mondongo collective (work for comme des garcons, 2008)
The other day I saw this snippet of conversation on Twitter, from Brett of @IAMTHELAB to Jessica of @designseeds.
“Good news is that I have a print that everyone likes on Pinterest. Bad news? Here: is.gd/sSKWAq“
The post refers to a nice piece of graphic work that Brett did for his New Additions series. The graphic had been receiving large slabs of Pinterest love, but despite all the pinning, it had not resulted in a single sale of that work in his Society6 shop. (You can view and purchase the poster here.)
More discussion followed, and points were made about how some people get a huge boost in sales because of pins, while others get completely ripped off and get nothing.
(Just let me add in here, that even before the internet, there have always been lots of ‘lookers’ and way fewer ‘buyers’. As a practising artist, I’m sure I’m not alone in that experience.)
So what made this difference in artists’ fortunes? The conclusion seemed to be that for artists whose work consists of 2D images – especially photographers, graphic designers, surface designers and illustrators – Pinterest was bittersweet, with few rewards other than notoriety.
However, for artists of 3D works – especially craftspeople, including jewellers, ceramicists, 3D textile artists, etc – it had resulted in a boost of traffic to their shops, and a subsequent boost to sales. It is important to remember though, that for this to happen, it is essential that the artists/makers/designers have fabulous photos (even if the work itself is average).
After all, Pinterest is all about images. No more, no less.
I love my Pinterest! I love sharing the beautiful things that I find (I’m here). However, it makes me sad when I see something especially noteworthy, and I can’t find the source. Case in point – the work from Mondongo Collective (above) was only linked to an anonymous Tumblr image URL – I had to go through Google Image Search to find it (made even more difficult by the fact that Mondongo don’t actually have a website of their own. In case you’re wondering, they are an Argentinian collective of 3 artists working in various mediums, but especially plasticine and thread). It took me a good half hour to track down who and what, but I’ve now credited it on my Pinterest pin, with a link to the source. I feel I’ve done a good thing. I know full well that not everybody does this – the overwhelming majority of people just pin images that are pretty or interesting, with no thought for where they’ve come from.
The ability to change the URL on a pin is both good and bad – it means good-minded folk can credit images correctly, but it also means that images can be hijacked – as has happened to me. This photograph of mine had been pinned from my website by the publisher of the book and then they re-linked it to their website. When I discovered this (quite by accident), and contacted them, it still took a bit of to-ing & fro-ing to get a correction and an apology out of them, but they eventually sent me a free book too. So I guess they saved their reputation.
But hey, this is not just about the pitfalls of Pinterest.
Images get shared many other ways too. It’s as easy as right-clicking and pressing ‘copy’.
Even images that have some kind of anti-copy protection on them can still be copied – if you can see it, you can copy it. Those things only keep the honest people honest, as they say. And the worst part about copying things this way is that they don’t come with ANY source information or URL.
But of course we want to share! That’s why we do it. Humans are irresistibly drawn to discovery and spectacle – we love things that have ‘wow’, and we love telling our friends to ‘hey, look at this!’ The internet makes it all too easy.
Copying the image is not the same as copying the object, but sharing the image certainly facilitates the process. It saddens me when I see a lovingly crafted piece of work that someone else has pinned to a board labelled “DIY”.
Despite the predominance of 2D works in the rip-off stakes, 3D works are not immune. I personally know of several instances where this has happened – surface designs have been copied and reproduced on cushions and t-shirts; jewellery designs have been copied exactly and reproduced as jewellery in another medium.
It’s not a new thing to copy someone’s work, there have been instances of it about ever since people decided you could make money out of art (I’m thinking Rembrandt et al here). And depending on your work and what’s been copied, you might wish to pursue legal advice.
But about those copiers! If you’ve refined your own product over years of work; if you’ve come up with your own genuine voice, they’ll never do it quite like you. Your pride in quality, the details you pay attention to will not be copied. So here’s the thing:
Get your work out there, it’s great exposure. The more people that see it, the more likely you are to find your customer.
If you’re a photographer or illustrator I realise it’s a whole lot harder – and often your images look best larger rather than smaller, so you are tempted to load up large versions to show them at their best, which means they may be more easily stolen or misused.
