Oldies But Goodies {Put This One on Your TBR List} Miss Hickory by Carolyn Sherwin Bailey by Karen S. Wiesner

 

Oldies But Goodies

{Put This One on Your TBR List}

Miss Hickory by Carolyn Sherwin Bailey

by Karen S. Wiesner 

 

Beware potential spoilers! 

The world was a very different place when Miss Hickory by Carolyn Sherwin Bailey was published in 1946. This was a children's novel, not a picture book with questionably well-done art accompanied by a sprinkling of words across the pages. Miss Hickory has 128 pages, 24,000 words. Back then, children were often read to by other people, usually parents. No doubt, many of these books were far beyond the child's own reading level yet the stories were perfectly understandable to them. The current suggested age for this book is 8 to 12, which boggles my mind a bit, and not simply because I can't imagine too many kids these days picking up a complex book like this. Additionally, back then stories like this one seemed to have a higher purpose than simply entertaining readers. 

Miss Hickory was one of the very first books I ever read on my own as a child. With a protagonist who's a living doll made from a forked apple tree twig and a hickory nut for a head, her story was magical to me. Miss Hickory lived in a luxurious corncob house made by her owner Ann. Miss Hickory is used to being spoiled, but now things are changing. Ann is going away, and selfish Squirrel has decided he likes Miss Hickory's comfy house for his own winter home. Crow helps her find a nest where she can live out the winter, but she'll need to be clever and courageous to survive. The author and her husband lived on a farm with an apple orchard, and she drew inspiration for this story from there. 

When I reread this enchanting story again recently, it was to the realization about just how prickly and hard-headed (sorry) Miss Hickory is. She likes to instruct people how best to live their lives but accepting help from others always leaves her irritated. And sometimes she misses out on wonderful things because of her stubbornness. Hilariously, she also likes be very feminine, and we find several chapters with Miss Hickory being a fashionista by making herself new and beautiful clothing out of things like maple leaves and grass and cherry blossoms. I found it interesting that Miss Hickory took the existence of God for granted. There's a Christmas miracle to be seen, but she misses it because she's too pigheaded to listen to anything Squirrel has to say. Does she learn her lesson through the many chapters in which she and her friends live out their lives on the farm? I'm not sure. But she does learn a lot about herself--her own origin, for one. 

This story was told very strangely. Most of the chapters were from Miss Hickory's point of view, which made sense, as this is the compilation of her adventures during the seasons. However, sometimes we're put into the perspective of another (usually animal) character for no other reason I can fathom other than that the author felt she'd started a story with that particular character and needed closure before going back to Miss Hickory. 

Though Squirrel plucks off and takes a bite of Miss Hickory's head (too scary for modern readers in both words and illustration? probably)--his character is suitably drawn with all the complexity needed for readers to find him endearing despite his actions. He's an animal designed for storing up food for himself, yet he can't seem to remember where he's hidden all his nuts from one minute to the next, let alone over the course of a long, harsh winter. And, frankly, wouldn't he much rather just eat it now? Of course he would! It's easy to root for all of these lovable, fully-fleshed out characters. Though the chapters play out in a seemingly random fashion, the story does actually reach full circle by the end. 

I'd be remiss not to mention the lovely illustrations done by Ruth Chrisman Gannett. I found out they were done by a process called lithography, which is a really archaic (though there are still people who do it) means of photocopying something. Apparently, the artist has to be very careful while drawing on the stone (or similar material) as there are no second chances with this method. Either it's drawn right the very first time--or as close as possible--or a whole lot of time, effort, and materials will be wasted. Find out more about the art of this here https://jerwoodvisualarts.org/art-techniques-and-materials-glossary/lithography/ and be sure to watch some YouTube videos of it actually being done. I found it fascinating. Too much work, definitely, but still intriguing as a precursor to modern-day photocopying. 

Inspired by the incredible artwork in Miss Hickory, I couldn't help wanting to do some sketches from the book myself, which were all done by black and white lithography (although color is possible with the method). I even did one in color, though only the cover of the book has color in the first edition. Does anyone else want an apple now, too? <grin>

  

Miss Hickory Black & White Sketch and Colored Pencil Rendering by @Karen Wiesner

 

Miss Hickory's Corncob House by @Karen Wiesner 

If you do an internet search with the words "Miss Hickory illustrations", you'll see some of Gannett's original designs, including one of Squirrel holding Miss Hickory's still scolding head just before he takes a bite of it. Never fear, Miss Hickory may end up headless, but she's also "heedless, happy" that way. Clearly, her head had been holding her back. 

Children and adults alike will find a timeless, magical world to explore in this well-deserving Newbery Medal Winner. The lesson to be learned (as all these old books had some kind of moral to impart, which I heartily approve) is not to hold yourself back from who you're meant to be--not with the promise of comfort nor with the hurtle of fear of the unknown. 

Karen Wiesner is an award-winning, multi-genre author of over 150 titles and 16 series.

