MJ Bogatin (“Bo”) of Bogatin, Corman & Gold, is an Arts and Entertainment Attorney in San Francisco. He is also Co-President of California Lawyers for the Arts. www.calawyersforthearts.org Bo is available to answer some of your questions surrounding the business of Art Licensing. - THANKS BO!
Recently I was asked to sign a non-compete for an image broker who wanted to help me license my work. Is it standard to ask for this sort of exclusive? In what scenario would a non-compete be necessary? Thank you, in advance, for your guidance!
The short answer is that people in business as ‘image brokers” or professionally as Licensing Agents may reasonably expect to represent the Artist exclusively. Whether or not the exclusive representation will apply to specific illustrations or specific goods is subject to negotiation. However, once the scope of exclusivity is mutually agreed upon, it would reasonably be expected that the Artist would not compete with the Agent of licensing opportunities within that scope.
I should mention, there is a legal difference between licensing exclusively through an Agent, and giving an Agent an exclusive right to license your works. With the former the Agent would expect that the Artist would use the Agent for all licensing deals. The Artist would be expected to accept a non-compete provision in the Representation Agreement. The Agent does not want her pursuing licensing opportunities that might interfere with the Agent’s own efforts.
Sometimes, it is possible for an Artist to obtain express permission from her exclusive Agent to pursue a lead or contact a person with a given company whose name has been given to her for possible interest in her work. However, I would recommend that it is simply good professional manners to get the express permission of the Agent before she does make such a call. To pursue such a lead without the knowledge of the exclusive Agent could have various negative ramifications. It may be that the Agent has a planned pitch meeting with the same company, or knows who really has the power to license at that entity. To pursue such a lead without the intent to pay the Agent her expected commission would be directly adverse to the Agent’s interest in representing the Artist in the first place.
Taking your own initiative to pursue licensing can also ‘muddy the water’ as to whether the Artist is or is not represented by a given Agent, this damaging the reputations of one or both.
However, the main reason I suspect that an Agent would not want her represented Artist to pursue such leads with or without her permission, even if the Artist were prepared to pay her Agent’s commission anyway, is that such initiatives undermine the Artist’s interests as well. It is the Agent’s job to know what the particular company is looking for by way of new imagery. S/he should know what trends are hot and which of her clients’ illustrations might best fill the needs of one or another company given the strengths (and weaknesses) of their existing product lines. S/he has likely spent years building up a professional relationship with that company that she expects to lead to greater confidence in her recommendations to those clients.
Were the Artist to pursue her own licensing with such a company, she may very well undercut or destroy the Agent’s business plan to sell that Artist’s line with a more profitable competing company and at better royalty rates than the Artist might be willing to settle for!
Even where an Agent is the Artist’s exclusive representative only for a particular line of illustrations or for a specific limited line of Licensed Products (i.e. greeting cards and paper products as distinguished from magnets, plastics and fabrics), the Artist can cause an Agent havoc by pursuing the same corporate Licensees for their interest in a different group of her illustrations or for use of her illustrations in ‘other’ product lines also handled by the company.
Just last week I had a client call who had been ‘balled out’ by her Agent who took exception to her independent efforts to license her imagery for product lines not handled by the Agent. It was clear to me that per her Agency contract, she had a legal right to pursue personally such licensing opportunities, but I could well understand the Agent’s resentment. How was he supposed to pitch her illustrations as fresh, new and particularly appropriate to this regular company client of his, if his own Artist has already pitched them for other products. It was very clear that the Agent would sooner pitch another Artist’s imagery than risk that scenario.
Accordingly, it is simply good business politics to be clear on the front end of an Agency relationship what if any independent marketing the Artist can look to do on her own behalf -- if any. One solution is for the parties to give each other a list of prospective licensees they would like to pitch, and for what illustrations and product lines, and determine if it is in the best interest of the Artist to make any such marketing forays on her own account. If it is, she should not do anything to undercut her Agent’s expectations as to Licensee royalty rates payable, and may offer to pay the Agent a discounted commission on Licenses she obtains – at least from company clients of the Agent if not from others.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is not intended as legal advice. Because the law is not static, and one situation may differ from the next, we cannot assume responsibility for any actions taken based on information contained herein. Also, be aware that the law may vary from state. Therefore, this website cannot replace the advice of an experienced attorney. Receipt of this information does not create an attorney-client relationship. MJ Bogatin, Bogatin, Corman & Gold, www.bcgattorneys.com
No comments:
Post a Comment