GAG’s Friends: Not So Earth Friendly

I haven’t bothered writing much about the Graphic Artists Guild this past year, mostly to preserve my peace of mind and save energy for more productive matters, but every now and then something comes to my attention that tempts me to write more about them. A recent news item posted by the Guild about Milt Glaser’s climate change message, “It’s not Warming, It’s Dying” finally caused a big enough spike on my irony-o-meter for me to go to the trouble, not to mention that with Earth Day being here the timing’s exactly right.

Milt’s work is great and I love it, but it kills me that the Guild can talk about climate while at the same time their Copyright Alliance friends are up to no good when it comes to the environment. In case you haven’t visited my previous posts or learned this elsewhere, the Copyright Alliance is a front group created largely by associates of former Sen. Don Nickles (R-OK) and his lobbying firm, the Nickles Group LLC, that caters to the interests of a few corporate interests and not so much those of the individual creators as they frequently claim. Despite knowing this the Guild continues to support them and has sent them a fair amount of money. (Directly to the D.C. office of the Nickles Group, as a matter of fact.) Sen. Don Nickles is a staunch conservative and longtime opponent of organized labor, workplace safety regulation, affordable healthcare, equal rights, and he has supported ALEC and other conservative causes during and after his time in the U.S. Senate, making it not the least bit surprising that both he and the people around him have quite a track record on the environment.


 

The Copyright Alliance and the Nickles Group on the Environment

The Copyright Alliance has been advocating for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) which has been widely denounced as a serious threat to laws protecting the environment both within the U.S. and around the world. This effort by the Alliance is part of a larger campaign by the MPAA and the other corporations it serves to get the TPP passed.

The Nickles Group Lobbies for Koch Industries. Other high profile fossil fuel clients of the Nickles Group: Anadarko Petroleum, Exxon Mobil, and National Oilwell Varco.

Don Nickles has been a vocal opponent of renewable energy, recently pushing for the elimination of tax credits for renewable energy producers.

Don Nickles was a board member of fracking giant Chesapeake Energy, which has not only polluted aquifers, but also screwed landowners with abusive pipeline contracts while doing it. Nickles resigned from the Chesapeake board in 2012, however, after being involved in CEO Aubrey McClendon’s troubles. It appears he’s still on Valero’s board of Directors.

Mitch McConnell’s new policy director is Hazen Marshall, a top aide to Don Nickles, and until taking the new position had been a lobbyist at the Nickles Group serving their oil and gas clients. If you heard about Sen. McConnell’s call for states to block President Obama’s initiatives on climate change, well then, you now know of one of the players behind the scenes who might have had a hand in formulating that bit of politicking.

The Nickles Group’s top client is the notorious patent troll Intellectual Ventures LLC, reported to be attacking the renewable energy industry. Intellectual Ventures has been harshly criticized for its modus operandi of threatening businesses with expensive lawsuits unless licenses to the patents owned by IV are purchased. Tech industry startups have been particularly hard hit by trolls; a past epidemic of poorly defined and very broadly written patents on items such as software code and other new technologies not sufficiently understood at the patent office has handed Intellectual Ventures and other trolls the opportunity to demand victims purchase licenses to dubious patents, or risk wasting millions on a legal fight even if they stand to win in court. This bloodsucking is now being done to companies in the renewable energy business with the help of the Nickles Group. Here’s the punch line- Cindi Tripodi, a key architect of the Copyright Alliance, is a founding partner of the Nickles Group and one of the lobbyists helping Intellectual Ventures do its damage to renewable energy.


So maybe now you’ll understand why I don’t take the people at the Graphic Artists Guild to be all that environmentally conscious. At some point I’ll probably also get worked up enough to write more about how they’re also not entirely credible when it comes to copyright and the economic interests of individual creators.

(P.S.- I must have done something right in a past life, because HBO just aired “Last Week Tonight” in which John Oliver did a marvelous job explaining patent trolls.   Must see!)

 

 

Big Cleanup Job, Tip #1

 

Tip: When facing a large mess, forget about developing a plan of attack. You’ll only waste time standing around rather than actually making progress. Just reach in, grab the nearest thing, haul it out into the light, and deal with it. Step and repeat.  Mind the spiders.

