Victor Caddy, director at IP specialist Wynne-Jones, advises if there are underlying rights in ‘new’ artworks if they are based on a recognisable art style.
The licensing sector is all about IP and brand extensions, many of which are creative and warrant protection.
Every business has some IP (defined as unique creations of the mind) and some of that can be protected legally by copyright, registering a trade mark or a design right, as well as by filing a patent.
However, the whole area of IP can be a confusing minefield for business leaders because it’s presided over by a niche legal profession, is a specialised business area and, by its very nature, intangible.
IP specialist Wynne-Jones has been listening to many industry queries over the past year or so – and in partnership with LicensingSource.net – it is now launching The IP Surgery, to help answer those burning questions. We want your questions, so we can provide the answers.
Today’s question: I have been involved in a number of art based ‘collaborations’ with artists and illustrators who create their version of famous characters (for example Sir Peter Blake and The Beano). What is the position on who owns the underlying rights in the ‘new’ artwork and artwork style, particularly if the style is based on a recognisable art style established by the artist?
Victor says: “For the 75th anniversary of The Beano comic, Sir Peter Blake created a silkscreen edition comprising a collage of cut-out Beano characters, superimposed on a monochrome vintage postcard-style image of Dundee High School.
This was the school that inspired the original Bash Street Kids comic strip. Beano editor and Bash Street Kids originator George Moonie used to watch children at the school from his office window. Sir Peter has readily acknowledged the great visual influence that The Beano has had on his work.
Copyright works can often be the result of input from more than one person. Where two or more people have created a single work and the contribution of each author is not distinct from that of the other(s), those people may be considered joint owners of the copyright.
You might think that is the case with Sir Peter Blake and The Beano, but actually it depends on how the work was created. If the artwork was composed completely by Sir Peter, using pre-existing clippings, and he had free rein to incorporate them into the composition as he wished, authorship in the overall artwork would probably vest with Sir Peter and, hence, Sir Peter would be the sole first owner of the copyright (authorship in the individual figures would remain with their respective illustrators/creators).
On the other hand, if the artwork was a joint effort, with new illustrations being created by The Beano specifically for the work (or someone from The Beano assisted with composing the scene), it would make sense that authorship – and copyright ownership – would be joint, too. That is, provided it isn’t possible to readily discern the contribution of each party to the composition – if it is, they would have separate authorships of their respective contributions.
An example of a collaborative creation with separate authors, and owners, of copyright would be a song, where the music and lyrics are created by different people.
It is important to distinguish between authorship and ownership. Authorship of copyright vests always with the creator or creators, whereas ownership can be assigned or transferred. Until and unless there is an assignment, ownership of copyright is held by the author or authors of the creation.
In the case of Sir Peter Blake and The Beano, a transfer of ownership of copyright in the artwork would not disturb ownership of the copyright in the existing figures, which would remain as-is.
Finally, it is worth noting that an art style itself is not, and cannot be, subject to copyright.
If you would like to ask the team at Wynne-Jones a question to appear in The IP Surgery, please email Samantha Loveday by clicking on this link.
