SandScales

eskiworks:

The content you’ll find on this blog is SFW, so Eskiworks isn’t going anywhere.  You can also find me on twitter and such, links below just in case!

https://twitter.com/Eskiworks

www.patreon.com/Eskiworks

https://www.deviantart.com/katiehofgard

http://www.furaffinity.net/user/wolf-nymph/

https://www.instagram.com/eskiworks/

https://mastodon.art/@Eskiworks

That said, I think the new rules are bunk.  I fully understand tumblr is a private company and can lay down whatever rules they want.  But I have a REAL problem with the ongoing crusade against adult content I’m seeing via payment processors and content sites like tumblr.  Shitty puritanical views only serve to make talking about sex, enjoying sex, or ANYTHING to do with sex more taboo.  I want to be able to make adult art if I choose, and I support other artists in doing the same.  And in monetizing that content! 

Tumblr, I think you’re really REALLY making a huge mistake here.  You’re not only shooting yourself in the foot, but you’re screwing over tons of content creators who have built their living off adult content on your site.  As an independent creator, I’m angry for anyone effected by this.  Livelihoods are going to be effected. 

Sorry for the rant folks.  Like I said I’ll still be posting here, but in case it all goes down the toilet, come see me in the above places too!  <3

Reblogged from: eskiworks

eskiworks:

I recently published a calendar for sale featuring various floating island pieces that people have commissioned from me over on Redbubble.  I’ve gotten more than one inquiry about the ethics of doing this, including more than a few accusations of “sketchy” behavior.  I recently responded to one of these inquiries in private, which became rather lengthy but which I think is useful to post publicly.  I know this information is floating out there in other posts, but because of the frequency of misunderstandings, I thought it useful to put it out here again!

I’d first like to open this with a brief explanation of copyright and trademark law, because usually this question comes from a place of not understanding how those laws work. When an artist makes a piece of work, that individual piece of work is protected by copyright. No need to register the piece with the copyright office, though doing so can help in cases where your artwork is used illegally without your consent for profit. This applies to commissioned artwork as well. Unless it is specified in a written agreement (an exchange of emails can count), the copyright to a commissioned piece by default remains with the artist. The client is paying for the time used to create the piece. It’s a service, not a product (though it’s a bit of a combination especially in regards to traditional commissions where the original painting is shipped to the client). Even with traditional paintings, the rights to use the image remain with the artist by default. Because this isn’t widely known, I have it outlined in my term of service, a link to which is available on my front page of every gallery I have, and provided in email exchanges with clients before payment is made.

Now you might ask, what about the copyrights of the characters? Don’t the clients own the character design? In an absolutely strict legal sense, the answer is no. Character design, unlike individual works of art, is not protected by copyright. However, a character creator can TRADEMARK their character, the process for which is a bit more rigorous than copyright. While trademark isn’t protected immediately upon creation like copyrighted individual works are, you need to actually file for a trademark according to certain specifications to have your character design protected legally. Examples of trademarked characters are Mickey Mouse and Superman.

Ethically, however, the characters absolutely do belong to the clients! Despite there being no legal precedent, that is something I respect. Which is why I often alter commissioned works before selling prints, stickers, or other products of the piece. Some people prefer this. Some people find it insulting, and desire me to represent their character exactly as designed in my products. Most people don’t care, as they’ve read and agreed to be terms of service before paying for and receiving commissioned artwork. I do my best to respect the wishes of every client in this regard on an individual basis, within reason.

A side note I want to bring up, because this is often a point of confusion, is the term “Work for hire”, which you will see nowhere on my terms of service. This is a specific legal term that applies to artists doing work for clients who will retain all the rights to the resulting work. Many people think “work for hire” means “any work which you are hired for.” This is incorrect, and the source of a lot of grief for artists. It’s important to know that it refers to a very specific legal term, and not ALL art which you are hired to create.

Now onto my terms of service. If you take a look at the link here - tinyurl.com/katiehofgardtos You will see I have more than one clause covering this exact issue. Clause 14 outlines basic copyright law as it pertains to commissioned works.  While not necessary, helps to avoid confusion. Most people aren’t aware of the law, and I believe clients should be informed. Clause 15 states that I do not claim ownership of the character, another concern that potential clients may have. By commissioning me, you don’t give over the rights to your character in any fashion whatsoever. They still belong to you, just as the artwork belongs to me. Clause 16 is an extension of clause 14, to further clarify that “rights” include the distribution of the digital file and sale of the image in any way. Again, many people don’t understand what rights are, so this is to keep them informed. Clause 17 outlines the limited rights that I transfer to a client, because some people want to make a print for their wall, or a t-shirt of their character just for personal use. That doesn’t harm me financially in any way, and I think it’s only right they get to do that.