Cleanup02_700x

Lots of stuff has piled up in the last few months; so following my own advice, I’m just going to grab one or two items from the pile and drag them out in no particular order. Additional posts will follow as I work my way through the accumulated junk.

Proposed COMCAST / Time Warner Merger

While this has been pushed back in the news by impending climate catastrophe, revival of the cold war, and planes falling from the sky, this is still something you should be paying attention to. After all, it would really suck to not have anything decent to watch on TV as the world crumbles. The New York Times continues its “who the hell knows, make up your own damned mind about things” approach to covering the COMCAST deal, with a positive article in today’s business section by James B. Stewart- A Vision Beyond Cable for Comcast After Merger . This merger-friendly article contrasts with a piece by David Carr on Feb. 16- Stealthily, Comcast Fortifies its Arsenal, as well as a doubtful editorial on Feb. 13-  If a Cable Giant Becomes Bigger.  I find it hysterical that Stewart, supporter of  COMCAST taking over Time Warner, mentions he’s a Time Warner customer and hates them.  Carr, in opposition to the deal, states he’s a customer of COMCAST, and loathes them.

Susan Crawford, author of “Captive Audience- The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age” has also spoken out in opposition to the merger.  In a presentation at Harvard on March 04 and also in an interview with the Harvard Law Record, she gives numerous reasons for concluding the merger will not be good for consumers.  Here’s an excerpt from her interview:

For most Americans, the only choice for high capacity Internet connection is their local cable monopoly, . . . A Comcast-Time Warner merger would make an already terrible situation incrementally worse in that Comcast would have additional scale. And scale is the secret to this business.    -Susan Crawford

The NY Times had another interesting piece by Eric Lipton, on Feb. 20- COMCAST’s Web of Lobbying and Philanthropy that focused on COMCAST’s lobbying machine, and mentioned that  former Sen. Don Nickles, the Copyright Alliance’s facilitator, is now on COMCAST’s newly formed merger strategy team.  The article digs into the web of charities and special interest groups that receive support from COMCAST and which might now be expected to lend a hand in getting the merger with Time Warner approved.

But don’t worry, Graphic Artists Guild members and defenders of the Copyright Alliance!! I’m sure this has nothing to do with you. Oh, wait, that’s right, the Copyright Alliance lobbyists work for Sen. Nickles at the Nickles Group LLC, and Executive Director Sandra Aistars was a Time Warner VP before coming to the Alliance. Move along!  Nothing to see here, folks.

 

The New and Improved IAG Blog

This site is no longer my blog for the IAG, the “Illustrators at the Guild,” my interest group for members of the NYC chapter of the Graphic Artists Guild, inc.  Unfortunately, I’ve reached the conclusion that the numerous problems within the Guild are insurmountable, and have decided that remaining as either an officer or member of the Graphic Artists Guild would not be a productive use of my time.

All my posts will be preserved for the benefit of Guild members who might still want to know some of the specifics about their organization, and exercise their rights to participate in its governance.  While I’ll still have a few things to say about the Guild, I will be speaking to the broader interests of artists, designers, and the arts community.  To any and all remaining Guild members, I hope you will pay attention to how your organization is being managed, and whether or not it is serving as an effective voice for your interests.

Sincerely,

Christopher Johnson

Reprographic Royalties

(NOTE: Originally published March 13, 2013, this post was re-edited for public display, Sept. 20, 2013.  The IAG is no longer my interest group at the NYC chapter of the Graphic Artists Guild, and I am no longer an officer, volunteer, or member of the Graphic Artists Guild.)

