1 post tagged “money-laundering scheme”
Apologies to those who actually read my blogs. Lately I've been using VOX ony to post artworks that link to main website.
Wow. Getting increasingly organized and de-cluttered (pruning inbox, filing, etc.) left time to read old posts. Realizing I miss keeping up on my OWN life with dates (I'll forget if I don't blog!) Ive decided to spend a few minutes here and there (rotator cuff tear prevents too much typing in any one period) to continue this blog.
I've had some rather interesting events happen recently...requests to reprint my art in an Art and Science journal in Basque (I'll believe it when I see it), a very strange series of emails turning into nothing more than an attempt to involve me in either an outright scam or money-laundering scheme, requests for "studio visits" where the person had no intention of buying but wanted me to "mentor" them, etc.
I honestly think that unless one is a Thomas Kinkead, Murakami or Warhol (Lola tells me he gave limited edition prints a bad name by repeatedly re-issuing "limited editions), selling art and navigating the scene to find the top 1% wealthy (the only ones who will survive this world-wide economic recession/soon depression) is near impossible. Also surprised to find out recently that in order to combat the bad name LE prints have with the knowledgeable art crowd, artists who sell LE prints are turning to putting their thumb prints on the back for verification. The widespread digital age has made the ripping off of visuals/signatures all-too-common (wonder how many people have "stolen" my work?)
Even a framer I know of (who shall forever remain nameless) said he got a print from a famous artist from an employee of a print house (a common practice amongst employees at print houses, he claims). "Was it signed?" I wanted to know. "No, who cares, I have the print! Plus it's easy to fake a signature" Was his reply. Wow...does no-one care about authenticity anymore? I guess unless you're a collector who wants to re-sell (usually to make 'a killing') down the road, most people don't care or consider the ethics of owning work they didn't buy or obtained illegally.
Part of me doesn't care if people steal my work, thinking of it as flattery. I know during the Napster days a lot of peole were introduced to music they then bought they never would have learned about otherwise. However increasingly as I learn more it does bother me. And now the All-Powerful Google is behind legislation to make it nearly impossible for artists to protect their copyright privileges
A summary from owoh.org:
A radical proposed change to US copyright law would allow infringer's to exploit the rights of copyright holders with little or no penalty. Two bills currently on the “rocket docket” would let infringer's “orphan” any copyrighted work whose owner the infringer failed to locate through a vaguely defined “reasonably diligent” search. The creative arts industry, including world-renowned artists, designers, photographers, manufacturers, and licensing businesses have united to oppose this legislation.
Do we have a chance? Methinks naught.
To be continued...