Every single client is given the opportunity to read this terms of service often in several stages; once before emailing me when I open for commissions, once in email exchanges before sending payment, and any time they wish to refresh their memory as it’s linked on all of my gallery pages. This is not hidden information, since it’s important to make the transaction go smoothly, and to protect both myself and the client.  Commissioning me is a choice, and preferences for the use of the commissioned art absolutely do get taken into consideration within reason.

I want to end this by emphasizing that without the use of commissioned works for creation of prints and other products, I and many other artists who work almost exclusively on a commission basis are reduced to being laborers alone. We are paid for the labor of making brand new art, but would be denied the opportunity to make passive income from our own artwork through products and licensing. I’m someone whose business is mostly labor. It will eventually catch up to me physically, I will not be able to make brand new art for pay later in life. It doesn’t seem like it, but art is a physically laborious task which can (and has) resulted in repetitive motion injury which threatens my livelihood in the long term. But with passive income (making and selling merchandise, or licensing artwork for companies to do so), I can create a secondary income for myself which frees me to do BETTER work, hurts me less, and provides a needed source of income for my family, for which I am the sole provider.

If you have questions, I recommend checking out from your local library this book - graphicartistsguild.org/handbo… Along with the courses I took in art school about copyright law, contract law, and common art business practices, this is one of my main up to date resources for building and maintaining the way I do business. My business practices are based off a combination of what I learned in copyright law/contract law/business practice classes in college, what I’ve read on my own, & common practices in the furry art commission arena. I’ve tried to create a balance that’s fair for me and clients!

Reblogged from: eskiworks

maggie-stiefvater:

I’ve decided to tell you guys a story about piracy.

I didn’t think I had much to add to the piracy commentary I made yesterday, but after seeing some of the replies to it, I decided it’s time for this story.

Here are a few things we should get clear before I go on:

1) This is a U.S. centered discussion. Not because I value my non U.S. readers any less, but because I am published with a U.S. publisher first, who then sells my rights elsewhere. This means that the fate of my books, good or bad, is largely decided on U.S. turf, through U.S. sales to readers and libraries.

2) This is not a conversation about whether or not artists deserve to get money for art, or whether or not you think I in particular, as a flawed human, deserve money. It is only about how piracy affects a book’s fate at the publishing house. 

3) It is also not a conversation about book prices, or publishing costs, or what is a fair price for art, though it is worthwhile to remember that every copy of a blockbuster sold means that the publishing house can publish new and niche voices. Publishing can’t afford to publish the new and midlist voices without the James Pattersons selling well. 

It is only about two statements that I saw go by: 

1) piracy doesn’t hurt publishing. 

2) someone who pirates the book was never going to buy it anyway, so it’s not a lost sale.

Now, with those statements in mind, here’s the story.

It’s the story of a novel called The Raven King, the fourth installment in a planned four book series. All three of its predecessors hit the bestseller list. Book three, however, faltered in strange ways. The print copies sold just as well as before, landing it on the list, but the e-copies dropped precipitously. 

Now, series are a strange and dangerous thing in publishing. They’re usually games of diminishing returns, for logical reasons: folks buy the first book, like it, maybe buy the second, lose interest. The number of folks who try the first will always be more than the number of folks who make it to the third or fourth. Sometimes this change in numbers is so extreme that publishers cancel the rest of the series, which you may have experienced as a reader — beginning a series only to have the release date of the next book get pushed off and pushed off again before it merely dies quietly in a corner somewhere by the flies.

So I expected to see a sales drop in book three, Blue Lily, Lily Blue, but as my readers are historically evenly split across the formats, I expected it to see the cut balanced across both formats. This was absolutely not true. Where were all the e-readers going? Articles online had headlines like PEOPLE NO LONGER ENJOY READING EBOOKS IT SEEMS.

Really?

