If I Buy The Original, Then I Get To Make Prints And Sell Them, Right?

Well, I don't think I could keep myself from laughing. Maybe they deserve to feel a little stupid after saying something like that!

You should have said, "I'm going to buy one stamp, then just make a bunch of copies of it." ;)

Good one April! I just don't think that quick on my feet, that would have been perfect!

Hello Julie, now this is a very good discussion and I do have news for you. Yes in fact if you own the original you can sell. Years ago I purchased a beautiful lithograph here in New Orleans and it had always hung in my bathroom because it was a nautical theme lithograph. Well many months ago I brought my copy to museum curators to seek the name of the artist. Here is the most remarkable story. The lithograph I purchased for 25.00 from a antique shop combined bookstore and rare prints. My copy is in fact an original lithograph by a French Artist. He ventured to America and ended up in New Orleans and did sketches and made original lithographs. how many is unknown. More than likely just a few. Traveling artist did not mass produce there work at that time.

When I laid eyes on this beautiful lithograph, I new immediately this was not a reprint but an original. Even the original description of the piece was hand writing by the artist and also included with the etching of the original scene and printed. What is very intriguing is a hand written mark on the back of mine. It may well be the artist hand writing pertaining to the original I own. No where on the original painting is his signature. Because of the historic scene and the time the artist spent in New Orleans they know its his work.

The museum was absolutely floored and quite taken. In fact 4 degreed educated curators carefully examined my copy and unfortunately at the time there original copy was on loan in a show. You see they own an original and the copy they own is protected by them But they do not own the copyright to my original lithograph because the artist had made more than one print. The lithograph is identical because my discovery of interest I found in my lithograph is also visible in the copy they brought up on there large monitor. We compared the measurements and it was discovered who ever had my copy had slightly cut the size of the paper to fit the beautiful old frame it was purchased with. There is evidence from the original paper which dates back to the early 1800's and the copy I have was in fact matted but the matt was removed and placed in my glassed frame. The paper has aged and it is yet decided if a historic restoration will be done to my paper. The actually lithograph centered in the middle is no bigger than 10'' x 5'' and is in perfect condition.

Because of my historic discovery there was never any reason to enlarge the print, you do not see the hidden features until the print is enlarged. Throughout the original lithograph are secret messages which is in French and reversed because when the original lithograph was made on stone and printed the print was then reversed. Until the findings are authenticated I will go public then.

What is very possible since all of this is pre Louisiana Purchase it may well be secret messages pertaining to his mission in the first place traveling to New Orleans. It seems he was very clever and instead of drawing lines which appear as lines but when the lines are enlarge it is script in French writing.

The museum could not quote me a price on my original lithograph and I took it to a reputable auction house, not knowing the extent the historic value they informed me they would start the bidding at 900.00. Well I then researched on line and this same French Artist original lithographs but of different scenes around New Orleans had been privately purchased by a buyer in Africa for over 300,000.

I did in fact signed a statement with the museum I expect full recognition of making my historic discovery which none of the educated curators even new existed in the lithograph. Because I was interested in marketing my copy of my original lithograph for sale here on Fine Art America I enlarged my copy to the highest resolution and made my remarkable discovery, I do have plans on coming forward and announcing my findings globally and receive full recognition.

To answer your question yes you can resell if you own an original copy. The museum does own two original copies and there original works are copyrighted by the museum.

The original lithograph was etched on a stone plate.

The answer is a resounding NO! (Unless it's old enough to be in the public domain, or if you've released it to the public domain.)
Michael H: You're citing one specific example which is an exception to the general rule. See above, in parenthesis.

It's YOUR art. It's THEIR print.

Tell them sure they may do this, if you they pay an additional $xx,xxx.xx for a distribution license for the image. (Did I get the right number of x's in there?)

That way, if they actually go ahead and do it, you'll have total justification for the invoice when you go to court. Just make sure you send the reply in a major email program with audit controls. This probably applies to gmail, for example.

"Only is you can make copies of his credit cards!