So much of our time is spent with screens, and it’s incredibly easy to copy and share images. However, there IS a difference between the physical product of the photograph/illustration on someone’s wall, and seeing it on a screen. The clarity of a print on high quality paper is very different to something printed out from a lo-res file on 70gsm A4 via the desktop printer. Knowing your print came directly from the artist – a real person – adds another un-reproducible dimension. It’s a tough thing to try and get this into people’s heads, but I truly believe it can and will settle into its own balance.
And, if there was more respect in the world, many of the issues surrounding copying and copyright would not exist. However, while respect for other people’s work is important, it’s not the complete answer.
Cultures always have these sorts of dilemmas whenever a new technology comes along – wasn’t photography supposed to mean the death of painting? Yet painting is still alive and well – it is valued for its own material qualities, and for the fact that it is capable of depicting things in ways not available to photography. Likewise, computer generated art has given us great new possibilities in depicting ideas, and it also has its own qualities and shortcomings – capable of and suitable for many things, but not suitable for everything.
Copying is not ever going to go away. We must face up to that fact and its implications.
I’m not suggesting that direct copying for the sake of profiting out of someone else’s idea is a good thing. But, it might not be all bad. In the The Knockoff Economy published late last year, law professors Raustiala and Sprigman argue that copying does not kill creativity, but in fact encourages creativity and innovation. The book cites the industries of fashion, food, and yes, font design as areas where copying is commonplace, and yet they remain vibrant and innovative. Their reasoning is that imitation simply makes the cycle run faster, forcing innovators to be even more creative.
So, if there has been a paradigm shift it means that intellectual property in an age of digital technology is a concept with shaky foundations – perhaps a corresponding shift in thinking is required. Artists need to come up with new ways to harness this proliferation of images and not fight it. We need to think smarter, faster.
iamthelab – creative mind @ work
(And seriously, you NEED this print to stick on the door/wall/window of your creative space.)
*
I would love to hear your thoughts on this subject! Provocative ideas promote discussions, and discussions provide the seeds of solutions.
Cheers, Jx
——
Part (ii) of this post is here. What do you do when someone copies your work? Read on!
——
thank you for sharing it! your posts are really nice … keep it up and come see my blog 🙂 + + Slevin
Great post, lots to think about!
I agree that copying is going to happen, with or without Pinterest and it’s up to each of us to act in a manner which is respectful (and within the bounds of the law!). I very rarely repin on Pinterest, I almost always pin from the original source – it’s so depressing when you click on an awesome pin and get directed to a Tumblr, and then another Tumblr, and then…
And also that it’s kind of a small step from copying to being ‘inspired by’ – the latter being what really makes the art, craft and design world go round in a wonderful way! Creative people feed off each others ideas and energy and distill whatever is in the zeitgeist. It’s doing that in a way that is respectful and original, and which actually builds on ideas rather than just carbon copying them.
What a great post, so balanced and insightful. As the instigator of this conversation, I too have to say that I love and use Pinterest regularly. Many of the artists that I feature benefit tremendously from my great Pinterest traffic. I’ve been told by some of them that they’ve sold out of an item in their shops, just because I did a post and pushed it to Pinterest. It’s been a great tool for the LAB.
My issue with Pinterest applies to all social media as well: it’s a tool that can be used for greatness or used for harm. Since no artist creates in a bubble, we are all inspired by someone, if not multiple someones. It doesn’t pay to be too preachy about inspiration vs. copying. As long as we aim for originality, we creatives will keep putting out amazing things. With Pinterest, if we link to the source and respect the creativity of others, we’ll continue to have a great resource for creative inspiration.
What does need to be said is that many designed things, including art, is protected by trademarks and copyrights, as Isabel noted. So, it is not only the right thing to do to not copy, in many cases it is the law. My other pet peeve (and solely my opinion): A handmade item is not automatically a DIY item. I see folks doing this, with Etsy sellers especially targeted. Creating DIY boards that feature handmade goods that someone else is making for a living is simply unkind.
I feel that the design community can do a great job of self-policing. That’s why I started the Design Respect initiative: http://www.iamthelab.com/design-respect/ We can educate, moderate and encourage others with great force and effect.
Thanks so much Brett, you know I’m a big supporter of your Design Respect initiative! Yes, as long as we continue to stand up and get the word out there, attitudes will gradually but surely change.
