Art Business Info: NEWS
about art for artists
If you are a self-employed artist living in the UK and earning income from your art, this is a little REMINDER that The deadline for paying tax for the 2016-17 tax year is 31 January 2018.
If you haven't yet started - or completed - your tax return then now is a good time to find that file with all your invoices and tax receipts and get stuck in!
That's because the fines for late filing of your tax return AND payment of any tax owing kick in after 31 January.
Estimate your penalty for Self Assessment tax returns more than 3 months late, and late payments.
Plus you don't want to get caught up in the meltdown of submission which always seems to happen at the end of January when all those who left it to the last minute start to wail when it's difficult to log in to the system and file your tax return and pay any tax owing.
Or maybe HMRC have fixed that?
TOP 5 Tax FAQs
These are the TOP FIVE most frequent questions which get asked about tax this month
Which brings us back to where I started!
Tax Tips for Artists
If you need any more help, you can try looking at my page on Tax Tips for Artists . I can't promise it has the answer to every question but it will probably steer you in the right direction. (Please note I do NOT offer advice to individuals and information is offered without any liability.)
I'm going to be updating this page in the near future while preparing my Tax Tips for Artists talk on 5th March 2018 for The Heatherley School of Art in Chelsea - which is free to anybody who wants to come (but there is limited seating!)
Finally here are some of my past blog posts on the topic of tax
Here's their Self Assessment Video about the weakest excuses and worst expenses they've had from taxpayers!
Subscribe to Art Business Info. for Artists - NEWS by Email
and receive every post via email.
(Your subscription is only activated after you verify the link in the email you will receive)
I've always maintained that Damien Hirst's real talent lay in marketing and selling. For me he is a classic example of an artist whose ability to work out how to market his art - and to manipulate the art market for his benefit - considerably outweighed his talent as an artist.
The False Narrative of Damien Hirst's Rise and Fall
by Felix Salmon in the New Yorker (6th December 2017)
This article is a "must read" because it highlights how Hirst has fundamentally challenged the notion of:
With the 2008 auction, Hirst moved out of the world of commodities, which are bought and sold speculatively with a profit motive, and moved into the world of luxury goods, which are bought to be consumed and enjoyed. Which is exactly what art should be!
It also focuses on the fact that by moving art sales to "direct sales" between artist and art collector, a considerable amount of art market data has moved out of the reach of those who purport to know about 'value'. All they know about now is the amounts which are in the public domain because of art sold at auction. That's not always where the important sales are done any more.
After (his 2008 auction sale) Hirst started selling his work directly to collectors, at scale, and stopped playing by the established gallery-system rules. Hirst’s galleries were furious, but there was nothing they could do about it. Freed from gallery constraints, Hirst could make the work he wanted to make, and sell it at whatever price his collectors were willing to pay.
Hirst is obviously an artist operating at the very high end of the market. He's ripped up the rule book and started to reinvent the art market.
After partnering with an auction house in 2008 to create a gigantic sale of his work, in 2017 he partnered with a Francois Pinault (the French luxury goods billionaire) and took over two museums to create an enormous thematic show and made the Venice Biennale an explicit commercial venue for buying art.
Hirst says that sales from his latest show, in Venice, reached a jaw-dropping three hundred and thirty million dollars as of early November.
One has to ask to what extent artists operating further down the food chain can do the same thing:
To my mind it's perfectly possible - but only if artists hone their marketing and selling skills as well as those related to creating art and partner with the right people and platforms.
We've already seen it to some extent with the achievements of those who have created a credible art business by selling direct to collectors online.
Now we need to see whether artists start partnering with venues to sell their art in new ways - just like Damien Hirst...
Like I said - it's a recommended read for those who acknowledge that marketing has a lot to do with how value is created in the art market.
There is an imminent threat to all artists, art galleries and photographers that have been using watermarks to protect images with a commercial value.
Images have become bigger and increased in importance within the web. The emphasis is on images looking good and helping people navigate the web (if you like this - then how about more like this?)
For all those artists using watermarks to protect their images - you need to be aware that Google has worked out HOW TO REMOVE THEM! It recently presented its findings at the presented at the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference. (Why they think they have the legal ability to alter your image without your permission and reproduce it is anybody's guess!)
Below is the video produced to explain the CVPR 2017 paper "On the Effectiveness of Visible Watermarks". It also explains that they worked out how to remove the vulnerability of images to this sort of watermark removal process.
However the good news is that the guys at Shutterstock are really not at all impressed with having their revenue model upended in one fell swoop (surprise, surprise!). They have now reverse engineered the new algorithm to prevent Google (or anybody else) from removing a watermark that is now unique to every picture which, in turn, makes watermark removal for secure.
What they've done is worked out how to make each watermark unique by marginally changing part of each watermark - for example by including the name of the photographer.
The same issue applies to artists - and what artists need to do is to work out how they can make their own watermarks more robust and incapable of removal using the algorithm so helpfully explained by Google!
My best guess is that this will need to involve doing something along the lines of what Shutterstock have done.
My recommendation is that artists should consider citing the title and their trade name (abbreviated in necessary) within each individual and unique watermark.
