself neither holds trademark,etc. and even if such radical scenario could happen, it would mean you can't copyright it, but neither could them.

 

Even futher, you could possibly be limited in commercial use of your artwork, but we don't do that, atleast I haven't seen anyone re-selling commisioned illustration to someone else in archviz, for the uniqueness of architecture :- )

 

But yes, truth be told, I derived everything out of contracts of architectural photographers, since I see great similarity in bussiness nature. The concept artwork, since we illustrate unbuilt architecture, surely changes something, but to what degree I am not sure. That's why discussion would be great, there are some well knowledgable people on forum in this I think (guy from Neoscape, Scott,etc..)