Visit her website and blog here: https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/

and https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/karens-quill-blog and her publisher here: https://www.writers-exchange.com/Karen-Wiesner/

Art Versus Life

A work of art (specifically, literature, including poetry such as song lyrics) does not necessarily reveal the life or personality of the artist. Agatha Christie and Dorothy Sayers didn't make a habit of committing murders. Stephen King has probably never met a vampire or an extradimensional shapeshifter, and although he incorporated his near-fatal traffic accident into the Dark Tower series, I doubt he actually encountered his gunslinger Roland in person. Robert Bloch, reputed to have said he had the heart of a small boy -- in a jar on his desk -- was one of the nicest people I ever met. As Mercedes Lackey has commented on Quora, she doesn't keep a herd of magical white horses in her yard. Despite the preface to THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS, it seems very unlikely that C. S. Lewis actually intercepted a bundle of correspondence between two demons. And, as a vampire specialist, I could go on at length (but I won't) about the literary-critical tendency to analyze DRACULA as a source for secrets about Bram Stoker's alleged psychological hangups.

C. S. Lewis labeled the practice of trying to discover a writer's background, character, or beliefs from his or her work "the personal heresy." Elsewhere, writing about Milton, he cautioned against thinking we can find out how Milton "really" felt about his blindness by reading PARADISE LOST or any of his other poetry.

The Personal Heresy

An article by hip-hop musician Keven Liles cautions against analyzing songs in this way and condemning singers based on the contents of their music, with lyrics "being presented as literal confessions in courtrooms across America":

Art Is Not Evidence

Some musicians and other artists have been convicted of crimes on the basis of words or images in their works. Liles urges passage of a law to protect creators' First Amendment rights in this regard, with narrowly defined "common-sense" exceptions to be applied if there's concrete evidence of a direct, factual connection between a particular work and a specific criminal act.

This kind of confusion between art and life is why I'm deeply suspicious of child pornography laws that would criminalize the broad category of "depicting" children in sexual situations. A description or drawing/painting of an imaginary child in such a situation, however revolting it may be, does no direct real-world harm. Interpreted loosely or capriciously, that kind of law could be read to ban a novel such as LOLITA. Would you really trust a fanatical book-banner or over-zealous prosecutor or judge to discern that the repulsive first-person narrator is thoroughly unreliable and that his self-serving claims about his abusive relationship with a preteen girl are MEANT to be disbelieved?

Many moons ago, in the pre-internet era, a friend of mine who wasn't a regular consumer of speculative fiction read my chapbook of horror-themed verse, DAYMARES FROM THE CRYPT. To my suprise, she expressed sincere worry about me for having such images in my head. Not being a habitual reader of the genre, she didn't recognize that the majority of stuff in the poems consisted of very conventional, widely known horror tropes. Even the more personal pieces had been filtered through the "lens" of creativity (as Liles puts it in his essay) to transmute the raw material into artifacts, not autobiography.

In case you'd like to check out these supposedly disturbing verse effusions, DAYMARES FROM THE CRYPT -- updated with a few later poems -- is available in a Kindle edition for only 99 cents, with a cool cover by Karen Wiesner:

Daymares

Margaret L. Carter

Please explore love among the monsters at Carter's Crypt.

Medieval Art Celebration by Karen Wiesner

Art by Karen Wiesner

In celebration of all things Medieval, a simplified black and white sketch I did in 2022 of the painting The Accolade by Edmund Blair Leighton (1901).

@Karen Wiesner

Snag And Be Damned

Each week, I read dozens of USA and international copyright-related columns, including media law, trademark law, technology insights, art law, proceedings of the USPTO, music policy, writing industry forums, and more, and I put together some of what I find most interesting and potentially relevant to writers.

This week, "art" jumped out at me.

As legal bloggers for Herrick Feinstein LLP  explain, there are differences in artists' rights in the USA versus, for instance in Italy.  In some European jurisdictions, an artist receives payment every time a copyrighted work of art is sold and resold. Not so in the USA.  Gabrielle C. Wilson, Howard N. Spiegler,  Lawrence M. Kaye and Yale M. Weitz  write a thorough summary of art law rights in the USA.

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e90a3a21-32c4-4672-85e4-19c994420cbc

Interestingly, museums usually try to obtain the permission of the artist/copyright owner before copying the artwork into catalogues or into posters and other advertisements. If that is an issue for catalogues and advertisements, is it a stretch to wonder if it could be an issue for cover art for self-published books if author-publishers do not make sure to obtain all the necessary rights and permissions for their cover art?

Another issue to be considered is the incidental or deliberate appearance of "street art" in photographs or advertisements.... or even on items of clothing. Or not!  Street artists have rights, even when they do not own the surface on which they apply their art.

Social-media-law expert legal blogger Robert B. Nussbaum for Saiber LLC's Trending Law Blog discusses a recent reversal of a liberal circuit's decision on whether or not it is copyright infringement to use Facebook's embedding tools to exploit someone else's video (in this case of an emaciated polar bear) in defiance of the copyright owner's clearly posted copyright notice.

https://trendinglawblog.com/2021/10/05/southern-district-of-new-york-rejects-ninth-circuits-copyright-analysis-regarding-embedded-images/

Apparently, just because Facebook or Instagram make it possible for their users to do something (embed copyrighted works without permission) does not mean that Facebook's magic impunity umbrella will protect users from liability.

