Evening star., 1926-04-22
THE NORTH WINDOW
BY Leila MechHn.

4
posed, and a new bill, drawn by Mr..
| Vestal of Indiana, which has been in
| troduced this session into both House
| and Senate, is now under considera-
| ton. This concerns artists as we'll as
authors and a unique feature OF the
| Vestal bill, which would profit all
alike, Is that 1t provides for auto
matte copyright-that is, a recogni-
tion OF the authors or artists pro-
prietorship in his own creation. At
the present time to secure copyright
registration is necessary. II the Vestal
| Dill becomes law this necessity may
be done away with No one, under
such circumstances, can copy or re-
| produce the work of an artist during
his lifetime or for SO years after his
death without the permission OF HIM
self or his heirs, and statutory pen
atty is prescribed for infringement.
| This gives artist or author sole right
to the product of his own brain. 1t
| does more than this-it legaliZes the
recognition of creative faculty as a
tangible and valuable possession.
| Such recognition has long been legal
lied in Great Britain. where for many
years now artists and authors have
enjoyed such protection and appar-
emily it imposes no hardship on copy
lists or publishers whose intent is
honorable.
A second provision which the repre-
sentatives of the artists are eager to
have included in this bill Is one which
will heavily penaliZe and therefore pre-
vent the issuance of arimitations Of
artists works. The present copyright
| law prohibits and penalties exact re-
productions of works duly copyrighted
and registered, but it does not protect
the artist against the near-imitation
which deceives the public and trades
on his hard earned reputation.
For instance. from end to end of
| this country the paintings of Maxfield
Parrish are known. His style, his
| colorings, his characteristic themes
are familiar to almost all. He is one
of the artists who have made spe-
| cialty of painting for reproduction.
| One or more American firms buying
| from him the privilege have issued
| at a reasonable price handsome re-
| productions Of his works His style.
| however, is not difficult to initiate,
and there are those who have pro
| duced paintings for reproduction
which, while obviously inferior, do de-
| ceive the public generally and thereby
| pass for Mr.. Parrish's work. Tn.
| scrupuous firms have reproduced
| these paintings and put them on the
market in large quantities at very
much smaller price than the Parrish
| prints. Naturally. this has not only
hurt Mr.. Parrish's reputation but de-
| creased his income. 1t Is trading on
| the brains and creative ability OF
another.
There are other instances of a siml'
lar sort. Miss Esther Hunt, who ap-
| peared at the hearing on the VestaI
bill before the House committee a
| week ago. claimed that through near
limitations of her little statuettes her
income had been reduced from $4,000
to $500 year.
Another case in point was an al
most exact reproduction of paint
ing by Cecilia Beaux, which had been
used exclusively by a Western candy
manufacturer for advertising pur
noses: and, having the matter brought
to his attention, he claimed-and prob
ABLY rightly-innocence of intention
| explaining that the drawing had been
obtained by his advertising agent
from a commercial art firm. When
the matter was brought to the atten
ton of this firm they claimed coincl
dence-that their artist and MISS
| Cecilia BeauX had had similar 1nsp1
ration The only difference in the ad'
| vertising design was the box of candy
! introduced in the lap of the young
| woman pictured.
| A painting by the late John W.
Alexander. owned by the Pennsylvania
| Academy of the Fine Arts, despite
| the fact of having been copyrighted
has been used with but slight change
for advertising purposes by a mat
tress manufacturer. And so 1t goes
The Vestal bill, il passed, would
certainly prevent the use of Original
works of art without the artists per
mission for advertising purposes. and
it is hoped, would also sufficiently
penalize near-imitations to make then
improbable.
Several interesting points wert
brought out concerning art and copy
right at the first session Of the pub
Ilic hearing on the Vestal bill. Among
these was a statement made by Mr.
Murphy, representing the Guild o.
Free Lance Artists of New York. thai
advertising, which ranked as the
fourth biggest business in the United
States. was chiefly dependent upor
art for it's success. This puts art es
sentially on a financial footing ant
NAV help to convince the hard-headet
business man that it Is worthy o.
consideration. A chief factor in the
fourth biggest business in the United
States certainly cannot be considered
a "frill.'
The Guild of Free Lance Artists
by the way, concerns itself with ar
entirely on the business basis. 1t II
a clearing house for art as product
something bought and sold. The ad
vertiser wishing a design may ap
peal to the Guild of Free Lance Art
lists for designer; so may the build
er who wishes a mural painting as 6
decoration. or the individual VIII,
seeks a portrait. The artist who ha.
to make a contract may call upon thu
guild for legal advice and contrac
forms, and in case of disagreement
with his client may place his case II
their hands for settlement. There Il
another organization in New Yorl
somewhat similar. 1t is known a!
the Art Directors Club and it's mem
bership consists Of business men wht
are art directors Of publications ant
in some instances of department
stores.
That art has not only found 1T
way into advertising. but is the chic
factor in this big business, is easil,
discoverable by turning the advertis
ing pages Of any of the leading maga
zines When It was announced som'
months ago that two of the magazine.
which had heretofore employed th'
best illustrators and been conspicuou!
for the merit of their illustration!
would no longer publish illustrates
articles, it was whispered that thu
reason was that they could no Longer
afford to compete with the advertiser
in this field. The best advertising
art Is of very fine quality and 1t.
merit is derived not only thrnuPh fh,