This is a topic that is affecting me and it is fascinating because it is such a grey area. I think it really shows how thoughtless some people are towards real artists, particularly when they knowingly copy a design and change it enough for it to be ‘different.’ I am astounded at the rudeness of this behaviour but it does force you to look into your rights which could save/make you money from your IP in the future.
I’m actually trying to get someone to remove an adapted design of mine from their website and also my original design from their Pinterest avatar. They continue to use it on all of their social media branding even after many requests to them to remove it.
That is incredible Isabel!! I cannot believe someone who is serious about building their own business, would be so blatant as to use someone else’s image for their own avatar. It is cases like this where we need to band together and call people out on it.
The more I think about this issue of copyright and the ease with which breaches happen and, more importantly, the scale of them, the more vocal I think we need to become. We need to let people know that NO, THIS IS NOT OK. Because scale is a central issue, scale can also be used to fight it – if you need support to get the message through to these people, just ask the people around you. I have no doubt that with any legitimate case of copyright infringement, you will get the support you need.
I hope your issues are resolved soon.
Pinterest users should be aware that they can’t get away with carelessly pinning other people’s photos without permission. If the copyright holder reports them, Pinterest will remove the photo(s) and may issue a “strike” against the person who violated the fair use agreement. Garner enough “strikes” and your account will be closed! As a photographer, I have had extensive interaction w/ Pinterest, having literally hundreds of my photos “pinned” without permission removed. I’ve also written several blog posts about copyright, including this http://www.tarabradford.com/2013/02/picture-this-pinterest.html (about why I don’t want even one of my photos on Pinterest).
Copyright infringement is a serious issue. It’s not only rude, it’s against the law – a fact all too many people seem to overlook.
What a great comment! Thanks for sharing your experiences – and your article is an excellent example of how badly this issue has affected artists with 2D works.
Unfortunately, the issue of copying is not going to go away because it’s just too easy to do. At least with Pinterest, they offer a piece of code to stick on your site (as you’ve used) so that people can’t pin directly from your site. But what about any other avenues? You can’t spend most of your life chasing up infringements – so do you NOT put your work out on the internet to start with? Do you limit how much work you put out there? Do you only put up lo-res thumbnails so the images aren’t worth sharing?
And how do you educate the public about what’s at issue here – i.e., your livelihood?
Cheers, J
Well, for starters, it would certainly help if people would mention the legalities when writing about the ethics of copying images. It struck me that your post never did. Many people are simply unaware, and the issue is regularly presented to them as an ethical dilemma, not a legal one.
Thanks Andi, and yes it’s true. Maybe though, that’s because very few of us have any kind of legal knowledge on the issue, it’s something we don’t feel qualified to talk about? Whereas we definitely know that it’s an ethical/moral wrong, and so that’s what we talk about.
I would love you to offer some legal insight into all of this!
Cheers, Julie
Great article, Julie.
I love my art but it has always been a support or supplement to what I do as a minister and author. I tip my hat to all of you who make a living from your art and images. So basically, I haven’t given it much thought until your article addressed it. Then, again, I don’t have a huge Pinterest following (or much of a following on any other social media for that matter). At any rate, enjoyed the article very much.
Cheers and best regards.
I have a Pinterest account but haven’t used it yet. This discussion has definitely alerted me to the fact that I should be licensing all my images through Flickr and adding a watermark most photo’s I post online. Cheers for the discussion. x
Watermark is def a good idea (although it CAN be photoshopped out if folks are determined). Like I say in the post though, if you can see it, you can copy it – in most cases, it’s as simple as taking a screenshot & cropping it to suit.
And, it’s a pleasure 🙂 x
it is such a tough and big question! I am a member of Viscopy for that very reason. While I don’t have a huge amount of great images it gives me a little peace of mind. I post photos of my work on my blog (usually watermarked) on Facebook / twitter and of course on my Madeit and Etsy shops (not always watermarked). While I have pinned a few on Pinterest I haven’t put that many and yes one of mine got repined on one of those terrible DYI boards… At the end of the day it is not the first time something I made (after working on a concept, researched, prototyped and then came out with a complete piece) has been copied. No it is not nice, made me feel hopeless and rather upset. Now I have a thicker skin I guess and focus on being the first one to have gone down that path and if some people want to fool themselves in pretending they are creative because they have come up with one block instead of 3 or changed the colour or turned it left… it’s up to them. I make jewellery, so when it comes to making something I am ahead of someone who would try to copy my work as I use particular techniques that need to be practiced to be get something decent and I cut my own gemstones. After all 25 years + experience in my field has to show somewhere! That is the only thing that makes me feel better about it but still it is a sore point!