Michael, they could choose to sell the original if they want, but to make prints of the original and sell those? I don't think that's legal is it? Don't I own the reproduction rights?

many think that. a lady at my mothers gym said, sure you can have a picture of the image hanging in my livingroom, you can sell it... no i don't think so. the copyright doesn't transfer over, unless they pay a heck of a lot more than they probably did.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

@Julie the museum in question does own the rights to any reproduction of historic prints which they have on hand historic archives. And yes to reproduce in any electronic or printed form would violate copyright laws pertaining to the museum. And yes they can sell their original lithograph, just I also can place my original for sale either a auction house or private buyer.... But, in this particular case the piece in question is public domain and its the actual stone plate which the original was etched upon would be of the highest value and sought after if in fact it exist. It seems when a lithograph is achieved no two or more are exactly identical because they are individually reproduced and vary when reproduced.

What does amaze me is the purchase of another lithograph by the very same artist but a different scene was purchased upwards of over $300,000.00. So without question to myself is this particular lithograph is of greater value to auction off higher than $900.00 starting bid. Instead of a local auction house go to a national auction house of historic lithographs.

Until I know the exact content of the secret writing in the lithograph and the understanding why did the artist do this will only increase a more values sought after historic lithograph.

I went on to further investigate quite a lot pertaining to this original lithograph and have found out the artist in fact home in France is a museum. Because of my interest I can not release the name of the artist until all findings are historically authenticated.

Currently their original copy they had at the museum is on loan elsewhere and when returned it will be carefully examined. They will have to wait and do the necessary examinations. After months of contacting the museum hence my original visit. Nothing further could be discussed. I firmly believe because of the signed document I presented to them claiming all rights to my discovery this does present to them a slight legality claim.

At first the museum intently wanted to disclaim I too owned an original and it wasn't until I personal showed them where exactly the messages are found in the painting to the naked eye it looks like nothing else but a line. And to prove my findings they verified by enlarging the image they had on their computer was identical.

Am I excited yes and until its made public and should I decide to sell my original I get to enjoy an original historic lithograph I paid only @25.00 hanging outside on a pole at the antique store where I made my purchase.

Since this has come up. I have a question?I have noticed a person online here that is selling original patents from the US patent office. He has over 1300 of them on his page here. He sells many because they are beautiful and many people love them. I understand that but I maybe mistaken that I read at the US patent office that you have to contact the original person or family member of the person that submitted the patent no matter when it was submitted and get written permission to reproduce it. I also noticed copies of old maps that are being reproduced on here. I have over 3000 patents from the US patent office I downloaded for free years ago when they were free. I also have maps going back to the 1700's of historical significance that I got the same way .They are very beautiful. I have written the US patent office about this matter with no response. So im anxious to find out if I can use my patents and also maps here at FAA for reproduction and selling? I also wrote the person selling them here and he has chosen not to reply to me so I am wondering about the legal aspect of all of this. I also found a site online that says how to resell old patents.It says if I read correctly that if the patent is before 1971 then its ok to reproduce and sell.Im not sure i read it correctly but if anyone knows the correct answer to my questions please reply .thanks,Jean

I simply state that under copyright law all copyights remain with the artist. When an original is sold the original is the only property being transfered, unless the artist agrees in writing to transfer certain or all copyrights. I don't think that explaination should make anybody feel stupid. In fact it's probably a good idea to write on the back of each original "All reproduction rights are reserved by the artist"

Bill Tomsa

http://billtomsa.blogspot.com/

@Michael, they are talking about contemporary art from living artists that still retain the copyright. Different rules apply.

@Jean, there are a lot of people selling other peoples property here on FAA, or at least listing them. I have no idea what the law is on patents though.

In San Francisco, yearssss ago. . . I had 2 Lithographs run off on equipment larger than an old Buick. . .40X40's. . .and
just like in the olden days, the first 50 are the most precious,
called AP's - ARTIST's PROOFs, which back in those days were worth more because the printing technique was more difficult
and those first 50 were the BEST quality. After the
other Lithos were run off..those in numbers beyond the original 50...I have a video of me cutting the huge metal plates to destroy anyone from reproducing them in any form.
The Lithographs are numbered and signed twice, once in the copy itself and the other Live, with pencil, and should Never be Copied by anyone.

The original Oil paintings that the Lithographs came from...I suppose could be copied. . .as when I do commissioned Art work...years later folks write and say their
children are grown and gone and I suggest they get copies in any size to distribute to their other children. . .and that is why Fine Art America is playing a terrific part in my
life now....I tell them to buy from my Vicki Aisner Porter account here. . .and CHOOSE the size they want and get as many copies on canvas or in print that they need..
I am new here. . .Vicki Aisner Porter, painter of only CHILDREN 'FROM THE BACK'
studiovp@aol.com

*Michael, sounds like you have a real treasure there!

