Lilith (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
reflectedeve) wrote2013-08-08 04:55 pm
reflectedeve) wrote2013-08-08 04:55 pm
Entry tags:
what's mine is yours
Um, hey guys! Did not mean to disappear off the face of the earth quite so completely there. I have a lot of things I've been meaning to post about my life, and fan stuff, but ... apparently I have things to say about creator rights, pay for artists, and design contests, specifically regarding the Welcome To Night Vale t-shirt design contest.
I considered locking this post, and reposting it on my public, real-name tumblr, but ... I want to come at this not only from a professional artist standpoint (something that only kind of applies to me anyway), but also as a fan, someone who is always making creative work for the sheer joy of sharing my enthusiasm with other fans. (Maybe a little less often than I wish I could.) Over the last few years, I've increasingly found myself in the middle of a fan/creator divide on certain issues (this comes up a LOT with MCU fandom, sigh), and this seems like a good opportunity to address some of that!
So. This post came to my attention earlier today (viawere_duck's twitter). The writer calls out the people of Commonplace Books (/Night Vale) for their design contest, which (they say) constitutes what is called "spec work:" design work undertaken for the possibility of future pay (where there is at least an equal possibility of putting in extensive labor for no compensation).
To put "spec work" in general terms: imagine if, every day at your job, you showed up and did the work as assigned, and at the end of the day, if your labor had achieved the goals your employer had for it, to their satisfaction and at their discretion ... then you would get a paycheck. Otherwise, not so much.
Okay, that's not a perfect example, so let me elaborate further: you're a cook at a small, independent restaurant. Now, if you're not very good at it, or if the people living nearby just don't like the kind of food you make, the restaurant might not be successful, and you might get fired or the whole place might go under. BUT, you'd still get paid for the hours you worked there! Ultimately, the success of your work depends on whether people want it, but you are compensated for your labor in the meantime.
Now, if you own the restaurant, this isn't true: if your establishment goes under, you lose your investment. It may, quite possibly, shake out so that you were not compensated for your labor. But it's your restaurant. By the same token, if I make a comic and self-publish it, or submit a story I wrote to a publisher, and nobody buys it, then sure. I don't get paid. But if someone hires me to draw their story idea, or design their t-shirt ... I get paid. The financial risk of selling that product or project is theirs; I am employee.
I think this is where a lot of people get confused about "spec work" and artists, because art (and design, and other creative work) is perceived as fun, as something people do for the love of it. They expect artists to function as creative collaborators first, and employees second, but that only works if the artist has an equal (and often original) emotional/creative stake in the property. If you're making a living as a freelance artist, illustrator, designer, etc, you can't really afford to do that with every job you take on, because it's your job, it's how you eat. And you are very probably saving a lot of that emotional investment for your own ideas and projects. (So I'm happy to take that financial risk for the graphic novel I'm planning! But if you hire me to draw yours, you're hiring me. Or you would be. I don't really want to pursue a full-time freelance career.)
As a matter of fact, staging a "design contest" is a fairly common and rather insidious form of spec work, one I haven't seen discussed a whole lot. I was, until recently, working at (as well as attending) a small interdisciplinary arts program, and one of my job duties was to vet "work opportunities" that were sent in to be shared with our students and alumni. Frequently, a business or org would write to us, full of enthusiasm, inviting our students to take place in a logo or merch design contest! This was because they wanted to have the opportunity to have their pick of designs without having to pay most of the artists. Sure, the winner would usually be compensated in some fashion, but meanwhile, every other artist who submitted would have done work for free: work that they often would have no rights to use afterwards (or it would be too specialized to use, even if they did retain the rights).
Now, I think the Night Vale contest is different, because it's a fan contest. Fanartists are already creating work just for the love of the series! This gives them the opportunity to perhaps be a part of something they love, and even get paid doing it! And hey, the contest prize is even a pretty standard, reasonable rate--from what I can remember--for that kind of design work. So for the winners, that's a really good deal, and for everyone else, it's a fun exercise and something they already were doing, for fun. I do not have a problem with Commonplace Books for running this: I'm even toying with the idea of participating myself (if not now, then for a future 'limited edition' contest).
Also, Night Vale itself is not a for-profit project (although IDK, the merch sales might be profitable). I don't think they pay the musicians for their contributions either; everyone is in this for the love of it. Which is awesome. So that helps. And even in a professional context, it does SOMETIMES make sense to work for free, when there's a genuine opportunity to get your foot in the door (not just a vague promise of "exposure"), or you can do work benefiting a cause you really care about. (I know one cartoonist who did some design work for Weezer for free because they're his favorite band. But HE went to THEM.)