Going back to Viscopy I would recommend anyone to join, it’s free and it helped a friend of mine get some compensation after a magazine he advertised in decided to use his image for their display and promotional stuff at a bridal show. The exact image he had used in his ad in their magazine!
oooh, those DIY boards are ugly! Yes 25+ years is something to be immensely proud of Annaig :), and you are absolutely right that the copiers do not have the SKILL to make it like you, nor do they have the inventiveness to develop any ideas from there.
Copying is a shallow, short-lived, and deeply unsatisfying way to make a buck.
Great post, Julie!
Such an important issue to grow awareness on. Crediting original source and properly linking back to an original post/store is critical for Pinterest.
I think Pinterest get s a bad rap in general. People misuse social media and don’t properly link back everywhere from Facebook to Twitter (people will upload other people’s work into their Twitter feed as a Twitpic even). I cringe most when I see traffic coming from Flickr or Deviant Art to my site (I don’t have an account either place). I also cringe when people upload my work to their Instagram account….that is another common way people violate copyrights. There is no linking back on these networks (like Pinterest offers), and copyrights (and proper attribution) are infringed the moment someone uploads your work there as you have lost control over them as the designer/artist as others are claiming them the moment they post them into their own profile.
Pinterest has been a godsend for my site in that traffic blew up (in a good way 😉 last winter as a result of people pinning my work, and has only increased the past 15 months. I also prefer Pinterest to other networks (say Flickr or Deviant Art) as it is so easy to have offending pins immediately removed…they are very responsive.
Thanks for the great post and helping grow awareness on the powers and pitfalls of social media!
Hi Jessica, I loved your post this morning about how the various media sites differ in their approach, and your defence of Pinterest, despite its imperfections. Thank you so very much!
(Jessica’s post is absolutely worth a read, here – http://blog.design-seeds.com/2013/03/05/the-point-is-not-just-about-a-pin)
Provocative? Umm. Yes.
Julie, this is a fantastic insight into the current grey area of copyright, the internet and the copying of image or object etc. I made a decision to start posting my own photographs on my blog because I felt overwhelmed with referencing each image in the correct fashion, which includes asking for permission before you copy and up-load the image. It is not enough to link back to the original source – not for blogs anyway, it has something to do with stealing bandwidth. (I think?)
I also agree that contemporary copyright issues in the age of the internet are fraught with grey clouds, thunder and lightening bolts. It isn’t a pleasant place to be ‘in the eye of the storm,’ especially when a larger business attempts to knock down the up-and-coming creative business. Competition is healthy but can also be tainted by insecurity and perhaps ignorance.
Copyright has alway been a grey area in Visual Art – when artists began ‘appropriating’ other artists work (like Warhol) the world was left to ponder the very notion of authenticity.
I think the functions of the internet allow users an immediate and hasty engagement in images. We scroll down the page, we click through a series of photographs, we search images and right before our eyes thousands pop up. We are treated to a visual candy store. Anyway, I think I could chat about this for a long time. Below is a link I found with some interesting points about copyright and art.
I am also left pondering the fact that Goyte’s smash hit was written to the tune of BAA BAA black sheep. Now is ‘Somebody I used to know’ authentic? Is it an original work of musicianship or a clever take and use of somebody else’s infamous tune? It made A LOT of money.
http://www.artslaw.com.au/articles/entry/appropriation-art-an-overview-of-copyright-and-consumer-protection-for-arti/
What a great comment Katie! YES, there has been a long history of appropriation within the Arts, with Warhol and Koons particularly using it to PROVOKE discussion about art vs. mass production and other issues.
Thanks for the link, which covers ideas on copyright as they currently stand – I think that there needs to be a major overhaul in people’s thinking on what copyright is and how it should be handled. for every image pinned in HASTE, how many HOURS of research/discussion between relevant parties does it take to resolve the issues surrounding its use?
