Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jfdlsjfd" data-source="post: 9582286" data-attributes="member: 42856">If it was the case, there wouldn't be any need to mention IP in the contract. The fact that the artists contract makes provision for transferring IP when doing commissioned work proves that the IP benefits the author, even in the case of commissionned work. Also, don't mix material rights and moral rights, as those can be treated differently, again depending on where the action takes place. In NZ, for example, the commissionned rule makes it default to have the ownership of the work belong to the commissioning party, unless agreed upon. In the UK (and since you wanted to know where I get this information: <a href="https://redmans.co.uk/insights/ownership-of-intellectual-property-in-commissioned-works/" target="_blank">here</a>, for example), the default situation would be that the author keeps his copyright. To paraphrase their example, if Penguin books hired Mr Smith to write a book, the copyright would still belong to Mr Smith. A specific contract would be needed to transfer the rights Penguin books want. In France, it would depend on the nature of the employment contract: all works created by civil servants belong to their employer, if they are doing them as part of their job (so if there are art teachers and the school board wants you to create a painting to decorate a wall in the courtyard, even if the instructions are just "pretty girl, long hair, elf, dramatic lighting", the artist would be the school, not the teachers (that's harsh for civil servants). In a relationship between private parties, it would be more protective of the artist, akin to the UK: if I hire someone to write a book about my life, it's still their book and I can't say "I wrote an autobiography".The grey area is between the two extremes you present, the white (from point X to point Y) and the black (a vague prompt). That's why it's called grey. BTW, I would be very interested on your stance on who is the artist in the case of Sol Lewitt's Wall Drawings. If I follow you, he shouldn't be considered the artist behind the wall drawings, since he just creates the concept and leaves the execution to the artwork installer? And where do you draw the line between the precise instructions of his first works and the later, more fuzzy ones?</blockquote>

Verification