Also piling on Facebook (my characterizaation), legal bloggers Kyle Petersen and C. Linna Chen  of Loeb and Loeb LLP discuss the interesting case of an attractive (one infers) lady newscaster who found her photograph being used without her permission as part of an advertisement for a Facebook dating app. She sued Facebook and other platforms.  Facebook tried to hide behind Section 230, without success.

https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2021/09/hepp-v-facebook 

Read all about it. What a terrible precedent it would have been if the lady had lost! Facebook could have been emboldened to snag any attractive face to use in its promotions for any other app or product or service. 

Imagine if you found your face or that of someone you love being used without permission or compensation to sell an activity or product that you do not endorse or approve! Maybe, also, be careful where you get the images that you put on your website and cover art.

Nevertheless, it is probably a better idea to peel away Section 230 protections and give the newly created CASE Act court a chance to work, than to give governments more power.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ 

http://www.spacesnark.com/  http://www.rowenacherry.com

 

Of Art and Dirty Laundry

In times of inflation, art appreciates. When cash (or bonds, or equities) lose value, people spend. They buy art, precious metals, property, stamps, and alcohol.

By the way, the cost of an American "Forever" stamp is likely to go up from 55c to 58c on August 29th, 2021.

For those who still use postage stamps to pay bills and send thank-you notes, buying a stash of forever stamps before the increase represents at least a 6% saving.

 

The savvy shopper might also invest in Tide Pods as a store of value. Proctor and Gamble has announced that it will be raising prices in September on adult incontinence products, baby care, feminine care and more.

Art is more interesting from a copyright perspective, and also a literary point of view. Thrillers have been written about high value rare coins, high value rare stamps, lost and stolen masterpieces: Charade, The Saint in Palm Springs, The Rembrandt Affair, The Monuments Men, The Last Vermeer etc.

Works of art can be forged, stolen, traded, used as a medium for smuggling something even more valuable, or created or sold as a beard for money laundering. In some jurisdictions, such as the UK, the authorities are taking notice. The law office of DLA Piper have a great article on anti-money laundering and requirements for art market participants to register (in the UK.). 

https://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publications/2021/06/anti-money-laundering-registration-for-art-market-participants/

 

Legal bloggers Gabrielle C. Wilson,  Howard N. Spiegler, Lawrence M. Kaye and Yael M. Weitz of the law offices of Herrick Feinstein LLP have published a thorough and comprehensive "snapshot" of the state of art ownership and trading in the USA including a discussion of what happens if an unsuspecting person buys a work of art that later is revealed to have been stolen.

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=21e56ac4-18a0-4e63-9910-698f1f88303a

One of the most interesting commentaries on the international art market comes from Art Law: Introduction, authored by Pierre Valentin of Constantine Cannon LLP. 

Quoting a small portion:

"Owing to changes in taste, high-end and, to a lesser extent, mid-market 20th-century and contemporary art and collectibles are doing well. Old masters and older furniture are not doing as well, unless they are exceptional examples."

And, on prices for exceptional works:

"...some commentators predict that within just a few years, an [iconic example of] artwork will sell for over US$1 billion. There is a relatively small pool of international billionaires and museums competing to acquire trophy pieces. Exceptional prices have been achieved at auction when only two such collectors or museums bid against one another."

Read more at: 

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=955d99cb-b043-4092-a740-2d1ce670783a

Astonishingly, works of art costing $500,000 or less are considered "lower end".

If and when one buys a physical piece of art, one owns the canvas (or wood, or paper) and the paint (or whatever medium is applied to the surface), but one does not necessarily own the intellectual property. One cannot create prints or derivative works... except in the circumstance that the creator assigned the IP by written contract.

That principle also applies when one does not own an original copyrighted work at all, as is the case with Andy Warhol and his copying of a photograph of Prince. An Appeals court has ruled that it is not transformative, and not fair use to take someone else's portrait and merely change the color of the subject's skin.

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/andy-warhol-foundation-loses-lynn-goldsmith-copyright-lawsuit-1955399

Lee S. Brenner and Nicholas W. Jordan for Venable LLP, discuss the case, and the four important factors that determine whether or not a use is "fair".

https://www.closeupsblog.com/2021/05/second-circuit-finds-andy-warhols-use-of-prince-photograph-not-fair-use/#page=1

It would seem that the Warhol Estate's contention that giving a person a purple face transforms them from awkward to "iconic" is ... not convincing.

On the same topic, Clyde Shuman, blogging for Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz explain that this case may have a lasting impact on the concept of "fair use" in American copyright law.

https://www.pearlcohen.com/second-circuit-andy-warhols-use-of-copyrighted-prince-photograph-not-fair-use/

I think that is good news for professional photographers, and also for artists in general.

Happy Fathers' Day.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry  

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/  http://www.rowenacherry.com

EPIC Award winner, Friend of ePublishing for Crazy Tuesday

A Non-Fungible Future?

There was once a man who bought an original sketch in an inventory-draw-down sale. The sketch was done during the course of employment by a moderately well known designer. So far, so good.  The buyer was an EBay seller, and he created dozens of prints of the original sketch, which he auctioned on EBay week after week for years. That was questionable.

Lawfully, one cannot purchase a drawing, painting, photograph, cartoon, musical record, novella or novel  (even in e-book form) and proceed to create copies and sell them. Not unless the original creator formally assigned the copyright.

Now, there is Blockchain, and Non-Fungible Tokens, or NFTs. It seems that a single work of art that is sold as a NFT can be sold on, but not duplicated, and a modest royalty can be paid to the original creator with every down-market sale and resale.