I predict this whole watermark thing will become BIG and there will be much scratching of heads by artists using watermarks!
Subscribe to Art Business Info. for Artists - NEWS by Email
and receive every post via email.
(Subscription only activated after you verify the link in the email you will receive)
I've just been updating my Insurance for Art and Artists page for the 1,000 year flood in Houston.
Those who already know it, will know that I do case study features to show what happens when the "these things always happen to somebody else - not me" event actually happens! The case studies feature
The situation in Houston
What's really interesting is that most of art museums seem to have learned the lesson from Superstorm Sandy - which saw art galleries in the Chelsea area of New York flooded and lots of stock lost and the galleries closed for a significant time while plaster and floors were ripped out and the interior was reinstated.
The art groups seem to have thought through what to do. Or have moved very fast since. There's now an Emergency Resources for Artists in Houston Google Spreadsheet that can be found here
Not so the artists. I've seen a number on social media who have lost their studios - and never ever anticipated they would be affected by flooding. Sadly I gather some/many are also not insured for flooding.
Has your art group thought about to respond to an emergency?
The time to think about how best to respond to an emergency is BEFORE it happens. It's called "risk management".
Will your studio survive a major flood?
Have you thought what you would do if your studio was destroyed along with your equipment, materials and stock of artwork?
Do you insure your art business for unexpected and catastrophic events?
Have you even thought about you might need to insure for? (You may be surprised).
I RECOMMEND you have
A court has determined that online stores, such as Zazzle, that manufacture products cannot enjoy the "safe harbor" benefits of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), 17 U.S.C. §512 normally made available to online service providers - to the extent that they satisfy required conditions.
This is due to the fact that Zazzle has a responsibility to control the production of merchandise for sale and ensure that it does not infringe copyright.
Below I try to tease out the key elements of the case and why the plaintiff succeeded in getting a a ruling that the plaintiff (an agent for an artist) can recover $460,000 in pecuniary damages from Zazzle.
The 'safe harbor' protection is only afforded to those who contend that they only operate as a publishing platform ONLINE. (Which is why Facebook is safe from prosecution). The notion is that an online publishing platform cannot be aware of everything posted 100% of the time.
However the protection only applies if a site immediately takes action to remove any copyright infringements as soon as it is made aware of them and has received appropriate proof of infringement. (which is why you need to serve a DMCA notice on the host if you see an image of yours online - see What to do about copyright infringement - for artists).
What's different about this court decision
What's different about this court decision is it states that when publication of images by an online platform moves into the production of tangible goods based on those images then the online service provider has the right and responsibility to protect creators from copyright infringement and hence can also become liable for any copyright infringement.
In other words in order for Zazzle to be protected by the DMCA's safe harbor provisions (relating to storing images of GYP's copyrighted paintings) - the provisions of 17 U.S. Code § 512 - Limitations on liability relating to material online required that Zazzle had to:
For the record, this is the Zazzle Copyright Policy. I'm guessing it might be rewritten by the lawyers in the future to pass liability for any costs awarded against Zazzle to the user - and make this explicit to every user of Zazzle.
This judgement has very considerable ramifications for:
Interestingly there is no press release about the Court Judgement on the Zazzle website and no blog post either. I'm unclear as to whether there is going to be an appeal although I understand the level of damages are likely to be contested further.
In effect, the court sets up a double standard: physical vs. digital. Zazzle is protected if users upload infringing images but not if customersdecide they want a copy of this image on a t-shirt or poster.
Wanting to find out about the business side of art?
Art Business Info. News for Artists
Successful artists get on top of the business side of being an artist.
Do you want to:
Visitors so far
No. of visitors since April 2015:
and receive every post via email.
Your subscription is only activated AFTER you VERIFY the link in the email you will receive.
Katherine Tyrrell writes about art, artists and the art business and has followers all over the world. She also delivers workshops for art organisations and reviews websites and career strategies for artists.
Art Business Blogs
Art Biz Blog (Alyson Stanfield)
ArtBusiness.com (Alan Bamberger)
Art Business News
Art Marketing News (Barney Davey)
ArtPromotivate - Tips
Artsy Shark (Carolyn Edlund)
Be Smart about Art (Susan Mumford)
Fine Art Views (Clint Watson)
Laura C George
Professional Artist - News
Right Brain Rock Star - no longer publishing
Savvy Painter Podcasts
The Abundant Artist (Cory Huff)
The Art Law Blog
The Clarion List - Blog
If you've got any suggestions for what you'd like to see on this website please send me your suggestion
1) Content and the law change all the time. It's impossible to keep up with.if you're not working on the topic full time.
2) I research topics carefully. However, I am totally unable to warrant that any/all information is
3) Hence all information I provide comes without any LIABILITY whatsoever to you for any choices you make.
4) This website is FREE FOR YOU but not for me. Links to books are Amazon Affiliate links. Buying a book via this website means I get a very small payment which helps to fund and maintain this website. .I much appreciate any support your provide. Adverts are provided by Google AdSense - but the adverts do not mean I endorse the advertiser.