I agree wholeheartedly with the artists having a right to be
          fairly remunerated for what amounts to an advertising
          campaign illustration. Why is it that visual imagery to
          promote something would be "donated" if that entity were a
          nonprofit? Don't the others working in that nonprofit make
          a living using their skills? So, doesn't it seem appropriate
          that an artist deserves also to make a living when using
          his/her skills? If the artist can't be paid for the work
          provided then a royalty payment per each print in the
          edition needs to be part of the agreement. Otherwise, no
          sane artist should consider working on the project.

          As an art director, and a working artist, I have too long
          witnessed the abuses that accompany advertising and
          promotion schemes reliant on "donated" imagery. The artist
          loses out by having nothing but a portfolio piece that makes
          little difference to anyone except those that have offered
          his work as a benefit to their cause.

          Artists are hardworking people. Pay artists fairly for
          their honest work.