There was another new phenomenon with Blue Lily, Lily Blue, too — one that started before it was published. Like many novels, it was available to early reviewers and booksellers in advanced form (ARCs: advanced reader copies). Traditionally these have been cheaply printed paperback versions of the book. Recently, e-ARCs have become common, available on locked sites from publishers. 

BLLB’s e-arc escaped the site, made it to the internet, and began circulating busily among fans long before the book had even hit shelves. Piracy is a thing authors have been told to live with, it’s not hurting you, it’s like the mites in your pillow, and so I didn’t think too hard about it until I got that royalty statement with BLLB’s e-sales cut in half. 

Strange, I thought. Particularly as it seemed on the internet and at my booming real-life book tours that interest in the Raven Cycle in general was growing, not shrinking. Meanwhile, floating about in the forums and on Tumblr as a creator, it was not difficult to see fans sharing the pdfs of the books back and forth. For awhile, I paid for a service that went through piracy sites and took down illegal pdfs, but it was pointless. There were too many. And as long as even one was left up, that was all that was needed for sharing. 

I asked my publisher to make sure there were no e-ARCs available of book four, the Raven King, explaining that I felt piracy was a real issue with this series in a way it hadn’t been for any of my others. They replied with the old adage that piracy didn’t really do anything, but yes, they’d make sure there was no e-ARCs if that made me happy. 

Then they told me that they were cutting the print run of The Raven King to less than half of the print run for Blue Lily, Lily Blue. No hard feelings, understand, they told me, it’s just that the sales for Blue Lily didn’t justify printing any more copies. The series was in decline, they were so proud of me, it had 19 starred reviews from pro journals and was the most starred YA series ever written, but that just didn’t equal sales. They still loved me.

This, my friends, is a real world consequence.

This is also where people usually step in and say, but that’s not piracy’s fault. You just said series naturally declined, and you just were a victim of bad marketing or bad covers or readers just actually don’t like you that much.

Hold that thought. 

I was intent on proving that piracy had affected the Raven Cycle, and so I began to work with one of my brothers on a plan. It was impossible to take down every illegal pdf; I’d already seen that. So we were going to do the opposite. We created a pdf of the Raven King. It was the same length as the real book, but it was just the first four chapters over and over again. At the end, my brother wrote a small note about the ways piracy hurt your favorite books. I knew we wouldn’t be able to hold the fort for long — real versions would slowly get passed around by hand through forum messaging — but I told my brother: I want to hold the fort for one week. Enough to prove that a point. Enough to show everyone that this is no longer 2004. This is the smart phone generation, and a pirated book sometimes is a lost sale.

Then, on midnight of my book release, my brother put it up everywhere on every pirate site. He uploaded dozens and dozens and dozens of these pdfs of The Raven King. You couldn’t throw a rock without hitting one of his pdfs. We sailed those epub seas with our own flag shredding the sky.

The effects were instant. The forums and sites exploded with bewildered activity. Fans asked if anyone had managed to find a link to a legit pdf. Dozens of posts appeared saying that since they hadn’t been able to find a pdf, they’d been forced to hit up Amazon and buy the book.

And we sold out of the first printing in two days.

Two days.

I was on tour for it, and the bookstores I went to didn’t have enough copies to sell to people coming, because online orders had emptied the warehouse. My publisher scrambled to print more, and then print more again. Print sales and e-sales became once more evenly matched.

Then the pdfs hit the forums and e-sales sagged and it was business as usual, but it didn’t matter: I’d proven the point. Piracy has consequences.

That’s the end of the story, but there’s an epilogue. I’m now writing three more books set in that world, books that I’m absolutely delighted to be able to write. They’re an absolute blast. My publisher bought this trilogy because the numbers on the previous series supported them buying more books in that world. But the numbers almost didn’t. Because even as I knew I had more readers than ever, on paper, the Raven Cycle was petering out. 

The Ronan trilogy nearly didn’t exist because of piracy. And already I can see in the tags how Tumblr users are talking about how they intend to pirate book one of the new trilogy for any number of reasons, because I am terrible or because they would ‘rather die than pay for a book’. As an author, I can’t stop that. But pirating book one means that publishing cancels book two. This ain’t 2004 anymore. A pirated copy isn’t ‘good advertising’ or ‘great word of mouth’ or ‘not really a lost sale.’

That’s my long piracy story. 

Reblogged from: maggie-stiefvater