Can creatives and celebrities rejoice? 

https://www.hickmanbecker.com/celebrities-and-creative-geniuses-rejoice-nfts-part-i/

Lexology link:

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=06e3b2e5-5295-489b-baec-43a621575a0d

 

Seemingly, so say legal bloggers Jeffrey Madrak and  Agatha H. Liu PhD for the IP law firm Hickman Becker Bingham Ledesma:

 

"Non-fungible tokens, or “NFTs” are taking the digital world by storm. Jack Dorsey, the founder of Twitter, recently sold an autographed tweet associated with an NFT for $2.9 million. Super Bowl champion Tom Brady just announced the launch of the NFT platform he has cofounded that will offer digital collectibles. Such popular use with highly appraised items begs the question – What actually is an NFT? And for those of us in the high-tech world, the further question – How do NFTs relate to intellectual property?"

 They go on to explain:

"An NFT is a digital version of a certificate of authenticity (a token), secured and embedded in a blockchain. When an NFT is created, digital information including the creator’s name and other programmatic details such as the creator’s blockchain wallet address are linked to an underlying asset and stored in a blockchain (while the underlying asset might not be stored in the blockchain). Because NFTs are secured by a blockchain, no one can modify the record of ownership or copy/paste a new NFT into existence."

For authors in particular, author Maggie Lynch has put up a comprehensive blog post on the topic, in which she lays out the pros and cons for adopting the technology.

https://povauthorservices.com/the-blockchain-nfts-cryptocurrency-and-author-opportunities/ 

Herewith, a quote of a small portion, with permission and attribution to Maggie Lynch and her blog.

"Here are some ideas of how an average author might consider creating NFTs. I’m sure there are many more I haven’t even considered yet.

• Digital 1st edition released in limited numbers prior to a book being released en masse to retailers
• A collectible version of a backlist book or a recent release that has different art or added art pertaining to the story
• A special edition boxset that is not offered in retail markets and won’t be offered in retail markets
• A bundled special edition that includes ebook, audiobook, and a shipped hardback book as a package
• A 1st edition Live Reading before the book is released widely, whether narrated by the author or a paid narrator
• Additional works of art based on your characters that are sold as separate digital art, playing cards, and/or provides information not in the books but germane to the story
• Tiers of special editions – Platinum tier: Only 25 copies are made of original offering which includes additional art, audiobook, and a special edition hardback delivered signed and numbered. Gold tier: 500 copies of special edition which includes everything but hardback. Silver tier: 1,000 copies of digital special edition which includes additional art.  After this, the book is released as a regular ebook, print, audio all separate without any special edition things to the wider marketplace.
• A digital object that helps your reader solve a puzzle inside the book.
• A digital object that allows your reader to select two or more alternative endings
• A way for the buyer to have a video call with you for a specified period of time or to book you for a limited part of friends (book group, family, etc.)
• You could use one or more of your NFTs as part of a contest or giveaway to create buzz and get people interested in the platform

All of these are additional opportunities for PR, promo, buzz, and have the potential to also influence regular retail sales of your book products. Doing NFTs is one more market for you. I would not leave the usual mass markets just to do NFTs. Instead I would add NFTs as another way to gain income, at least until it proves it is the only way that makes sense for you to market your books."

Legal blogger Sophie Goossens, representing Reed Smith LLP, (a British law blog) takes a dimmer view of NFTs when it comes to ownership of works of art in a blog titled "You Think You Own An NFT? Think Again." She is, of course, speaking to art connoisseurs.

https://viewpoints.reedsmith.com/post/102gu68/you-think-you-own-an-nft-think-again

"Can one own a physical a piece of art? Yes. What do you own: the 'tangible property' i.e. the canvas, the statue, the physical sheet of paper embodying the work. Do you own the intellectual property in a piece of art just because you hold the original or a limited edition of it? No, if you want to own the intellectual property in the artwork, it needs to be assigned to you from the creator, by contract."

Sophie Goossens asks and answers several more interesting questions about possession and ownership of art and digital art.

 

Last (but not least), Pramod Chintalapoodi of the Chip Law Group takes a look at the legal implications of NFTs, and warns:

"The NFT's usefulness when it comes to IP rights is currently limited, and even problematic. The dilemma here is that ownership of NFT does not translate into ownership of an original work. In other words, buying an NFT does not mean that one is buying the underlying IP rights in a given content. Section 106 of the US Copyright Act states that a copyright owner has exclusive rights in reproducing and preparing derivative works. They also have exclusive rights in distributing the copyrighted work. Buying a piece of art does not mean that the copyright to that artwork transfers to the buyer."

https://www.chiplawgroup.com/legal-implications-of-nfts/

The bottom line seems to be that NFTs may be good for thwarting pirates and exploiters, and are therefore good for creators of art and literature.... but, one has to be prepared to adopt Ethereum.

Coindesk has put up a How-To guide to entering the NFT market:
https://www.coindesk.com/how-to-create-buy-sell-nfts

All the best,

Rowena Cherry  

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/  http://www.rowenacherry.com

Piracy, the Photographer, and the Photographer's Models

I found Mitchel Gray in the front matter of Men's Health Magazine in 1994. At least, I found his name in very small print, in the credits for the photograph of the cover model. Over the years, he has been my go-to source whenever I have needed a gorgeous, shirtless male for my books' cover art.

