Intellectual Proprierty of a render.

[Marco Manunta]

Hi there,

 

an odd thing happened to me recently:

 

a photography agent contacted me to ask if i was interested to publish two specific renderings with the help of a well known photo-gallery (YellowKorner).

 

He said that i ll get the 10% of the sales, and he will take the 25% and told me about statistics etc etc

 

the problem is that the two renderings were made for a client of mine (a lost competition by the way).

 

the thing i want to ask you is: do i ve the right to sell my renderings to others ? It's a product of mine, but i sold it to my client. I never signed a contract of intellectual proprierty with him, but it's a good client, he gives me some work frequently and i don't want to risk to loose him.

 

what do you think ?

 

thanks!

[Devin Johnston]

That's a tricky problem, on the one hand if you had a contract that said you retain the rights to use the imagery for promotional purposes then you should be able to do with it what you want. However if the images were created under a NDA or if it were communicated to you that they were to be kept confidential then you shouldn't try to sell them. An easy way of finding out would be to ask your client if you could sell them, they might agree since there of no use to them anymore.

[Marco Manunta]

mmm yes you re right...

 

after each mission i ask my client if i ve the right to publish or not my images, and i wait for him to confirm. So yes, he gave me the right to publish, but i didn't signed any NDA or stuff like that in order to sell the product.

 

on one hand we ve the fact that i made the image by myself, it's a product of mine. On the other is that i sold it to a customer who paid for it.

 

probably i should speak to him...even if it's that kind of awkward situation where he could ask me a percentage of profit, or he would expect some kind of discount in future collaboration...

[RyderSK]

This is why exact written contracts are necessary :- ).

 

Now with IP, things are always complex. Since you're in European union, you always (and almost forever) retain authorship of your artwork. You can't actually give it away, just exclusive&unlimited rights to use. So yes, it's yours.

 

But the content of that artwork is mixed. If you visualized building of your client, your client owns the IP of that design and he might or might not content to other use of illustration of his IP for uses that differ from original illustration.

 

Architecture is bit of grey zone but product design makes this distinction a lot more obvious. Let's take cars, if agency or automaker directly let you visualize their new product, you retain authorship of that image, but you can't use it to promote your business unless that specifically let you. By default you can't except for editorial (non-commercial, non-promotional use), although specific agreement in contract can let you.

 

And because you plan to sell it, even without contract, it can be considered as benefiting of foreign IP, so I would definitely ask your client for this very specific scenario and for next time have contract.

[Ernest Burden III]

In the US, the copyright is the property of the creator unless transferred in writing. So it would be yours. I don't know if there have been any cases (here in the US) that have addressed the issue of the architect owning any image of their design, especially an unbuilt design. Because BMW can't say people cant sell photos of a car that drive down their street (though they might try, just give it time). A photo of a car is not a car design and a rendering of a proposed tower is not an architectural build set. Will Fender say that Bruce Springsteen can't make a video showing him playing his guitar? It's the best advertising they've ever had.

 

Yeah, yeah, all that.....BUT

 

10% ? What a deal! If they offered you any less you would be getting billed for each sale. Will they promise a certain minimum of sales? You could do better printing it yourself and selling a few. With print-on-demand you don't even put up any money. Look at redbubble.com and the art-selling site saatchiart.com who will also do printing for you. Maybe the guy is a sales genius, and you'll be piling those tiny fractions of the money in no time. The typical gallery split--and that is not an artist-friendly environment--is about 50/50, but then artists pay for framing and can be expected to cover some of/all opening costs (that Costco cheese and bucket wine isn't free you know). About the only avenue left for selling your images is doing everything yourself, which doesn't leave much time for creating.

[RyderSK]

Because BMW can't say people cant sell photos of a car that drive down their street (though they might try, just give it time). A photo of a car is not a car design and a rendering of a proposed tower is not an architectural build set. Will Fender say that Bruce Springsteen can't make a video showing him playing his guitar? It's the best advertising they've ever had.

 

.

 

Don't be sure of this ;- ) Have a look who BMW sued last year. And check what kind of licence you can get for every single car model (it's editorial only).

Yes they largely don't care for small fish artists, how would they even find out, the reach of said artworks are super small, but the copyright is very clear. They own the IP of the product, everywhere that product is, be it photography of your own car, they want to have a say in it.