*Bill, I do have a Certificate of Authenticity that accompanies each print & original that has the statement in it "title of artwork" (C) 2015 by Julie Senf. All rights reserved. All copyright & reproduction rights are retained by Julie Senf. This artwork/print may not be reproduced by any process whatsoever without the express written permission of the artist." It's not written on the back of the print/artwork though, just in the certificate?

*Jean, I don't have the answer for that one. Hopefully someone who does will see your question so you can start selling some of that. Sounds like a good opportunity :)

Julie since you look alive and kicking to me, I think you have it covered.

Jean - I believe they are only available to US Taxpayers who fund the patent office.

." It's not written on the back of the print/artwork though, just in the certificate?
Certificates can get lost. Maybe best to have certificate AND written on back of original?

Bill Tomsa

http://billtomsa.blogspot.com/

Someone asked me once this same question and my reply was this. I would be honoured if you took my art and made money off of it. What percentage are you thinking for commission on my copyright?

Hopefully I will get a answer for the whole question and i know now that patents have to be purchased but when I got mine it was free access to the patent office at no charge and the maps came from states that let you download them but I always thought that someone had restrictions of them no matter what...I would just like someone that has the correct answers hopefully to answer..I was hoping that the patent office would answer but they aren't yet and I am pretty sure there are restrictions for selling government archived prints of old maps but not sure so im waiting and hoping..to hear something solid..but as others have stated.. just because you buy a copy of a patent does it give you the right to reproduce it? Also I have seen a lot of controversial answers about people taking art from sources online and reproducing it.. it seems it is hard to get direct ,correct answers to anything that concerns all of that. I have seen a lot of famous prints on here and im pretty sure the people selling them don't have the copyright to do so.. so well...it is kind of a thing that you wonder about. I see other people that have taken famous images and altered them and put them online as theirs . Im not sure but I think that is suppose to be illegal too.. but this is the internet so I suppose anything goes..

Jean - I don't think anyone here is a copyright attorney and we have been warned not to give out any legal theories.

@LC thanks for the input I was aware my example was a complete different situation.

@Julie I do understand what you were pertaining to opening your discussion I personally took it upon myself to reveal because of copyrights yet my situation is differ than yours, the fascinating story behind my original lithograph. What is interesting with a lithograph and a historic lithograph each one produced is an original. The lithograph I own is the actual lithograph made by the artist as well as the lithograph the museum has is their original. Each lithograph is original unless numbered or signed which the lithograph isn't signed or numbered. On the back of my lithograph there is a number in pencil, he may have written on the back to keep track of how many prints, and then are the proofs. The lithographs which perhaps the artist noted something did not print as he expected.

The original is the actual plate in reality they own a print from the original stone plate. The prints were pretty much printed at the very same and only one time printing. He could have sold others or given them away and or they were actually printed on his return trip to France then retuned with the written messages only the person receiving the painting would know where the messages were located. Of course this is just stipulation.

I do know this past summer sometime the particular lithograph an article was written but I have no clue what it was about, I do not get or buy newspapers. There may have been an exhibit of the artist but I missed it. And it may have tied in with the celebration or anniversary of the Battle of New Orleans. or the 200th anniversary of Louisiana.

I was informed by the museum when their original was returned to them I would be informed upon their investigation into the lithograph. What was odd I did ask where was the original located and they would not tell me. I thought that was odd they could not disclose that information unless in a private show. Interesting for sure.

Ed,

Thanks,I didn't know.. still I was just wish someone could maybe email me and tell me..if possible... anyway ..thanks ,Jean

Tell him he can make all the prints he wants from the original - 70 years after your death.

Dave Gordon
http://dgportfolio.net

There are so many artists who don't understand copyright very well that I don't find it surprising that there may be people out there in art-buyer land who might not fully understand whether or not they're buying the right to copy along with the painting. If you're really worried about your patrons buying your paintings and selling prints, first put a copyright notice on your art. I know current copyright law no longer requires copyright markings, but as a practical matter, most people know what the copyright symbol is, or you can write out the word "copyright" just to be super clear. That would serve to alert most buyers that you (the artist) hold the copyright, and maybe if they want to make copies they should start a conversation with you about that. Then you can let them know how much they would have to pay you to buy your copyright(s). As probably most of the people on this website know, in the United States, you can file your work with the U.S. copyright office. (See copyright.gov to find out how to do that -- it's actually not that hard or that expensive.) Filing with the copyright office goes a long way toward enabling you to enforce your copyright if you are inclined to go that route.

