DeviantArt Conventions | Fan Art Law at Comic-Con (SDCC 2012) 

After watching the whole thing, my general takeaway is this:

We are in the 21st century, everything should be more agile.

This is the video that EVERYONE needs to see if they are insecure about Fan Art. It gives out a TON of details and answers all questions.

Very interesting video. I think in today's world, (especially since the emergence of the internet), copyright has been used by creators as a mean's to become bullies. The purpose of copyright, is to give the copyright holder control over sale and distribution, NOT to suppress someone's personal right to blog about "said character" or show "love", or even a personal tribute. FanArt is a copyright holder's ticket to longevity. To see FanArt means your works have a fan base, and should be applaud.

Being an art student, you hear alot of 'against fan art' arguments, yet most of the classical art in museums and such were just 'fan art' of various scenes of the bible or mythology, or painted selfies of rich people.

With music artists, their worlds and creations are treated a lot better. A rad example is the My Chemical Romance fandom. Two very prominent artists worked together to create a fan comic about MCR. The band loves it. If Warner, the label they’re signed on, ignored their love for fan art and DMCA’d these artists, MCR would sign off and go to another record label. Warner doesn’t want that to happen, so they back off. That’s why making fan art about musicians is better-they’re more online and love it more than the people who simply just monitor it.

This should have 100 000 000 views. This is the best video explaining Copyright / IP on the web I could find, coming from an actual expert and for free.

My TM Lawyer send me this to clarify why Big companies send out C&D Here's a little piece of information that you might not have heard yet:

This is a great video. Thank you professor. I would fight for the artists on the grounds of implied consent. At least for the low volume commission situation. This activity has been known by the big two and accepted for years and years. Also, blank covers are implied consent for artist alley at the very very least.

we are all sinners

No fanart (be it cosplay prints, shirts) = NO COMIC CONS

This guy is a BOSS! He makes something boring worth listening to

I believe copyright law extensions have gone way too far. Extending ownership of ip far beyond its creators lifetime and withholding it from public domain as well as the fans and their hard work which expands your marketing at hardly any cost to the ip owners. At least adjust the insane penalties when its obvious fan art sales will never stop and it will not bring harm to your ip. The law is too strict. I agree with stopping obvious imitators, obviously stolen work for resale, etc. I understand the importance of protection for peoples works, yet when a corporation buys it to market it as an obvious cultural phenomena or just a pretty well known work and cannot provide or do not want to provide that work in certain styles or fashions that a fan and willing consumer wants to have while a small artist barely able to make it by can put their skills to paper and provide then it should be fine as long as its an original piece in terms of creation. Its bad enough given how much creation is out there and that the pool of possible ideas is getting smaller and smaller until nothing will be original anymore. I know its not the law but christ I find it disgusting and against the original idea of protecting artists.

So basically...you just can NEVER know if you will get in trouble for selling fanart or not?

Very good panel. Even though it is easy to complain about the big bad corporations the same copyright law that protects their intellectual property also protects yours. If you are a fledgling artist who makes very little money off your works you are protected so at least you are making very little money and none at all.

Yes it is breaking the law but the larger issue for me is we need to redo the damn public domain laws. DC did not create Batman and those creators by in large are dead now so pretty much ANYONE working on Batman related stuff is doing fanart legally or illegally so why should DC get mega money on an property they as a company did not create? At this point Batman, Superman, Mickey Mouse etc. should be public domain.

Thanks for this information, its fantastic and well spoken. I've been discussing such rules and laws actively as of late. With social media being what it is, there is quite a lot to say upon the subject.

What I find really weird is I find a lot of people (RU-vidrs, artists from Art websites, etc) advertise, create and sell fan art merchandises with their own materials, style and hands, and nobody even mentions it, even though they're unoriginal characters. They never talked about it or at least use the word "fan art" literally. They act like it's legit and they buy them if they're in good condition and are delivered fast (high recommendations). Like Etsy. You can find TONS of them and are still going on. Not that I'm upset about it, just addressing what I witness.

So fanart is illegal even if it's free? IT's only legal if we keep it to ourselves?? That doesn't seem like much fun I like sharing my stuff for free with my friends.

When I make fan art, I don't wanna sell it, I just wanna share it with people and make them feel good.