THAT SAID, I'm glad someone is bringing this out, because while this specific design contest might be actually pretty great, it is so similar to a trend that is not great (is actually fairly predatory), and because it speaks to a general atmosphere and set of issues that has a huge effect on artists, INCLUDING FANARTISTS, all the damn time.
There's a really troubling and widespread cultural tendency to devalue creative work, because it is seen as fun, or because creative integrity and money are understood to be incompatible. This really puts a damper on the idea that making your living as a creative professional is a dream come true, seriously ... because dude, it'd be awesome not to have to charge money for creative work. It'd also be awesome if money weren't required to live, but there it is. You can go the route I'm pretty much choosing, and do a "day job" to support your art, but ... you'll produce less of it, certainly, which is a shame if you have a lot of great things to make and say. And you're much less likely to be able to contribute to other peoples' projects.
This comes out in all kinds of ways. On a large scale, it leads to troubling situations like the one in the comic industry, where artists have no kind of union at all and often have to bow to really problematic practices and standards. (Not to get into this, but ... one of the things that makes me uneasy in MCU fandom is the knowledge that the people who created those characters barely got paid anything. They received no royalties for their creations when their popularity took off. Sometimes they even lost the rights to, and possession of, the things they made with their own two hands.) On a more insidious one ... I am always, always seeing artists, young ones especially, selling their work for insanely low rates. Original, and yes, fan commissions go for a pittance all over the place! (The idea of selling fanart is a little messy, and I'm often on the fence, but let's not forget that fanartists often wind up selling original art, to people who were originally attracted by their fanwork.)
Now, some of these artists are kids, and maybe they can afford to work so cheaply (I mean, if you try and translate some of those fees into hourly wages, based on the amount of time the work may take to make ... yeesh!) ... maybe they're just looking for spending money, they still live with their parents, and/or it's a supplemental thing they're mostly just doing for fun. But that creates a market standard, it creates expectations, and then the labor of artists in general is devalued.
And this in turn contributes to the kind of situation that I've seen many times, where an artist is in dire straits and can't afford health insurance or rent or some other essential even though they are working so hard. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the hat being passed in the last few years, since I've become part of a larger professional and semi-professional community. There was this one time a friend of a friend lost his kid and couldn't afford a life-saving operation. He'd been working in the business for thirty years. It was messy.
So, generally, it's a really, really good thing if fandom--people who consume creative work, and are generous and enthusiastic and wonderful and care about the wellbeing of creative folk--pays attention to these issues. Because they are relevant.
There is one point made in that above tumblr post that is really important even in this specific situation, this fan/professional grey area (because I do think that doing the work for an official context starts to move across that boundary!): who owns the rights? Generally speaking, if you are selling the copyright to your creative work, beyond a single, specifically delineated use of such work ... that commands a higher price, or royalties, etc. In most contexts, if your work isn't used, or goes out of print, the rights revert to the creator.
Now, the fanwork aspect does make this a little more complex, because depending on how specifically/obviously derivative the design in question is, you might not be able to do anything with those rights anyway. You can't really sell something Night Vale-specific in some other context. However, theoretically, the Night Vale people could use your work later and not pay or recognize you, if you don't retain legal rights, so this issue is still applicable!
The original tumblr post may come off as a bit harsh, or as making assumptions; it doesn't sound like the writer has actually contacted Commonplace Books to ask about copyright, etc. However, simply failing to mention rights is a time-honored tactic that has been used against creators, and there is a certain need for vigilance involved! (This is, in fact, the very tactic used against the creators of Superman, the Avengers, etc ... after the fact, if it wasn't premeditated.) I am quite certain that Commonplace Books is not attempting to sneakily steal their fans' rights--of course not!--but the professional and appropriate thing would be to spell things out up front.
And while it would be possible to quietly and individually contact them about this issue, well. Calling attention to it is important, because plenty of potential clients and such are not as trustworthy as I presume Commonplace Books to be. And that includes fanwork contexts.
Whew, I know that was long, sorry. Maybe I can try and make it a little more concise, later ... I'm behind on my project schedule for the day! Also, I mean, I'm not claiming to be the ultimate authority on any of this: I'm not an experienced working artist or designer. I've done very little paid work (mostly because I don't want my livelihood to depend on navigating this kind of landscape, tbh). I do, however, belong to a sprawling community of creators who base various percentages of their living on work for hire, and the faculty I've just been learning from all have decades of experience with these issues, which they worked hard to pass on to us. I welcome other perspectives, though! These are things I'd like to see discussed on the fannish side sometimes!
