@benjaminv said in Aprilbet Art Challenge (Coming Soon!):

@_benjaminvillarreal

What a lovely idea! I think I am in!

Congrats! thats so cool, and well deserved! Perhaps you can check out some art of books to see what 'rough' is. The sketches in Peter de Seve's book will help you aswel I think. Good luck, you can do it!

@smceccarelli Love them all, but #8 and #13 are my favorites!

@smceccarelli Ow, how nice! I think Ill be going to Bologna, lets keep in touch for meeting up for coffee!

@nyrrylcadiz What a lovely concept! The comp and storytelling are really nice! For me nr. 3 has the best lightening . Although nr 1 is fun , to me it looks as if is not working for this story ( Perhaps save this idea for a scary illu?) nr. 3 focusses nicely on the 'shame' . Have fun coloring! I cant wait to see the finished version!

@eli thank you Eli!

Working on a new childrens book in a new style. Now today is coming out day, I thought I'd step out of that with a gaypride version of one of the characters. Have a happy day!

Its not quite like that, its much more complicated, and of course I don't have all the answers. The main thing for me is unpaid use of copyright-protected work. Its not about personal pictures, drawings or paintings. Its not about advertising via social media. Its mainly about big companies who earn billions without having to pay anything for use (reselling) of copyright-protected works.

For example: use of illustration on a educational platform. Work for a publisher who publishes books and also educational material for use on the internet. Schools pay to get acces, use the material. But they only have to pay (collective) royalties for the use in books, not for use on screens. So if a publisher decides to only publish on the internet there is no royalty payed to the autor, creator.

Wouldn't it be great if these companies pay royalties, even if it was collective? You can claim your royalty for copyright-protected artwork.

For inning royalties I am helped by Pictoright is the author’s rights organisation for visual creators in the Netherlands: illustrators, artists, graphic designers, photographers and other professional image creators. If it wasn't for them, creators in The Netherlands would miss out thousands of euro's on income per year. They collect copyright fees. I think they do a great job fighting for the protection of copyrighted works, and I believe they have jurist who help us by making good agreements with publishers, colleges, broadcasting, companies. They pay collective royalties. This does not mean that work will be published less often; Collective Rights Management Organisations have agreements with a lot of publishers. These publishers are already accustomed to paying a fee for using work.

(Of course I don't know how inning collective rights is arranged in other EU countries, perhaps you can find out if you can claim the copyrights of published works in your country. For example in the UK I think it is https://www.dacs.org.uk/) Now just as the music industry relies on royalties, in the future we as illustrators will rely more and more on these royalties as well (less books, more published on the internet).

Hope it helps! , but perhaps its a good topic for a podcast by Jake, Lee and Will?

@smceccarelli I agree. Its not a negative claim for open use of art. its a very good medium. However there's no payment for use of artwork. That what this is about. When you buy a book the publisher has to pay a certain fee for copyrights. For example educational material is used in classrooms, and for the copies the schools make of materials, they also pay a fee. That fee can be claimed by the artist. The same with music. Every time a song is played on the radio, or used in a commercial, the artist gets paid. Now for the use on internet, this can be platforms, open source etc. there is no copyright. thats just not fair. So I believe strongly that we earn copyright payment, because we share our artwork not only to be seen, but also to earn an honest living.

Don't know if its appropriate to share this here, but to me it's really important that our rights as artists are better protected. So Hereby: We, creators from all artistic fields and from all over Europe, call on you, EU decision makers, to put a stop to the funneling of value away from the creators to a number of online platforms.

You have rightly acknowledged that user uploaded content (UUC) platforms are now the main point of access to our works online, but unacceptably do not, or only barely remunerate us for their exploitation. The viability of cultural and creative industries, which create significant growth and jobs for the EU economy, is threatened by this transfer of value.

We want an environment that fosters growth for new and legitimate businesses, including UUC platforms, while providing legal certainty for consumers, and ensuring that this is paired with appropriate remuneration for creators. UUC platforms have built their businesses on people’s desire to access and share our works, and should not put the burden of liability on consumers or creators.

The current situation is a race to the bottom that drives down the respect for and value of creative works. We depend on copyright/authors’ right as this is our pay and the only leverage we have to negotiate fair remuneration for our works.

The forthcoming legislation on copyright is your opportunity to stop these freeriding platforms.

Please sign the petition on:

http://makeinternetfair.eu/en