If you’re the insatiably curious type and actually took time to browse through the Guild’s 2011 LM-2 financial report to the Department of Labor, you might have been puzzled to learn that most of the Guild’s revenue did not actually come from member dues.  Not by a long shot; far and away the largest chunk of change the Guild received in 2011 is listed on page 4 of the report as simply “Other Receipts”:

.
Statement-B_v02_370x

So what the heck is that $593,275 all about?  The “14” circled in red refers to Schedule 14:

sch14_v03_625x

Schedule 14 reveals that the real golden egg in the Guild’s fiscal basket is the $541,788 in Reprographic Royalties paid by the Authors Coalition of America (ACA).  Guild members who’ve been around a while probably have heard of them, but newer members are likely to be completely in the dark.  In my time at the Guild, there’s been very little open discussion about them; so to remedy this, here’s a very brief summary, which I’ll follow with links to more detailed articles that will give you a better picture of this very crucial part of the Guild’s finances.

Reprographic Rights- The Basics

Many countries have Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs) that are given authority by their nation’s copyright laws to issue licenses and collect fees for the photocopying of copyrighted materials.  RROs collect money in two ways; from “title-specific” fees, generated when copyright owners are identified and can be reimbursed directly for the copying of their works; and from “non-title-specific” fees charged for copying without recording who the individual owners are.  This can happen where laws allow for the issuing of blanket licenses to institutions such as universities that want to photocopy large volumes of works without having to track each and every copyright owner. RROs collect and then redistribute non-title-specific funds to organizations that serve creative communities, so that artists and authors can at least benefit in some general way from the copying of protected works. These are the “reprographic royalties” that the Guild has been receiving.

There are many RROs around the world organized through the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations (IFRRO).  Since copyright law varies from country to country, the collection and redistribution of money is complex; for the most part it’s done through bilateral agreements between RROs of different nations, based on IFRRO guidelines.

In the United States, we do not have an RRO established by the federal government;  however, IFRRO has designated the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), a nonprofit corporation, to receive funds from other countries and redistribute the money to organizations that support creators in America.  The CCC gives a portion to the Authors Coalition of America, of which the Graphic Artists Guild is a member.

An article written by past Guild president Jonathan Combs is archived on the Guild’s website (no longer available) and gives a reasonable explanation of IFRRO, RROs, and reprographic rights money:

Foreign Reprographic Royalties: What They Are and Why They’re Important
by Jonathan Combs, Guild National President, 1998-2000
November, 2002

Note however, that in the article there’s mention of contractual limitations on the use of this money, making the situation a bit more complicated.  In addition, the following quote speaks to our current managerial issues at the Guild:

“Several important principles guide RROs in their work. One is the concept of transparency — to be as open about business dealings as possible. Rights-holders should have access to budgets, surveys, and other business practices to avoid mismanagement or misuse of RRO funds. Another is accountability. In addition to being represented on RRO boards, rights-holder organizations should be accountable to their members through elective and democratic processes.”

Given the lack of financial information that’s been provided to both the international board of directors and the membership, it’s hard for me to reach the conclusion that the Guild has been living up to these principles, and to have much confidence that we’ve been meeting the contract terms for usage of reprographic royalties.

For additional information, and some very stark and unflattering viewpoints on the Guild’s usage of reprographic royalties, here are a few links of interest.  The articles about the defamation lawsuit that the Guild brought against the IPA and Brad Holland have everything to do with how the Guild does or doesn’t use the royalty money, not to mention that the lawsuit is in its own right another very important subject that hasn’t been discussed much at the Guild.

Articles:

Animation World Network, August 24, 2010
Mind Your Business: Who is Keeping Your Royalties?
Mark Simon is as mad as hell about reprographic royalties.

Print Magazine / Imprint website
Illustration and the Law
Steven Heller, May 10, 2011
Interview with Brad Holland

Graphic Artists Guild Notice of Appeal (pdf)
April 28, 2011

Association of Medical Illustrators / Press Release:
Graphic Artists Guild Lawsuit Dismissed

Access Court Documents / Defamation Lawsuit.
eCourts / main page
(follow ‘WebCivil Supreme’ link; log in, then search for case index number 109149/2008)

Websites:

IFRRO

Copyright Clearance Center

Authors Coalition of America

———–

Let me wrap up by emphasizing one more time that if the Graphic Artists Guild is ever going to be a responsible advocate for artists and designers, and a good steward of the resources it’s entrusted with, there’s going to have to be a lot more sunlight around here, with many more members taking an interest in the governance of the Guild.

-Chris