This double portrait of an NFL player is an example of Mitchel Gray's artistry from his "Bodies In Motion" series. The most unique feature of this series is that both figures are the same person.

Please note that the image is watermarked in dark red (which is subtle, but "there"). The copyright belongs to Mitchel Gray, the image is shown here with Mitchel Gray's explicit permission. Snag it at your peril.

Print costs vary according to the size of the print, and are available from 11 x14 to 40 x 60

$750 - $4,000.  Licenses for cover art and more would depend on time frame and usage.  To see more, check out www.mitchelgray.com

 

Recently, I asked Mitchel Gray a flurry of copyright infringement related questions.

1) How has piracy affected you?  (Have any of your photographs been snagged from the internet and exploited by someone without permission?  Have you found any of your photographs, without your permission or payment, on any of the sites that sell licences to use images?  Have you found any of your images online with the copyright information cropped out or stripped out?  How does that make you feel? 

Mitchel: Piracy has not impacted me terribly badly, but certainly a few times --as far as I know-- and that’s the problem. I may not be aware of any number of snagged images. I try to watermark any online usage of mine, but that certainly does not exclude being “copied and pasted” directly from my website or elsewhere my pix may appear -- there are some very competent “thieves” out there. I have not found my images on the sites that sell licenses, but that doesn’t mean they’re not there—I can't spend all the time required to search. I have found images online with my credit removed, but that usually occurs when the models post the images—and not that often even then. Sometimes the client will do it. 

It’s very irritating.

My next salvo of questions were:

2) How does a photographer make money?  What does piracy do to your cash flow?  Is it good, free publicity?  Or is it very damaging? 

Mitchel: A few different ways: direct commissions from private clients, Ad agencies booking jobs, or purchasing existing images, magazine editorials, stock photo sales, fine art private and gallery sales, and books, both printed and virtual. Piracy simply deprives the photographer of revenue which ain’t good. But sometimes as you mention, it may be free PR, however that depends who and where they are posted

3) What can you do, if you see copyright infringement of your photographs?  Has this happened to you?  Has the DMCA "takedown" process worked for you?  Have you ever sent a DMCA and been thwarted by a counter notice?  Have you ever sued anyone? 

Mitchel: You can sue the user, or publish a wide ranging post about its misuse naming the user, you can force it to be removed from the site using DMCA. I’ve never been thwarted by any counter notice. However, sometimes there may an issue of interpretation of an agreement. I have sued a few.

4) What goes into taking great photographs that you could sell for cover art for a novel? Location?  Light quality? number of shots?  Amount of time? Do you pay the model?  Airbrushing? 

Mitchel: All the above plus a clear knowledge and discussion of the intent for the look, location, and subject matter from the author or publisher, depending on who is hiring me. And concept, concept, concept!

Asked to explain, Mitchel obliged.

"Concept, concept, concept” refers the idea of the photo—or what am I trying to say in the picture. There are a lot of ways to get your point across and each of them will present a different visual while doing it, and it gets more complex depending on the project—a portrait is different than headshot, a book is different than a magazine editorial, an ad is different than a label on a can, etc. That is one of the joys of the medium.  

 5) How has piracy affected your models?

 Mitchel: In a similar way, but with more potential impact, depending again on the location of the post, who is doing the posting, and on what is the intent the post is- who is it being used for. Also if it is being used in conjunction with other questionable content. It can be very painful, and infuriating

6)  How long can a cover model's career last?

Mitchel: A wide range here. A few years for some, 30+ years for others, all depending on how they adapt - or are allowed to adapt- to the aging process, and the type of publication or a story that will be told. I have one friend who is now 57 and still modeling. Different clientele, different uses.

7) What should an independent author know about buying a photograph for the cover art of an ebook?   What should she expect to pay?  What rights would she get for the money?  What waivers and releases would she need to obtain (and pay for)? 

Mitchel: This is all up for negotiation each time. The price is based on time limits, the expanse of circulation areas, what else she might want to use it for other than the cover, i.e. advertising, promotion, social enhancement, etc. She would need a release from the photographer that states either the areas, or if the shooter is willing, a buyout which is always the most expensive.

8) Where are good, reputable sites for buying licenses for cover art? 

Mitchel: There are the stock photo companies (they are also generally the cheapest which stinks for us), a number of new online sites that offer photo sales, and private individuals. Since the business is now virtually totally digital, one only has to provide digital files and that has fueled in increase in online sites.. I’m sure there a more, but these are the legitimate ones.

9) What other services might photographers offer (if any) in cover art preparation?

Mitchel: So many options- 

1. conceptual sit-downs to lock in on the purpose and market.

2. location search and securing.

3. Hair & Makeup artists and stylists

4. travel arrangements if need be.

5. studio usage and rental

6. lighting approaches

7. digital application and knowledge 

8. editing !!!!!

And a lot more.

10)   Do you have any advice for any amateur photographer who lives in an especially scenic location for monetizing their photographs?

Mitchel:  Yes, shoot a whole lot of images, perfect your editing skills (photoshop, and more), research research research stock houses and stock sites for both legitimacy, style of images, and price points. And keep on shooting! You never know what you might capture that someone may have a use for.  Of course, this pertains mostly to stock sales. Comission shooting is obviously a much different story. In that case you shoot those pictures to get hired, not to sell directly

As an example of what Mitchel did for me, here is the before shot of the rock climbing model who seemed perfect as 'Rhett, hero of Knight's Fork.