I have a question. If you draw a celebrity from a photo are you allowed to sell the drawing or do you need permission from the celeb or from the photographer?

Jean, rather than taking advice you might get here, unless it's from a copyright/patent attorney, it would be wise to seek counsel from a patent attorney. There are many out there and I'll bet you can get it for 150.00 flat rate and have your answer. Then you can sell and make that much back easily if given the go ahead.

Fran yes,I did that today and he said I had nothing to worry about for public domain art unless there was specific restrictions set down in writing on the site where it is. He also said as little as it gets exposed here compared to the millions and millions of other sites and as little that is sold here ,not to worry..that it isnt like I was a corporation making millions off of it.. But don't take my word for it..Always get your own copyright attorney.. and by the way it was a friend of mine that knew the attorney ,so it did not cost me anything. The friend has been a patron oc mine for years.. thanks Fran..

When someone asks that question you take out your fists. Then BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM. After you have said BAM a few dozen time's the person looks at you funny and wonder's off but if they return BAM,BAM,BAM!

Michael John: The answer is probably yes, you need permissions - two of them. You probably need permission from the photographer (or whoever holds the copyrights to the photograph - copyrights can be sold or otherwise transferred to other parties) and you probably need permission from the celebrity. The "probably" is in there because there are circumstances under which you don't need permission, but I would make sure I knew what I was doing before asserting my right to copy a photo without permission. Fran is right, that's an ask a lawyer question. For the celebrity, the answer might depend on who the celebrity is and under what circumstances the photo was taken. Our art gallery occasionally hires models to pose for artists to draw/paint. We require the models to sign waivers saying that we can use their image in our artwork. The law regarding a person's right to his/her image is different from copyright law, it's more in the area of privacy rights. My personal approach is to not draw from photos that I have not taken myself, and to ask permission if I'm planning to use a person's image in my artwork. I also don't do drawings/paintings with individually recognizable random strangers in them.

I have suspected a couple of my customers as people who have done this, just because of similar comments. A lot of people see no crime in it.

Interesting discussion. I live in Swaziland and recently met with a customer who had an image she got online that she wants me to draw. I mentioned to her before that you need permission to draw and sell someone else's photo to which she replied "But we have no copyright laws in this country"
I'm pretty sure all countries have copyright laws but they vary greatly but more importantly I am pretty sure the copyright of the image protects it regardless of where in the world it is used right?
I'm not looking for legal advice here just want to know who's responsibility it is to obtain the permission to draw an image? The customer or the artist? I mostly draw portraits of pets and people so rarely need permission but I have asked photographers and paid a small fee for permission to draw their photo before but that has been for my own collection and not a commissioned drawing.

Pamela, I don't know whose responsibility it would be but the sensible thing would seem to be for the artist not to make the copy without being satified that permission exists - either because the customer has already got it and can show it, or by contacting the photographer directly. I don't see that it matters who has got it, as long as it exists.

Jean - it seems odd that an attorney would suggest that the need to worry about copyright depends on the level of sales or whether or not you are a megacorporation. Sure, big-selling mega-corp stuff is far more likely to attract litigation but the impact a court case would have on an individual could be devastating. In my encounters with lawyers they have sometimes said something along the lines of: "There's not much chance of anybody taking action so you'd probably get away with it, but as legal advice I have to tell you to follow the law to the letter - so don't do it". In the case you cite, I would guess the fact it is public domain is what makes it safe, not the statistical improbability of anybody trying to sue.

If it's a photo there is no original except for what you have in your computer.
If you're talking about paintings, original works like that then that's a whole different story.

Correct me if I'm wrong please.

*Erica, if your referring to me it is an original watercolor painting.

Paul: If you're doing the copying, you're doing the (potential) infringing. *You* should get the permission, in writing, and keep a copy for your records. (Potential because not all copying is infringement)

Everyone, check out the "Frequently Asked Questions" on the U.S. copyright office's website. It's very clear, readable, current information on copyright, and it's free. Copyright.gov

Here is the link to the copyright information Cheryl is referring to. It is a good reference to have. Thank you Cheryl :)

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/