A Word About Copyright

Mythic Tarot copyright

I've been really interested in this discussion about copyright and would welcome your thoughts and advice. I did the illustrations for The Mythic Tarot by Liz Greene and Juliet Sharman-Burke, way back in 1986. I have just heard that there is to be a 'New Mythic Tarot' published in August 2008, by the same authors, but illustrated by someone else. The only illustration I've been able to find is the cover, featuring the Star with Pandora's Box. It is almost a direct copy of my own illustration - even down the the same dragonfly amonst the insects coming out of the box!
I was not informed of this book coming out and no-one has asked whether I minded my artwork being copied in this way and I was wondering what my rights are. I know I have copyright of my illustrations, so surely they can't be copied in this way? Why on earth they would want to is another story!
Any thoughts anyone?

I don't know the legal position; I would talk to a lawyer, and fast. Do you still have your original contract ? haev you been in touch with Juliet ?

The CAB might be a good place to start....

Tricia, I think you may have to go bck to read the original contract with the publisher especially regarding use of the illustrations. My (UK) understanding is that if you are employed by someone to do the work the copyright rests with them BUT they may have to have a specific contract clause assigning copyright in this way just to be safe (for them). In the UK, the law was also changed ten? or fifteen? years ago so this may be a factor too.

It does depend on the country whose laws govern the contract, and this should be stated explicitly in the contract.

For example, when I wrote material for a (non-fiction) book, as part of the contract I get first refusal if the book is to be updated and reissued. But the copyright of my words is with the company I wrote them for, and not with me. That was drawn up under UK law.

There's also a UK thing where the contract may be deemed to be unfair if it is unbalanced on behalf of the 'big guy' should anything go to court.

So, check the contract.....

Aerin

ps found a site http://www.artquest.org.uk/artlaw/copyright/28183.htm

pps law aside, that's just plain RUDE

Mythic Tarot

Yes, I think I still have the contract somewhere. I haven't talked to Juliet, or anyone yet, as I've only just found out about it. I don't know what the other illustrations look like yet so I don't know whether they are all going to be clones of the originals, but judging by the cover I would imagine that they are. I just don't understand their thinking - why produce a copy of something which has been so successful?

Tricia, is Fireside Publishing a subsidiary of Simon & Schuster of New York? And if it is, wouldn't US Copyright Law come into play here?

We are very picky about intellectual property rights in this country. I am no lawyer, but you may have a case with or without a contract! I think this is an egregious affront to you as an artist. And I think I speak for many of us here that we support you.

This is a strange one, which begs the question of why they chose to have new illustrations done in the first place, why not inform you or offer you the opportunity to do them. But to then base the new versions in any significant way on your originals seems to be adding insult to injury.

However apart from the morals involved, the legalities may depend on how similar the two versions are, and that may be subjective. Beyond that however is the similarity in names. For example Llewellyn would probably jump all over me if I were to produce a new deck and call it something very similar i.e. Guilded or New Gilded, simply because there would a compelling argument that there would be the potential for confusion in the consumers mind as to which was which. That in turn could have negative effects on the sales of the original, and hence your royalties from it. There is in fact a specific refernce to that "potential confusion" issue in my contract.
As gregory suggested you should seek initial legal advice and also contact the publisher and authors, requesting reference of the new images to ensure that they are indeed "new"

I'm not sure about Fireside Publishing. There have been so many different publishers in many different countries, but I actually did the work for Eddison Sadd, who are a book packager. It was published in the UK by Random House. Surely it would be covered by UK law, even though it's also sold via other publishers in other countries?

There's got to be something that you can do, Tricia. I'm appalled and outraged at even a notion of the new Mythic. The deck you created has pretty much achieved legendary status around this forum, and I'm sure with others as well. The deck was perfectly fine. Nothing wrong with it.

Here's something I posted when I finally calmed down after hearing about the new deck

raventepes said:

Reprinting a deck is one thing. Recreateing it's something ENTIRELY differant. Or even something like with what happened to the Der Jen. LS bought it and renamed it. I can see and understand that. But to completely redraw out a deck by another artist no less and to give it the same basic name? That's outrageous! Can we say "In it for the money?"? There was NOTHING NOTHING wrong with the original! This one's probably even going to have numbered major arcana! That was one of the things that I LOVED about the first version! Its art prefectly reflected the attitude of the deck! It was raw! Primal! What I see for that Pandora picture just reminds me of a cheep imitation.

I have to wonder...what artist would POSSIBLY concider remakeing someone else's work? You don't see people bidding to recreate the Sistine Chapple or the Mona Lisa do we? NO! We don't! This whole concept to me is just outrageous.

DON'T FIX WHAT ISN'T BROKEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

I stick to that original post.

Hello Tricia.

As has already been said, you need to read your contract, and probably have a lawyer interpret it for you.

If it says that you did the art as "work for hire" you will have little or no recourse. This would mean that anything you produced during the duration of the project belongs to the publisher. Usually this would even include all concept sketches or even written notes. They can do anything they like with it, in terms of use or alteration.

More likely, it states that all copyrights to the images are assigned to the publisher. When they sign you, they will tell you that this is necessary, in order for them to use their lawyers to protect against any violations. Also, it allows them to produce promotional materials without paying you additional royalties. But a side effect of this is that they can also alter the images or create derivative works without owing you anything. (I suspect this is what is happening here.)

One additional thing you might do is ask your lawyer about what happens to your royalty situation (assuming that you have one) when the "new" deck comes out. It's unlikely, but depending on how the contract is written, you may have a claim to a piece of the new deck.

Anyway, I'm sorry to hear about this situation.
Good luck.

Quick Copywrite

A rreeaallllyy quick way to copy write something that YOU created (if you dont want to spend a hundred bucks min on copywriting) is a trick my piano teacher taught me (she is just about the most amazing person in the world lol). Photocopy your creation and MAIL it to yourself. When you get it back, do not take it out of the envelope. Keep it in safe-keeping. It will have the date on the envelope, and there is your super-easy-quick way to copy-write!!
Please Note: if you plan on selling your creation to the wide world, use a more advanced source of copywrite. This is just for small ideas / pictures / that you want to keep as your own for now.

|| When I refer to MAIL I mean that kind of MAIL where you stick it into an envelope and smack a stamp ontop and stuff it into your mailbox. || hehe we're in the 21st century ppl ^_^