 

Not even public buildings are exception to this, Eiffel Tower being one of the most discussed parts of this modern nonsense. Really, take a photo of it and try to sell it ;- ) Yes you can do it because no one except your Facebook friends will ever see it, but it's illegal. As simple as that.

 

The whole IP thing is another patent-trolling in making.

[Marco Manunta]

wow interesting things!

 

yes the best would be to write all down on contract. Maybe next time it should be enough to put some note about IP when i send the client my quote for a new job.

 

10% ? What a deal! If they offered you any less you would be getting billed for each sale. Will they promise a certain minimum of sales? You could do better printing it yourself and selling a few.

 

yes you re totally right. It's nothing. BUT i don't have great interest on this, if i can make some little money, why not ? then probably with the next experience i will think more about it. YellowKorner is retail shop photo gallery around the world (around 90 shops), so we re not speaking about pure artwork. It's totally commercial, capitalistic, evil, artist enemy and whatever we want to put in.

[RyderSK]

Yeah the 10perc. is bit funny :- ) There is lot of talk how established galleries take 50perc. because they can, or how Steam/Apple store use their dominance to take away 30perc. when they give back very little.

But 90perc. off sure puts things into new kind of perspective, one I would call 'don't bother'.

[Marco Manunta]

Yeah the 10perc. is bit funny :- ) There is lot of talk how established galleries take 50perc. because they can, or how Steam/Apple store use their dominance to take away 30perc. when they give back very little.

But 90perc. off sure puts things into new kind of perspective, one I would call 'don't bother'.

 

yeah, but they took the charge to print in whatever material (even metal), framing all size etc etc. Ok for them it is not so expensive, but if i have to print by myself, it would be like crazy! Without an agent you would pick at least 35% that begins to be a sort of good perc...

[John Dollus]

yeah, but they took the charge to print in whatever material (even metal), framing all size etc etc. Ok for them it is not so expensive, but if i have to print by myself, it would be like crazy! Without an agent you would pick at least 35% that begins to be a sort of good perc...

 

I wouldn't bet on it. They are probably just sending it to one of the services Ernest listed.

 

10% is pretty ridiculous imo.

[Scott Schroeder]

Not even public buildings are exception to this, Eiffel Tower being one of the most discussed parts of this modern nonsense. Really, take a photo of it and try to sell it ;- ) Yes you can do it because no one except your Facebook friends will ever see it, but it's illegal. As simple as that.

 

It is actually limited to the Eiffel Tower at night and it's the lighting design that is considered artwork. The tower itself is in public domain. So yea, further muddies the issue here.

 

https://artlawjournal.com/night-photos-eiffel-tower-violate-copyright/

 

Either way, check with the client first. Most often, architects do not want images of lost competitions out in public. If someone were to recognize the project and start a campaign saying that your client's design was the better design, there could be a public sh*t-show over it. Granted this is limited to .0000001% of the most high profile projects out there, but that may be more of a concern than IP rights. Plus architects like to recycle lost never seen to the public competition designs.

[RyderSK]

You are right, I did remember afterwards it's only for nighttime shots, but didn't occur to me it's tied to the lighting system alone. Funny :- ) Still terrible.

[komyali]

too much talk, I sell everything, just don't get caught

Save

[helo53e]

If you do not have a contract, you can do whatever you want with it. I would discuss this personally with my client. Typically, you would want to retain the IP for f your work. A right to publish is different than making profit off of it by the way. If he gave you his model to render and you used his IP, you might have a problem. For example, if it's a rendering of his building that you rendered. If it's an apple on a table, you should be fine.

 

The percentage will be a factor of what they are selling. If it's s poster that will be bought individually, you might not even get 10% in some cases. Make sure and do your homework on the contract says and how much you will be receiving and at what point the 10% is awarded. I.e. 10% at the sale price before taxes.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited September 14, 2017 by helo53e

[notamondayfan]

Personally I grant my clients exclusive right to the work, and this would of course mean I can't re-sell the work. I think going behind the back of your client can only end in tears.

 

Just be honest with your client, explain the situation, and they might be happy for you to make some extra cash. If they aren't happy, what's to stop you creating some new work, and flogging that to the gallery.