Page History

Nicholas Kristov

Getting full and deserving credit for work is of major concern to artists of all mediums. Art is a difficult profession to make a living and the credit and reward (payment for pieces) should go, at least in part, to the original artist.  The Hogath act aimed to bring an artist version of the literary copyright act of 1708 to the physical art world.  In a pamphlet used to introduce the Hogarth act, the purpose of protecting works was stated,  " for when

everyone is secure of the Fruits of his own Labour, the Number of Artists will be every Day increasing." One aspect of the law is to help the artists gain credit and recognition for their work, however the other benefits society. If artists and creators feel that they will receive full credit for their work, they will produce more for the general public, not just for a few trusted buyers.  Hogarth had major issues with copies, often within two weeks of production of a piece there ware unauthorized copies and reproductions. This drove him to develop a subscription process, cutting out the middleman distributer and assuring people who bought into the subscription that the work done was both credible and original.  Part of the problem is that many of the works that Hogarth did were etchings. "Southwark Fair" (below)shows incredible attention to detail. However, etching prints are themselves copies of the original piece, and so unauthorized printing, or creating a copied etching plate can easily done.   Image Added
The Engraver's Act gives artists rights against unauthorized copies for a period of 14 years from the date of printing and a fine for every copy discovered. This ensures that copies are penalized and artists' original pieces are given full credit. This solves the problem however does not give artists specific rights after the protection period is over, either due to expiration or death. The issue for many artists is not only that there will be fake pieces floating out there, but that the next time the artist chooses to sell their work, the market will bring a worse price due to concerns of legitimacy and potential forgeries. The enactment of the Engraver's Act actually creates the Art Market as we know it. Without much worry that the Art many buy is a fake, collectors can accurately asses the price of pieces. 

To this day there are still problems with copyright law and intellectual property. Fake art is constantly discovered, and letters of authenticity are all that can prove to a buyer that the piece is legitimate and original. The most obvious example in the current market is music and the ease of people to copy work almost immediately. This pushes artists to release their work in new and inventive ways, rewarding loyal fans for actually giving them credit. However one interesting contrast to this is the movie and music industry which seems to have a stranglehold on copyrights even after the death of the artist or director/producers. While in some ways it gives the works' producers the rights to credit for their work, at a certain point it makes sense to limit the copyright period and make the art available for the general public.  

One question I have regarding copyright law is the use of sampling others' work to create new work. As I understand, work can be marketed as the artist's own, even if it incorporates other work, as long as there is a material change. Often in contemporary art, other's work is changed to make a statement, however no credit is given to the other artists. Should there be some credit for the original work if it gives inspiration?