Diane Brenner wrote:

     Thanks for your response.  What prompted the request was

that a
local architectural firm took pictures of a school assembly
area that has
a large and impressive art installation - terrazzo floors
with inlaid
constellations, and a central astronomy themed piece in the
middle.  This
is an assembly area in the middle of a science wing at the
local high
school - and there is a planetarium (machine) that they use
on the
ceiling there.  Because of the sculpture and the floor, the
place has a
wonderful personality.  They used their photos and got a
national design
award, and then cropped one image to the art specifically,
and used it as
their Christmas card.  We'd have not cared if they had mentioned the
artists name in the award proposal, (or that if it were't for the 1% for
art program there never would have been enough money for the fancy
floor.)  But neither the artist nor the program that funded it was
evident in their publicity.  It particularly galled the artist that her
prominent piece was not credited on the card - which truthfully showed
very little of THEIR design work.  Our curator of public art wondered if
she hand more ammunition than her charm to ask them to at least list the
artist when they publish more images of their work.  We have agreements
with the artist that they retain the copyright of their work in public
places, but we have no contracts with the architects.
     Thanks for your insights.
     Diane Brenner, Anchorage Museum
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a different matter entirely: the fact that they cropped a photo down to the
art work itself and printed it up as a Christmas card which they then distributed,
sounds much more like an infringement of the artist's copyright.

The line of differentiation between the two situations is clear: if the architects
publish a Christmas card with a photo of their work, and neglect to mention the
artist by name, it's questionable, unethical, etc., especially in the context of the
national award. By publishing a card *of the artist's work* they've overstepped the
bounds.

Usually, these infringements are "unintentional" -- that is, oversights based on
lack of thinking, or simply lack of knowledge about copyright.   If a lawyer is
convinced this is a case of infringement, a letter from him/her pointing out the
fact and demanding correction of the oversight (monetary damages may or may not be
part of the picture) may well be enough: there's a decent chance the architects
will do what's neccessary to make up for the oversight.

-------------------------------------
amalyah keshet
head of visual resources, the israel museum, jerusalem
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
date: 02/06/97
visit our web site at http://www.imj.org.il
-------------------------------------