Also, for more on the kind of atmosphere that leads artists to be frustrated and wary of these kinds of situations, here's a twitter account dedicated to actual quotations from people trying to hire artists (mostly comic artists) to work for free. Ranges from funny to rage-inducing.
I considered locking this post, and reposting it on my public, real-name tumblr, but ... I want to come at this not only from a professional artist standpoint (something that only kind of applies to me anyway), but also as a fan, someone who is always making creative work for the sheer joy of sharing my enthusiasm with other fans. (Maybe a little less often than I wish I could.) Over the last few years, I've increasingly found myself in the middle of a fan/creator divide on certain issues (this comes up a LOT with MCU fandom, sigh), and this seems like a good opportunity to address some of that!
So. This post came to my attention earlier today (via
were_duck's twitter). The writer calls out the people of Commonplace Books (/Night Vale) for their design contest, which (they say) constitutes what is called "spec work:" design work undertaken for the possibility of future pay (where there is at least an equal possibility of putting in extensive labor for no compensation).To put "spec work" in general terms: imagine if, every day at your job, you showed up and did the work as assigned, and at the end of the day, if your labor had achieved the goals your employer had for it, to their satisfaction and at their discretion ... then you would get a paycheck. Otherwise, not so much.
Okay, that's not a perfect example, so let me elaborate further: you're a cook at a small, independent restaurant. Now, if you're not very good at it, or if the people living nearby just don't like the kind of food you make, the restaurant might not be successful, and you might get fired or the whole place might go under. BUT, you'd still get paid for the hours you worked there! Ultimately, the success of your work depends on whether people want it, but you are compensated for your labor in the meantime.
Now, if you own the restaurant, this isn't true: if your establishment goes under, you lose your investment. It may, quite possibly, shake out so that you were not compensated for your labor. But it's your restaurant. By the same token, if I make a comic and self-publish it, or submit a story I wrote to a publisher, and nobody buys it, then sure. I don't get paid. But if someone hires me to draw their story idea, or design their t-shirt ... I get paid. The financial risk of selling that product or project is theirs; I am employee.
I think this is where a lot of people get confused about "spec work" and artists, because art (and design, and other creative work) is perceived as fun, as something people do for the love of it. They expect artists to function as creative collaborators first, and employees second, but that only works if the artist has an equal (and often original) emotional/creative stake in the property. If you're making a living as a freelance artist, illustrator, designer, etc, you can't really afford to do that with every job you take on, because it's your job, it's how you eat. And you are very probably saving a lot of that emotional investment for your own ideas and projects. (So I'm happy to take that financial risk for the graphic novel I'm planning! But if you hire me to draw yours, you're hiring me. Or you would be. I don't really want to pursue a full-time freelance career.)
As a matter of fact, staging a "design contest" is a fairly common and rather insidious form of spec work, one I haven't seen discussed a whole lot. I was, until recently, working at (as well as attending) a small interdisciplinary arts program, and one of my job duties was to vet "work opportunities" that were sent in to be shared with our students and alumni. Frequently, a business or org would write to us, full of enthusiasm, inviting our students to take place in a logo or merch design contest! This was because they wanted to have the opportunity to have their pick of designs without having to pay most of the artists. Sure, the winner would usually be compensated in some fashion, but meanwhile, every other artist who submitted would have done work for free: work that they often would have no rights to use afterwards (or it would be too specialized to use, even if they did retain the rights).
Now, I think the Night Vale contest is different, because it's a fan contest. Fanartists are already creating work just for the love of the series! This gives them the opportunity to perhaps be a part of something they love, and even get paid doing it! And hey, the contest prize is even a pretty standard, reasonable rate--from what I can remember--for that kind of design work. So for the winners, that's a really good deal, and for everyone else, it's a fun exercise and something they already were doing, for fun. I do not have a problem with Commonplace Books for running this: I'm even toying with the idea of participating myself (if not now, then for a future 'limited edition' contest).
Also, Night Vale itself is not a for-profit project (although IDK, the merch sales might be profitable). I don't think they pay the musicians for their contributions either; everyone is in this for the love of it. Which is awesome. So that helps. And even in a professional context, it does SOMETIMES make sense to work for free, when there's a genuine opportunity to get your foot in the door (not just a vague promise of "exposure"), or you can do work benefiting a cause you really care about. (I know one cartoonist who did some design work for Weezer for free because they're his favorite band. But HE went to THEM.)
THAT SAID, I'm glad someone is bringing this out, because while this specific design contest might be actually pretty great, it is so similar to a trend that is not great (is actually fairly predatory), and because it speaks to a general atmosphere and set of issues that has a huge effect on artists, INCLUDING FANARTISTS, all the damn time.
