Twitter Just Got Ugly for Jake Parker
-
@CosmoglotJay that is a real shame, I don’t know him but I really like Jake as an artist. I also hope it doesn’t affect his podcasts, his insights and advice are brilliant. I can completely understand his reason for getting sponsors for inktober. I just hope any misunderstanding get resolved for all involved soon.
-
Jake Parker wanting to make an extra profit from a property he created that he didn’t expect would grow into something so gigantic, is totally 100% valid.
We all DREAM of creating an idea that would get so huge.
People being upset that something that’s been free to use, had no guidelines, and open for everyone (including the official logo) in order to help them make extra cash no longer is and must be altered in order to fit certain rules, also very valid. I’m of the opinion that People are allowed to be upset about a change that’s affecting their ability to sell certain things.
Could there have been some preliminary work done to let the public know of these changes, sure. Did Jake expect this mess would happen? Probably not. I respect Jake for taking the time to apologize and do PR to make sure his own brand can stay marketable and other artists can still sell their art.
instagram and twitter: @artofaleksey
alekseyillustration.com -
If what I'm reading is true (and again, I don't know the details), Jake copyrighted "Inktober" as a word. His intentions on his blog make it appear that he's only interested in protecting the logo for the sponsors. But since there are lawyers involved, they may be interpreting it literally and now they're sinking their teeth into everything they get their hands on.
Copyright and trademark are vastly different things.
Another entity CAN trademark "Inktober" in addition to Jake but they can't use it in the same classification category as Jake (and of course it would have to valid and be accepted).
A trademark has to be actively enforced in order to remain valid and that will mean people being served C&D letters.
-
@Aleksey said in Twitter Just Got Ugly for Jake Parker:
Jake Parker wanting to make an extra profit from a property he created that he didn’t expect would grow into something so gigantic, is totally 100% valid.
We all DREAM of creating an idea that would get so huge.
People being upset that something that’s been free to use, had no guidelines, and open for everyone (including the official logo) in order to help them make extra cash no longer is and must be altered in order to fit certain rules, also very valid. I’m of the opinion that People are allowed to be upset about a change that’s affecting their ability to sell certain things.
Could there have been some preliminary work done to let the public know of these changes, sure. Did Jake expect this mess would happen? Probably not. I respect Jake for taking the time to apologize and do PR to make sure his own brand can stay marketable and other artists can still sell their art.
You can't blame anyone for wanting to make a buck. My position is the trademark could have been contested as being in the public domain on the grounds that the term was encouraged and allowed to be used freely for a decade without any claim or enforcement of rights.
To happily and willingly give something away and then claiming after 10 years that you own it and in fact are taking it back under threat of penalty in order to now cash in simply does not speak well of a person. I don't know Jake, I don't participate in inktober. But I find the situation fascinating since I honestly don't see how this trademark was approved.
-
@jimsz that’s very interesting. Would individuals be able to contest it at this point do you think?
-
To happily and willingly give something away and then claiming after 10 years that you own it and in fact are taking it back under threat of penalty in order to now cash in simply does not speak well of a person.
Oh, c'mon, it's a lot more complicated than that, and you know it... Jake has made multiple posts on Twitter and made an official statement to that fact, and he's working hard to make sure that everyone can still use the logo correctly and sell their art. He's not some selfish villain. He is 1/3 of what makes these very forums possible, an active participant who sometimes makes comments on our posts, and a teacher who has taught most of us here a great deal through the classes available through SVS and a monthly contest.
He's not doing this maliciously, and most of us who are on these forums know that. It's an incredibly complicated issue that none of us are going to be able to solve here with these posts. Please please please take care to avoid the disparaging of any person's character on these forums. We've blissfully avoided flamewars here, and take great care to make sure they don't flare up. An air of honesty and altruism must be present on these forums in order to help each other by offering advice and constructive criticism, so please don't inadvertently undermine that...
I'm sure Jake is getting an earful from a LOT of very angry people right now. We've seen the pitchforks on Twitter. Let's not let this place degenerate into that. Please.
Children's Illustration Portfolio: https://www.coreyartusillustration.com
Art Portfolio: https://www.coreyartusimagery.com
Mastodon: https://mindly.social/@Coreyartus
Pixelfed: https://pixelfed.social/Coreyartus -
@jimsz said in Twitter Just Got Ugly for Jake Parker:
To happily and willingly give something away and then claiming after 10 years that you own it and in fact are taking it back under threat of penalty
The only thing he’s taking away is the ability for thieves to undermine the integrity of the artist IP.
“ Inktober is and will always be free to participate in. The hashtag is free to use (as are all hashtags). Every artist is free to sell the drawings they made during Inktober if they want to. Contrary to misstatements recently made on social media, I am not trying to stop any artist from profiting from their own artwork, and I am certainly not trying to steal your work, nor receive back payments from work that has been sold.”-an excerpt from Jakes blog.
We are still free to use #inktober and to publish or sell the work we’ve done from the inktober challenge. We just can’t (and shouldn’t) sell it as if Inktober was our IP.
For example, when I make my physical book from the work I did for this years inktober challenge, if I choose to mention inktober I will not use its trademarked logo or pretend that I am associated legally with the logo, but I can and may credit or mention Jake Parker and his Inktober challenge as the kick in the butt i needed to help me make the book. But I would also ask his permission before doing so, as is right.
I have spoken
-
@Coreyartus well said!!
-
I don't have a side in this as I have never participated in Inktober. You may not like what I am saying and I am not trying to dump on Jake nor trying to have a flame war. But let's not be naive either. Some here will jump to defend Jake because they are his students.
Were artists encouraged to use the logo and phrase for a decade or so prior to registering the trademark? That is simply a yes or a no answer. I'm not saying it was wrong to do so or wrong to register the trademark. However, once you set something loose and encourage it's use with no oversight and then try and enforce legalities/rules/etc., you are going to get hammered.
If someone had an extra $600 or so laying around, they can trademark slowvember and find a use to trademark Inktober in another classification.
-
@jimsz Honestly I don't get why you're so hung up on the fact that the use of the logo and phrase was encouraged for a long time or how that somehow make Jake a bad guy here? He created something, encouraged its use. But over the years it changed into something much more than he expected and now it makes more sense to have some rules to protect it. Just because he allowed and encouraged some things in the past, doesn't mean he's obligated to keep it that way forever. Bottom line, it's his to do what he wants with. It was nice of him to allow the use of the logo and phrase this long. He's also working with artists who've received take down notices to help sort it all out. And before you accuse of protecting my teacher or whatever, I actually never bought one of his classes so I don't have any biases here. Just a person with common freaking sense.
-
@jimsz If someone trademarks Slowvember, I'm ok with that. But they will have to pay the $1,000,000 for the web domain which I own! haha!
SVS Faculty Instructor
www.leewhiteillustration.com -
