Thinking About Making
Suppose I design and build birdhouses with an easy-cleaning lower shelf. Suppose they’re really cute and I’m selling a lot. A brand name hardware store and a brand name home decor store catch my Instagram sharing and make an offer I can’t refuse, as I license and sell through both venues, of which both companies are worth millions and millions.
I’m pretty delighted, but then the company that makes the boards I use in my birdhouse, says–“we have to have more money for our supplies because now you’re with a big company.” And so does the dowel maker, and the special screen maker on the lower shelf. They all want a piece of what I designed and built and licensed– only because it’s now with some large company.
Sounds unreal, right?
Some Art Licenses
Isn’t that what some art companies and artists expect in their digital use licenses? It’s very confusing. Have you read the licenses when you purchase digital products for your art making?
Maybe it’s only if I’m asked to design the birdhouse by the company. But that’s not clear, nor does it make any sense anyway. And what’s more, it’s not stated what the additional cost would be. Perhaps I can include that as part of the contract, and perhaps it won’t affect the bottom line, but are we sure? We aren’t provided the cost or the next steps, but just a “contact us” expectation.
The Question
Why do digital companies and some artists think they can intrude on the results of an artist’s designs when using their products?
I buy a brush at the art store and no one will come after me for part of the profits if I sell my art prints at a brand name store. Why is a digital brush different? The makers don’t have a physical product to make — it’s all digital downloads.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I totally admire the craftsmanship, imagination, and creativity it takes to make a digital brush that acts like real gouache or watercolor or oil or chalk. I know it takes time and knowledge.
I also purchase the additional commercial license when I buy digital products. But, as I’ve said, even the “commercial” license may have this additional stipulation if the artist’s work is licensed with a larger company.
But, to me, once I buy it, it would be mine to use in my creations, just like the brush or scrapbook paper I buy in the store. Digital creations come with the obviously needed restrictions not to sell or share them myself, but that other stipulation when I may actually get a big sale/contract, to expect some other arrangement in a license? That’s totally not OK.
Are you confused?
Perhaps I’m totally misunderstanding the license change, but that’s part of the problem. Don’t you think it should be stated right up front, in the initial license, including costs?
I think if you look at “bespoke tailoring,” the basis for the stipulation in the license is found, but it still does not make sense for a digital project, especially only after reaching a certain limit in sales. A digital product doesn’t even need to be changed when the limit is reached. It’s not part of the the original product; the item is simply created by the artist with the product [brush, texture paper, font, etc.]– just as it would be with a physical element.
Anyway, I’m disappointed in the idea of expecting something different only when an artist may finally get some reward for their own work and designs. I know many artists who have developed a beautiful style and lovely illustrations and patterns over time. I know that many of them will find themselves able to sell to a large company.
And that’s my reason for writing this post: What’s fair– to the art brush creators, the artists who use the brushes, and the art?
I just find it ludicrous that such a change in license is made and accepted by artists. It simply doesn’t make sense, nor is it fair to the purchasing artist.
What do you think? Can you help clear up the confusion?
I wonder, if I draw a line... 