And here is how Mitchel cut the ropes and inserted a sword.

 

To contact Mitchel Gray

Mitchel Gray
mitchelgray7@icloud.com

917.721.7303

www.mitchelgray.com

Thanks, Mitchel!

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/ 

Willy Nilly and the Erosion of Privacy

Does personal privacy matter? Less so, it seems, in the age where a priority is put on the convenience of others and the profitability of "data", whether the subject of the eroded privacy likes it or not.

"Willy Nilly" harks back to the Old English for "will he" and "ne-will he", "ne" being the negative prefix which is not usually cited in online dictionaries. Most resources condense "ne-will" to "nill", but not all.

Millennials don't seem to mind.  Authors are accustomed to having to give up some privacy as a trade off for pursuing a career, and some authors use pen names... and sometimes, a pen name is not the guarantee of privacy that it used to be.

Perhaps, it is not a good thing for all those sites --that post disclaimers asking paid users to refrain from making employment, or housing, or lending, or other important decisions about the person whose alleged info they are selling online-- to be allowed to monetize private information.  They don't always get it right.  Even if they did get everything right, that information tends to deny persons a fair chance or a second chance.

It is divisive.

Ironically, to read a Loeb and Loeb legal blog article about privacy, you have to accept cookies.
https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2020/02/new-uspto-rule-makes-trademark-owner-email-and-mailing

Lexology link.

Loeb and Loeb LLP legal bloggers Melanie Howard, David W. Grace and Ashley Van Leer explain for the benefit of trademark owners how new USPTO rules make trademark owners' street addresses and email addresses available to the public. Authors cannot hide behind their intellectual properties attorney any more.

That is lovely for the "Person-Locator-type" internet businesses that sell personal information, and also for scammers, robocallers, spear phishers, and other common varieties of spammers... and advertisers and marketers.

By the way, on the subject of government helpfulness.... the Copyright Office will be raising many fees as of March 20th, 2020. (Not for photographers.)
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-02-19/pdf/2020-03268.pdf

Reverting to advertising and targeting, and the annoying loss of privacy, the Charles Russell Speechlys LLP  UK focused legal blog has some must-read insights into data driven online targeting.

Lexology link.

Original:
https://www.charlesrussellspeechlys.com/en/news-and-insights/insights/commercial/2020/2020-update-data-driven-online-targeting/

Legal blogger Olivia Crane does a deep dive into what data-driven online targeted advertising means, especially for Britons. This author sympathizes with Olivia Crane's unpleasant experience with shower curtains.

I had a similar experience recently with a synthetic planking product that popped up and virtually stalked me wherever I went (online).  This was after I made a purchase which I regret to this day... so where was the commercial sense in metaphorically bludgeoning me with a Lumber product?

It seems to me, the sensible advertisement targeters might be using "targeting" in much the same way as click-fraud.  "This woman recently bought a new roof for her house (usually a 15 - 30 year warrantied purchase), let's sell her name to roofers, so they can try --in vain-- to sell her a new roof!"

Most authors use Facebook, too.  The Socially Aware legal blog asks, "Are your facebook posts discoverable?"  Of course they are!
https://www.sociallyawareblog.com/2020/02/24/are-your-facebook-posts-discoverable-application-of-the-forman-test-in-new-york/#page=1

Lexology.

J. Alexander Lawrence and Lily Smith for Morrison Foerster LLP give chapter and verse on how far your privacy can be eroded and information you shared semi-privately on Facebook can be exploited and used against you in a court of law.

So, if you are ever going to sign a lease to rent a home that says "No cats", and having an illicit cat is grounds for eviction, do not post photos of your beloved cat on your Facebook page with distinctive features of said rental house in the background... for example.

Finally, for readers who love fine art, your ability to acquire anonymously is receeding, as Andrea N. Perez, writing for Carrington Coleman explains.
https://www.ccsb.com/our-firm/publish/loss-of-privacy-rights-when-purchasing-art/

Lexology.

Art lovers are presumed to be terrorists and/or money launderers until they prove otherwise according to the EU's Fifth Directive.

What an excellent book title "The Fifth Directive" would be!

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/ 

Bare Bottoms, Bubbly, Benelux And Beyond

One cannot resist alliteration, can one?

This past week, the most interesting copyright-related legal blogs centered on art, artists' moral rights, and the rights of those whose trademarks were depicted in commercial art.

Starting at the bare bottom, legal bloggers Annick Mottet Haugaard,  Olivia Santantonio, and Ruben Van Breugel discuss --with illustrations-- the legal objections brought by a maker of one of the world's finest Champagnes to an artist's repeated commercial use of their trademark in his works.

Lexology Link (which at the time of this writing is displaying the pointillismish bottom)
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e66edcf1-d801-4444-804b-8ac28db7d19a

Original Link (which unfortunately has broken links for the illustrations)
https://www.lydian.be/news/which-extent-can-artists-use-trademarks-their-works-0

The bare-bottom-with-bubbly case has not been settled, but for any author who is considering using someone else's trademark in her cover art... beware.


