Jump to content

BaronVonClop

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About BaronVonClop

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

122 profile views
  1. I'd be a bit upset as the commissioner if I wasn't told in advance. I understand that artists maintain the copyright of their art and can do what they please, but it would still be my character and my design being sold for a profit by someone else without my knowledge or consent. If I were told in advance, I'd have no problem with it. But at the same time, I probably wouldn't commission that person to begin with if I knew that was on the table.
  2. To me, it would depend on what the reward is. I know artists tend to have wildly different ideas of what rewards are. If it is something tiny like a $5 Telegram sticker or a rough sketch, I'd add a clause to my Patreon page which states rewards that go unclaimed for that month (or maybe make it two, just for leniency's sake) are forfeit. Make a post informing your current patreons of the change, explain why, and probably even send the particular individual that isn't responding a direct e-mail to them personally warning them that next month this policy comes into effect and to please respond. If it is something major like a $50+ full commission with limited slots (which I've seen many artists do as well), I'd probably just boot them from the supporters and let someone else take up the spot who is willing to respond to my messages. This is probably the easiest solution that would result in the least (potential, down the line) drama.
  3. Net neutrality has been repealed in the US, but I'm not aware of any US states blanket banning any social media websites. That would be huge news, and a quick Google search shows that while places like Russia and Iran are banning Telegram, I can't find any info that places in the US have. Even if they did, the artist could still use their mobile data connection to access it, and if all else failed, a VPN. Simply put, I don't believe for a moment that their claim is true and even if it was, they have other options if they were truly concerned about it. Regardless, the fact that they are online and your messages show that they were read proves their claim is not true. They clearly have access to Telegram in *some* fashion. Personally, if I were in your shoes, I'd challenge their claim that their ISP has blanket banned Telegram, and point out that they are reading my messages so they obviously have access to the service. Request an update. If they dont have one or refuse to respond, escalate to an ultimatum. And, if that too passes with no answer (I'd say about a week), ask for a refund. And if all else fails, a PayPal claim (assuming you used PP, of course).
  4. Ah, okay, being too-low-for-print-quality-but-still-viewable makes sense. I've still never encountered it, but that reasoning is certainly sound. Thanks for that; not being a graphic artist, I would have never considered that as an issue. Like almost everything else in their terms, it isn't defined and is left vague so I have no idea. It's entirely possible I'm just being jumpy.
  5. I'm definitely apparently in the minority there, then. As mentioned above, I've literally never heard of this and I have commissioned a fair number of artists. But fair enough, it's just my inexperience showing I suppose! I have no issue with a blacklist, I apologize if that's how my post came across. If someone is being a jerk, then the artist is well within their right to refuse working with them. Zero problems there. My own ToS includes a "being too much of a jerk" clause as well, but it includes a full refund and the right to repost the piece as a YCH with their character rewritten. My concern was more with the fact that they could not only at any time declare "blacklist!" but also then keep as much money as they want (at least, in theory, because in practice I doubt that would hold up to a PayPal claim). I was looking at it from more of a "am I being scammed" point of view, I guess. That's basically my concern as well. The lack of public queue, the lack of due dates, and the idea of charging people to get a due date... on their own without the others, I could overlook (mostly, no public queue is a pretty big issue), but when they are all combined, I'm weary because that just screams "hey, you're never getting this before the PayPal claim window closes, if ever". Regardless, thanks for the help. I'm glad I asked because I would have apparently made myself an ass in at least two places if I didn't, so appreciated.
  6. Awesome, thanks for the quick response! I'm honestly surprised to hear that! I've commissioned in the range of 30 artists and I've never encountered even one that gives two quality versions, let alone barring me from showing anyone the good quality version (with the exception of in person, I guess? Only "uploading" is banned). Two versions with the same resolution, but one has a watermark for public upload, sure, understandable. Maybe I just commission lax people, but I was baffled when reading that, and even more confused now that I'm hearing it's fairly common! But fair enough; if this is common outside of my circle, I won't push it. Yeah, now that I'm reading it back I realize I worded that poorly. I know that when commissioning things the copyright remains in the hands of the artist, no concern there. My confusion was more that every other time I've seen the partial refund clause, it has included the bit about the commissioner being allowed to use the unfinished art. But fair enough, your explanation is solid. Regardless, that all makes perfect sense to me. Against the logical side of me, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt and will wait another week to see if there's any progress, then probably follow your advice and just file the claim and write out the beware if nothing comes up. Thank you for the honest advice!
  7. Hello all. Currently dealing with a problem artist (who will remain anonymous in this post, of course) who is taking an excessive amount of time. They're now threatening to invoke their ToS and force me to take a partial refund in response to a polite request to have the work completed prior to the PayPal claim window ending. Sure enough, I checked their ToS and found some staggering things that are big red flags to me, but I'm unsure if they are really as big of a deal as I'm reading them as, or if I'm overreacting and most other artists think these clauses are fair. The artist did not notify commissioners of their ToS existing prior to payment, nor did they require us to acknowledge it prior to commissioning, so I'm only now noticing these practices. I'm no lawyer, but as far as I understand it that alone makes it unenforceable, but regardless I'd like second opinions. In particular, their ToS states: They may take as long as they want on any commission due to medical issues. There is no due date or time frame for any piece of art. You can pay an additional fee for a due date, but it must be mutually agreed upon and they might not even accept at all. The fee is not listed. They do not have a public queue, and they do not do commissions in the order they take them. There is no way to know how many other people are waiting for art, where you are, or even a rough idea of how long the wait is. The commissioner is not allowed to post or share the art anywhere. Instead, there is a separate, watermarked, low resolution version and you, the commissioner, may only upload that, no exceptions. The completed, full-res piece is for "personal use only" and may not be uploaded anywhere. These are already a bit strange to me... but then the refund section begins to really worry me as a commissioner. 10% "processing fee" for all refunds. They just keep a flat 10% for no reason. This is digital art, by the by, so there's no materials to buy. I totally understand deposits on fursuits or physical art. Refunds take four weeks to "process". Partial refunds for partially completed art. Fair enough, even though the percentages aren't listed so they can make up anything they want. However, you aren't allowed to keep or use the partially completed art you've just purchased. If the commissioner is paying for it, isn't it theirs? Otherwise what am I being charged for? You can be "blacklisted" at any time for a variety of vague reasons including "being rude" or "being disrespectful". At that point, the artist is allowed to select how much to give as a partial refund, even though they are the one choosing to give the refund. Furthermore, would these issues be appropriate to mention in a Beware about a transaction, or would it be considered off-topic? I feel that this is rather important for people to be warned about, because had I been aware of these clauses in the ToS it would have stopped me in my tracks from commissioning said artist. Instead, the artist does not mention a ToS or require acknowledging it prior to payment, and has only brought it up now that they want to try and get me to accept a partial refund. I appreciate any thoughts and comments!
×
×
  • Create New...