Are the Art Prints on Allposters Authorized by Artists
* Art.com is taking a reproduction of an art print out of an art volume and reselling information technology as an art print, in direct competition with the actual artists, many of whom are selling their own real fine art prints simultaneously. Legally justified or not, it's difficult to believe that the people making this decision considered it to exist a sound and ethical choice.
* Art.com is selling artwork taken from an art book, but the images are uncredited on their site, which seems like an odd oversight considering every artist'southward name, bio, and URL appears on the back of each page. It'due south either insulting to the artist, or intentionally deceptive on the part of Art.com, depending on your point of view.
* Fine art.com's complaint process deters complainants from having the ability to easily register their complaints. In a find buried a few layers deep on their site, an artist will detect they are required to impress out a grade and postal service or fax it to the Art.com legal department. As a site that purchases/licenses products from third party suppliers, ane might recall they'd want to protect themselves with a simple "written report/flag" push button on their product pages. But perchance Art.com feels that such a button on their site would make it too easy for people to report or flag.
* Fine art.com has damaged their relationship with the artist community they are supposedly trying to connect with. This scheme is supposedly a sort of "exam run" to meet if selling gigposters is a viable option for them. They've evidently reached out to a handful of artists to offering wholesale deals of (existent) art prints, while alienating the majority of others involved. They have thrown shit at the wall to come across what sticks. Where they eat. Or something.
* Art.com is selling cheaply assembled items at an incredible markup. They accept purchased Clay Hayes' books (probably in bulk or reduced rates), cut out the eleven×15 pages, offering them in cheap forest/plastic frames, and are selling them for $59.99. A bulk of these posters can be purchased directly from the artists, many in the $10-$thirty range, on better quality newspaper, at larger sizes, with richer colors, and are actual 'real' art objects – hand-pulled, limited edition screen prints. Or you could buy the book, which is a dandy book.
* Has Fine art.com actually sold any of these overpriced, inferior products? And if so, volition they be sharing those profits with the artists they've contacted near wholesale deals? Since their own website doesn't even credit who the artists are, information technology seems unlikely. Will they continue to sell the inferior version of the impress aslope the existent print?
* Art.com has engendered so much ill-will among the poster artist community & across in the last 24 hours, I'm actually surprised to wake up this morning and see the "fine art prints" withal available for sale. This is a big topic on Twitter, on Facebook, on reddit, on gigposters.com: There are potentially 202 artists notifying their art-buying followers non to buy art from art.com. I wonder how Fine art.com'due south public relations/social media people feel well-nigh this incredibly poor business organisation decision?
I wish those artists who work out distribution deals with these websites the best of luck.
UPDATE:
I have received an email reply from Art.com subsequently filling out their form and emailing it to them. Some highlights:
* "Tardily final year, we began to offer some of these "tear out" posters every bit a examination to gauge customer involvement in the gig poster genre." Months this has been going on. Yikes.
* They would like to talk over "the opportunities bachelor to work with Art.com directly. As a first footstep in developing that relationship, we will be removing your poster from our websites effective immediately." I note a few things from this: 1. If I was interested in working with a website of this nature, I would accept reached out to them. 2. Their get-go footstep of developing a human relationship is apparently trying to undo their own artist relations fuckup. 3. This is very clumsy PR spin.
* "It may take a couple of days for the products to come down from the site." – If you are a web-based shop that can't manage to remove an inventory item in less than "a couple of days," then yous're probably non a very good web-based store.
* "We regret any confusion or distress this has caused yous. We hope this addresses your concern and we look forrad to working with yous in the future." – ane. I am not confused or distressed, but cheers for bold. 2. I have no involvement, nor take I ever had whatever interest, in working with yous, in the past or in the future, just thanks for bold.
RELATED LINKS:
* Here is where you can purchase the Gigposters Vol ii book (which my work is included in) directly from Dirt Hayes. Purchasing these books help support and expand a customs of artists and an fantabulous website. Purchasing this book will get yous 101 poster pages for $40 instead of ane poster page in a cheap frame for $59.99.
* Here are the aforementioned reddit and gigposters.com threads.
* Here's a fine blog post by Graham Pilling/Army Of Cats, another creative person involved in this bullshittery.
* I am selling my New Pornographers affiche in my ETSY shop. It is 18×22, printed on heavy paper stock, and the colors are fantastically brilliant and vibrant. It is a neat piece of limited edition art. It is office of my design & illustration portfolio.
* Information technology looks similar Art.com has but recently been back their way out of another artist/public relation mess involving street artists.
* Tell your followers on Twitter what y'all think of @artdotcom and @Allposters'due south business organization practices. Or maybe say hello to art.com or allposters on Facebook.
Source: http://blog.tompappalardo.com/?p=10331
0 Response to "Are the Art Prints on Allposters Authorized by Artists"
Post a Comment