There's a really troubling and widespread cultural tendency to devalue creative work, because it is seen as fun, or because creative integrity and money are understood to be incompatible. This really puts a damper on the idea that making your living as a creative professional is a dream come true, seriously ... because dude, it'd be awesome not to have to charge money for creative work. It'd also be awesome if money weren't required to live, but there it is. You can go the route I'm pretty much choosing, and do a "day job" to support your art, but ... you'll produce less of it, certainly, which is a shame if you have a lot of great things to make and say. And you're much less likely to be able to contribute to other peoples' projects.
This comes out in all kinds of ways. On a large scale, it leads to troubling situations like the one in the comic industry, where artists have no kind of union at all and often have to bow to really problematic practices and standards. (Not to get into this, but ... one of the things that makes me uneasy in MCU fandom is the knowledge that the people who created those characters barely got paid anything. They received no royalties for their creations when their popularity took off. Sometimes they even lost the rights to, and possession of, the things they made with their own two hands.) On a more insidious one ... I am always, always seeing artists, young ones especially, selling their work for insanely low rates. Original, and yes, fan commissions go for a pittance all over the place! (The idea of selling fanart is a little messy, and I'm often on the fence, but let's not forget that fanartists often wind up selling original art, to people who were originally attracted by their fanwork.)
Now, some of these artists are kids, and maybe they can afford to work so cheaply (I mean, if you try and translate some of those fees into hourly wages, based on the amount of time the work may take to make ... yeesh!) ... maybe they're just looking for spending money, they still live with their parents, and/or it's a supplemental thing they're mostly just doing for fun. But that creates a market standard, it creates expectations, and then the labor of artists in general is devalued.
And this in turn contributes to the kind of situation that I've seen many times, where an artist is in dire straits and can't afford health insurance or rent or some other essential even though they are working so hard. I can't tell you how many times I've seen the hat being passed in the last few years, since I've become part of a larger professional and semi-professional community. There was this one time a friend of a friend lost his kid and couldn't afford a life-saving operation. He'd been working in the business for thirty years. It was messy.
So, generally, it's a really, really good thing if fandom--people who consume creative work, and are generous and enthusiastic and wonderful and care about the wellbeing of creative folk--pays attention to these issues. Because they are relevant.
There is one point made in that above tumblr post that is really important even in this specific situation, this fan/professional grey area (because I do think that doing the work for an official context starts to move across that boundary!): who owns the rights? Generally speaking, if you are selling the copyright to your creative work, beyond a single, specifically delineated use of such work ... that commands a higher price, or royalties, etc. In most contexts, if your work isn't used, or goes out of print, the rights revert to the creator.
Now, the fanwork aspect does make this a little more complex, because depending on how specifically/obviously derivative the design in question is, you might not be able to do anything with those rights anyway. You can't really sell something Night Vale-specific in some other context. However, theoretically, the Night Vale people could use your work later and not pay or recognize you, if you don't retain legal rights, so this issue is still applicable!
The original tumblr post may come off as a bit harsh, or as making assumptions; it doesn't sound like the writer has actually contacted Commonplace Books to ask about copyright, etc. However, simply failing to mention rights is a time-honored tactic that has been used against creators, and there is a certain need for vigilance involved! (This is, in fact, the very tactic used against the creators of Superman, the Avengers, etc ... after the fact, if it wasn't premeditated.) I am quite certain that Commonplace Books is not attempting to sneakily steal their fans' rights--of course not!--but the professional and appropriate thing would be to spell things out up front.
And while it would be possible to quietly and individually contact them about this issue, well. Calling attention to it is important, because plenty of potential clients and such are not as trustworthy as I presume Commonplace Books to be. And that includes fanwork contexts.
Whew, I know that was long, sorry. Maybe I can try and make it a little more concise, later ... I'm behind on my project schedule for the day! Also, I mean, I'm not claiming to be the ultimate authority on any of this: I'm not an experienced working artist or designer. I've done very little paid work (mostly because I don't want my livelihood to depend on navigating this kind of landscape, tbh). I do, however, belong to a sprawling community of creators who base various percentages of their living on work for hire, and the faculty I've just been learning from all have decades of experience with these issues, which they worked hard to pass on to us. I welcome other perspectives, though! These are things I'd like to see discussed on the fannish side sometimes!
Also, for more on the kind of atmosphere that leads artists to be frustrated and wary of these kinds of situations, here's a twitter account dedicated to actual quotations from people trying to hire artists (mostly comic artists) to work for free. Ranges from funny to rage-inducing.