The point about promoting innovation is an interesting one. I think for art/ design as a WHOLE it might be true, but for individuals it’s devastating and can take a lot of time, energy and emotion to sort out. To see someone making money from stolen work is very depressing. And actually isn’t innovation stifled when unscrupulous people copy? If products are made with copied designs, patterns etc then there is less new work being made surely?
Blogging is another minefield. So many people include images on their blogs which they probably don’t have permission to reproduce – where is the line? Most bloggers will use images of things they love and want to promote to other people, which is great, but some bloggers make an income from their blog – should they be paying for the use of images? There is such a range of blogging from the ‘professional’ to the very low-key – should we all stick to the same rules?
Hm I haven’t exactly answered your questions but it’s definitely important to discuss!
Thanks Anna, I think that when unscrupulous people copy, their success is relatively short-lived because don’t have the SKILLS and INVENTIVENESS of the originator, and can’t sustain that success with any kind of follow-up. As Annaig points out below, her 25+ years of experience counts for a lot, despite the fact that she has seen her work pinned to a DIY board. Could those people REALLY make something like Annaig, with the same attention to detail and quality of finish? I doubt it.
I know on an individual level, this copying can be devastating, but I really don’t think anything with dampen human creativity; I think that sometimes challenges like this simply make one more determined to rise above it. The more discussion there is around these issues the better – if we know it’s going to happen to us sooner or later, then we are better able to deal with it. ‘Luck favours the prepared.’
I’ve just recently signed up to Pinterest and while I try to carefully credit my original source I have noticed that you can easily get sucked into this habit of ‘re-pinning’ and forget it actually takes it further and further away from the actual source. And this is coming from someone who is ever so cautious….so what about those who haven’t got a clue? That being said, this is an ongoing issue/dilemma for anyone involved in the design field with or without these trending pinboard-style photo sharing websites like Pinterest or social networking sites like Facebook. Back in the day we used to naively Google our images for inspiration, take photos or cut out stuff out of magazines with no thought of noting where it came from! I’ve had this discussion many a times with my husband and friends (all within the design industry) and unfortunately for us artists, designers, crafters and makers this issue of ‘inspiration-versus-copying’ is going to take place no matter what. Weirdly enough I was watching Social Network the other night where Zuckerberg states that “A guy who makes a nice chair doesn’t owe money to everyone who has ever built a chair” – which is simply how the world works and grows. Unfortunately we just cannot go copyrighting or patenting every design element we create! Unless it is flat-out copying i.e. reproducing the EXACT same thing you’ve created for commercial use, which is a different issue altogether, then collating or sharing images for inspirational purposes is harmless. But what we need to do is raise awareness and educate folk about crediting images simply out of respect (and principal!) to those who have painstakingly created and sourced their images.
Great point Sammi, about when we used to create moodboards from pics we found in magazines – there was RARELY a thought given to who/what/where it came from! At least Pinterest retains the original source, no matter how many times it gets repinned (unless of course it is deliberately altered). Sites like Tumblr don’t allow for source info.
And yes, yes! I am not so naive as to think that I invented cushions made from vintage fabrics, although I have come across makers who think this way, and get dreadfully upset that “someone stole my design”…. umm… what? It’s about realising there is a massive difference between re-using the general aspects of a design (chair/cushion/dress/etc), and actually copying the details EXACTLY.
I like Pinterest. However I only use it occasionally because I am sick and tired of people repinning other people’s stuff casually instead of linking back to the actual source. Regardless of whether your work is 2D or 3D, there are bound to be copycats everywhere. It is such a fine line between “Inspired By” and “Copied By”. Will it stop people from creating and sharing? I don’t think so. It all comes down to respect. Respect another artist’s work and you will be respected in return.
I agree that it can be SUCH a fine line between inspiration and wholesale theft, and YES! respect is the key to so many things. In discussions tonight I have also been reminded that as easy as copying is, almost easier still is mobilising support when wrongs have been committed. Support through social media can easily go viral and be a huge disincentive to copiers, as opposed to copying which tends to be happen as a single incidence (although sometimes it can be a major incidence, for instance through a corporate retailer).