Beware, also, what you re-tweet. Defamation laws around the world are different, as J. Alexander Lawrence blogging for Morrison & Foerster LLP's Socially Aware blog explains.

Lexology Link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=55aed4c8-51e2-43c2-a4cf-cc7d529609b1

Original Link:
https://www.sociallyawareblog.com/2019/11/12/the-joys-and-dangers-of-tweeting-a-cda-immunity-update/#page=1

Even if you have the right to express yourself in 120 characters or more, someone else may have the right to sue you.


Talking of being sued, Susan Okin Goldsmith  writing for McCarter & English LLP has an inconvenient warning for owners of websites or blogs that allow third parties to comment or upload material (presumably or links) that might infringe on the copyrights of others.

Register your agent with the Copyright Office, or risk liability for whatever your visitors may post. The article is well worth reading, and gives detailed instructions on how to register and what it will cost.

Lexology link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2c03a3d0-4085-4419-aed1-afc8b0c2e0eb

Original Link:
https://www.mccarter.com/insights/renew-or-register-your-websites-copyright-agent-now/


Finally, and quite startlingly, Aysha Alawi-Azam  blogging for Clyde & Co LLP  reveals that an owner of a work of art may have difficulties if they change even the frame, let alone if they heavily restore the art, and the still-living artist objects.

Lexology Link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=747eca5a-cd5f-4795-9a8d-06c5f8077837

Original Link:
https://www.clydeco.com/insight/article/artists-moral-rights-in-the-frame

Sometimes we buy art at an estate sale, for instance, and it never dawns on us that it might be unwise to switch out one frame for another. It's worth reading the original... there are some glorious illustrations.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/  http://www.rowenacherry.com

Expensive Mistakes

Not all art is in the public domain, even if it is in a public place. even if an image-licensing service can license the right to use a specific photographer's photograph of that art. One might still, additionally, need a license from the original artist.

The United States Postal Service made such an expensive error, and will have to pay $3,554,946.95 plus interest to a sculptor.

Initially, a USPS employee mistook a view of a modern sculpture inspired by Lady Liberty for the Ellis Island original.  The latter is in the public domain. The former is the intellectual property of the living sculptor. Possibly, the USPS could have settled for $5,000 when they first discovered their mistake.

In a Washington Post article from 2013, author Lisa Rein quotes the lawsuit.

"Defendants, through the USPS, determined that it was in their financial best interest to continue to infringe upon Davidson's rights, as the costs to discontinue the infringing activity exceeded the marginal cost of royalties...."

They calculated wrong. Way wrong.  Legal blogger Jesse M. Brody for the law firm Manatt Phelps and Phillips LLP suggests that this may turn out to be one of the most expensive copyright mistakes ever.

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=382f2fb0-40d7-46a1-bf28-5abef7caa891&utm_source=lexology+daily+newsfeed&utm_medium=html+email+-+body+-+general+section&utm_campaign=lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=lexology+daily+newsfeed+2018-07-20&utm_term=

It would appear that the costliest part was a 5% running royalty on the 3.24% of the stamps that were bought by stamp collectors, and represented unadulterated profit for the USPS.

An article by Timothy B. Lee for Ars Technica shows the two faces of the Statute of Liberty: the fierce-faced original on Ellis Island, and the troubled-looking homage in Las Vegas.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/post-office-owes-3-5m-for-using-wrong-statue-of-liberty-on-a-stamp/

Presumably, this costly lesson in copyright infringement affects us all. We'll probably all pay more for stamps,
forever.

Now comes General Motors, with the argument that Joe Public should not be expected to research the history of every public building (especially if that building is covered in graffiti) before taking a photograph, or filming something else where the graffiti is in the background.

The case of Faulkner v General Motors Company is discussed by author Alan Feuer for the New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/arts/design/general-motors-graffiti-artist-copyright.html

It raises some interesting issues about the use of photographs and films of public buildings and art in (and on) public places.

For artists, the copyright alliance has a timely article on how to copyright your paintings.
https://copyrightalliance.org/ca_faq_post/copyright-my-paintings/

For artists who wish to license certain rights to a work, but not to relinquish their copyright in the work, the very generous and courteous people of ARTREPRENEUR publish a template agreement, free, on condition that the beneficiaries of this template give them written credit.

Find the template here:
https://artrepreneur.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Artist-licensing-agreement.pdf

Explicit credit: https://artrepreneur.wpengine.com/

All the best,

Rowena Cherry

Marketing Fiction In A Changing World Part 26 -Must You Compromise Your Art To Sell Big?

Marketing Fiction In A Changing World

 Part  26

Must You Compromise Your Art To Sell Big? 

by

Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Previous parts of this series can be found here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/05/index-to-marketing-fiction-in-changing.html

Here is one dismaying idea that arises among beginning writers when established professionals explain the field of fiction publishing.

"If I do what you say, I would be compromising my Art."

That idea, that your personal Art, something that defines who you are to yourself and what you were born to say to the world, must be tossed aside, ignored, tramped on, or lied about in order to sell fiction to a large, commercial (mass market) Market, arouses a "fight for life itself" response.

In fighting for your life, you may well regard the entire problem as "the end justifies the means" -- and be willing to do anything at all to survive.

We see that today in the resistance to Donald Trump -- half the country is morally convinced he is a threat to our very lives, and to all we've sacrificed so much to build for future generations.

