Saw over on the BOTP ML that someone's trying to make money off fans' work. http://search.stores.ebay.com/Retromodo_g-force_W0QQfciZQ2d1QQfclZ3QQfsnZRetromo\ doQQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQfsubZQ2d999QQftsZ2QQsaselZ211073087QQsatitleZgQ2dforceQQsofp\ Z0 If you're one of the folks being ripped off, contact EBay. Has to be the artist. Cricket

Hmmm... I still recognise Jason Hofius's and Nikki Broughton's work there, as well as one I saw on a japanese fansite. The G-logo looks particularly poor quality, unless it's just artifacting from the image being resized. I do hope that seller gets banned - they're probably ripping off a lot of other fanartists from all those other fandoms they're selling t-shirts for too.

Hmmm. I just went there and no Gatch stuff. Good.

Never mind. It's there, just not under Retromodo.

I understand about the copyright stuff but would there be any possiblity of being able to get some of those cool pics on t-shirts????? I think a lot of them are better then the t-shirts that are out there.

I'm not sure how good any of those pics would be on t-shirts anyway simply because the original images weren't all that big, so the resolution wouldn't be so good when enlarged to t-shirt size. I believe many places that do photo printing now also offer sidelines in printing photos on t-shirts - I would have thought they would be equally able to print any image of your choice on a t-shirt. The ones on Ebay don't look in any way commercially produced to me, it's just that the seller has found a lot of images to use and is probably making them themselves by using those transfer sheets you can put in a printer. So if you were to get a t-shirt printed yourself it would probably be better quality and the design would last longer.

So first would be to find out who the artist is and ask before using on a t-shirt, right??? Then print it off and have a possible transfer??? I do have 5 iron on sheets for my computer here so I guess that could work. ;-}

Yes, I suppose so. It'd be best to make it clear that you're only making them for yourself, as the artists might be feeling rather sensitive after this ebay thing.

As far as fan art goes (or regular art), I think the main thing is are you making or stealing money from the artist? For instance, if you can't buy a shirt with the image (a key point), there is no problem, legally, with putting the image on a t-shirt via iron transfers. However, if you mass produce the shirts, you're making a profit off of someone else's work. However, it's always best to ask the artist and make it clear what you're wanting to do.

Thanks guys for the heads up on this!

I am surprised (and yet I am kinda not) that this person is allowed to sell these items. Afterall I am almost certain she is in breach of copyright by producing these designs for sale.

The problem lies within the fact that it is fanart that has been posted on the internet free to anyone who wants to save it. People who draw fanart have very little legal control over it, if any. HOWEVER, in this case, the store is claiming that the art is their design. Should the artist complain to ebay, ebay should take it down. In this case, artists' rights on design, structure, etc, take preference over the actual characters. It all depends on whether or not the artist contacts ebay or not.

I'd say using the art in any way, even just for personal use, without permission is not allowed. It's easy enough to email and ask. And if you can't find the artist, either ask the ML (someone will know) or find another piece. The one in question, he even removed the Jason's signature. Definitely over the line. Yes, if you put something up you may lose effective control, and you have to weigh the risks of that happening if you do put stuff up, but it's still wrong to take advantage of it. And then there's Tatsunoko's opinion, of which I'm totally ignorant. I'm pretty sure, though, that at ComicCon, the default is you may make small amounts of money off fanart, but you must indicate that the Tatsunoko (or whoever) owns the characters/copyright. So far, Tatsunoko and Sandy Frank have been pretty lenient.

Tatsunoko and Sandy Frank are probably some of the most lenient companies, whether through actual opinion or nonaction. And I definitely agree that nonpermissed use is wrong. The problem is that the actual "LAW" is more lenient towards personal use. (Which, btw, is not what the person is doing on ebay. What he is doing is considered illegal, if hard to enforce.) It's also wrong to take stuff that isn't yours, whether or not it's free. For example, some knitting patterns my mom uses were free. However, the rules are that she cannot sell the pattern to others. She can give the pattern away (with the same stipulations), but she cannot sell it. There are also patterns that she has that were free, but she can't sell the end product (other free patterns allow it). If she broke the rules, it would be hard for anyone to take legal action, but it would still be wrong.

If its fanart, regardless of copyright to the original product (Gatch) then it is considered to be under intellectual property rights, which is legally binding. If we know the author, we can contact Ebay ourselves and demand proof that this person has authorisation to produce these designs with that artwork.

Knitting patterns are an interesting case. (Speaking as a 3rd generation knitter.) As with any art form, the amount of work that goes into them varies. And sometimes subtle changes can make it look like a totally different product. (E.g., use a textured yarn, use the wrong side, all sorts of other things you can do if the exact fit isn't critical.) Most of them are ways to sell other things. Yarn companies provide patterns that specify their products. Knitting magazines use them so you'll buy the magazine; if you do that, they can sell more ads. Cricket off to ramble some more and spew more useless information