The response to such a threat is utterly primal, and once triggered that response prevents any other nuanced message from dampening that response.

The response a writer feels to the mere whiff of the idea that they must compromise their Art in order to reach their intended audience, is that same "fight for your life" visceral response.

The heroic type person will fight to the death to protect their Art (or their politics).  The wimpish type won't make waves.  The majority fall between these two types.

But what if the response itself, a purely animal-flesh based response to a threat to life (or lives of our children), is inappropriate?  What if the problem of a Wild Politician or a Savage Publishing Industry is not a threat to life and limb, to children and posterity?

What if it is an entirely different sort of problem?

What if Compromise is not at all anything like a solution to the real problem?

We excoriate politicians for refusing to "compromise"  -- then turn around and refuse to "compromise our Art" -- maybe we have to reframe the problem of "How can I sell my novel (mine, my Art) to Mass Market Paperback publishers?"

Framing the issue changes the debate.  In fact, it changes the very issue itself.

To teach yourself to write good dialogue, read up on the psychology of "framing" and public argument and debate.  Some people grow up into a full, unconscious ability to use "framing" to direct the thinking of others while other people have to learn it in adulthood.

Here are some links where to start (it is a huge study).

http://frameworksinstitute.org/assets/files/PDF/chroniclephilanthropy_wordsthatchangeminds_2016.pdf

Frameworks Institute is a Washington based Think Tank hired by governments and other enterprises to "re-frame" a message to get the public to do what the hiring firm wants the public to do (rather than what the public actually prefers to do.)  They are aggressive manipulators -- proving how plastic public opinion can be.  (the ethics of doing this make fabulous Theme material).  They make a lot of money tricking the public.

Here is wikipedia's entry - worth contemplating.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_(social_sciences)

If "they" can do this frame thing TO YOU to put you at a disadvantage -- then surely you can do it to yourself to give yourself an advantage?

Problems are as plastic as public opinion -- you can reshape your problem, thus re-populate your list of possible solutions.  (and in the process of working on your own mind, you can take notes for the plot of your next novel).

When a think-tank "frames" a problem to sway public opinion, they are acting, and actions are Plot Events.

When a Character (or a person) explores their own mind looking for old, rotten, and inappropriate 'frames' left over from immature thinking, they are growing, arcing, changing -- and thus telling their own Story.

The exact same thing, FRAME, is both story and plot -- so therefore, it is a Theme.

It turns out, a scientific study supports the observation that humans do CHANGE with age and experience -- real personality change.

https://qz.com/914002/youre-a-completely-different-person-at-14-and-77-the-longest-running-personality-study-ever-has-found/

----------quote---------
If your patterns of thought, emotions, and behavior so drastically alter over the decades, can you truly be considered the same person in old age as you were as a teenager? This question ties in with broader theories about the nature of the self. For example, there is growing neuroscience research that supports the ancient Buddhist belief that our notion of a stable “self” is nothing more than an illusion.
---------end quote----

Maturity is not just getting older, but refining and reshaping the very plastic material of which your Character is made.

That does not mean being a victim of Think-Tanks that hammer you into a new "frame of mind" to march lockstep with the rest of the mob -- you can do it to yourself, and maybe get better results.  You can be the artist who reshapes yourself, just by reframing the problems in your life.

The classic language shift that has been urged on those seeking success is to think of problems as opportunities.

That is a re-framing.  It might help you -- might not.

Some people never learn framing, and thus can be manipulated by the unscrupulous with little effort.  Characters who use "framing" in their dialogue to get other Characters to change their behavior will seem realistic, like real people, to the reader.

But with TIME - we change in very fundamental ways.  And as we, ourselves, change, our very Art changes.

Is that compromising your Art - to mature and change yourself?

Your "self" is just one variable in this business of selling to Mass Market.

The Market itself is another very complex variable.  As the generations rotate through a particular genre or style of story, forming a Market for that story -- and then moving on, leaving that Market to be picked up by a younger generation, the publishers, too, change.

Editors are usually fairly young people, early in their own story-arc of character maturation.  And then they move on to other genres or niches in publishing.

So with Time, you change, the Market's audience members change, and the publishers and editors change.

Today, the changing market calculations have to take into account the ebook and audiobook -- and who knows what next.

Your Art changes, too.

The trick to "not compromising" your Art is very simple.  Create the piece, study what you have created, then watch the ever-changing Market for it to rotate through being just the right vehicle for that piece of Art.

Meanwhile, create more Art pieces.

Art critics have all noted how a given Artist (in any medium) will have "periods" -- sets of years when all the pieces produced relate to a given theme, subject, setting.  You, too, will have "periods" during which you explore specific themes.

With novelists, it is not always possible to discern when a given novel was written -- because an item may not be sell-able now, but will sell 10 years hence as the Market shifts.

So the answer to that age-old question is, no!  You never have to compromise your Art.  You just have to watch the Changing World change your Market into a home for that particular piece.

I know of best sellers that waited 20 years and more for the Market to cycle around.

Today, of course, we have the option of placing any piece directly into the publishing stream via self-publishing.  Sometimes that is the best way to go with a given book.  Figuring out which pieces you produce should go Indie, which self-publishing, and which Mass Market, is the business of writing.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com