Advice, commissioner requesting art removal due to personal issues

[lavenderpandy.livejournal.com]

So, this came about months ago where an old commissioner requested removal of their commission due to their significant other having major issues with the artwork. The image was of their personal character with someone else's character which was not allowed in their relationship or something. I'm not entirely sure. As the commissioner described, it got to the point of constant arguments and threats of self-harm. I said no as the image was pretty much 2 years old and had obviously been spread to multiple places by now. I'll admit I asked that if they wished for me to remove the image, I would need a privacy fee paid.

That didn't go well and the commissioner went on an emotional tirade, blaming me for the discourse and "profiting" off their issues. I didn't respond.

Months later, the significant other asked for the art to be removed, explaining that the personal drama was still going on (ironically, the image was in their favorites on their page...okay???) They said they would pay the removal fee but instead I just broke down and removed the image and blocked both the users, telling the SD never to contact me  about any of these matters  again.


Did I handle this properly? What rule in my TOS would be a good way of handling this? I've had an usual number of people ask for their art to be removed at the beginning of the year due to miscommunication between the participants, but not with like this. I'm empathetic but I don't want my artwork weeded out due to emotional situations like this all the time.

Comments

[jamesalesto.livejournal.com]

I think you're handling it just fine. FWIW I have a policy in my ToS that I don't pull for any reason unless the client is going to buy out my rights. The buyout price is 5x commission cost.

It's entirely up to you. Some folks do it as a bit of customer service, but I personally don't want to be involved in people's relationship drama.

[lavenderpandy.livejournal.com]

Thank you, I felt I was making the right decision as well but was unsure if I was being a bit too harsh presenting the privacy fee.

[metallik-hasse.livejournal.com]

I've been wondering what to charge for the right to a piece of my work. May I ask how you decided on 5x the original price?

I apologise if this strays too far from the topic.

[jamesalesto.livejournal.com]

The general consensus has been for a while that a complete buyout of rights is 3x the cost on commission. I want to say it came from the illustrator's handbook, but I can't recall at the moment. Given that I really don't like selling my rights I bumped it to 5x. Mostly to scare people away unless they absolutely want it. I mostly do sketch commissions with a max price of $110, so if they want me to never post it the sketch has to be worth $550 to them.

[metallik-hasse.livejournal.com]

That's really helpful info! I think I'll follow suit, honestly. I [i]really[/i] don't like keeping my work private, [b]but[/b] if they want to pay that much, I'd be willing to accept those terms.

[gatekat.livejournal.com]

Is a privacy fee (under any name) in your TOS? It makes a real difference IMO on whether it was handled well.

If you have a privacy fee listed then the first half with the original commissioner was handled well. That you took it down without being paid the fee is not right to me. It's a slap in the face of anyone who has or would pay it that you might demand it from some and not everyone.

If you didn't have a privacy fee in your TOS then asking for one is a problem to me.

[lavenderpandy.livejournal.com]

Yes I do, it's 25% of the original commission price.

[teekchan.livejournal.com]

This^

[dinogrrl.livejournal.com]

You don't have to take the image down if someone later has issues with whoever else they had put into a commission. That would be, in effect, taking away your ability to advertise yourself and losing the potential revenue from that. But their issues are their own and they had no business involving you once you declined and explained the fee (which is perfectly reasonable). Along the same lines as if you were to get a tattoo of your name and your SO's name encircled with flowers or something on your arm--if you later had a bad breakup with that person, you can't just go to the tattoo artist and throw a hissy fit and demand they remove/retouch the tattoo for free. You have to pay for that service. (Though tattoo removal uses time/materials that not posting or taking down an image online doesn't, but in both instances the artist loses an avenue of advertisement and your personal relationships are still none of the artists' business.)

So, to answer your question of if you handled it properly, in the first instance yes, in the second with the SO involved I'm not sure, depends on if you have the 'no showing off' fee in your TOS. But I can understand why you did what you did and if it ended that situation then it's water under the bridge by this point. Just take this situation as a lesson learn and make sure you have something related to this in your TOS for the future.

[ramthedragon.livejournal.com]

If I was in your shoes I would've just taken the picture down, as you said it was 2 years old so really it's not as if it was garnering tons of attention or views. I'm not really a huge fan of the privacy fee either.

I agree their drama is none of your business but I still think it's a nice gesture that I don't think really affects you that much at this point.

[mazz.livejournal.com]

Artists get commissions by sharing the work they produce. Requiring a fee to not share the work or to remove it is fair because they lose those views that will get them more work. Even if it is a few years old, people still see it. I've commissioned many artists because I found them in someone's faves from an image that was a few years old.

[metallik-hasse.livejournal.com]

I agree completely with Mazz; several of my older pieces are shared more often than many of my newer works. I'm sure this is for a variety of reasons, but just because a drawing is old, it doesn't mean the it isn' valuable to the artist.

I've commissioned artists by finding hecka old art by them shared around the web or in the depths of someone's favorites.

(Edited for typos and reworded parts for clarity.)

[thaily.livejournal.com]

"If I was in your shoes I would've just taken the picture down, as you said it was 2 years old so really it's not as if it was garnering tons of attention or views."

Disagreed, there's a few pieces of mine people clearly favor, some are older. I had a piece from 2014 I had to re-upload so I could have it in my gallery and spread awareness that it was mine, because I got tired of people tracing/re-uploading it as their own.

[mazz.livejournal.com]

You were in the right to have that privacy fee.

They are honestly lucky you removed the image and didn't charge it after the SO contacted you. Tho I'm sure they will find other reasons to keep fighting because that whole situation sounds toxic as all get out and I'd have just removed the image and blocked them after the SO contacted me as well because no way do I want to be dragged into personal drama of someone I did business with.

[everainsley]

Yeah, this. Their personal issues have nothing to do with your art, and it's highly unfair of them to drag you into it, especially on an older piece.

[lavenderpandy.livejournal.com]

Me and my husband are reworking things.

[thaily.livejournal.com]

Just include "I reserve all rights".
The right to redistribute (upload) is included in that.

[leongon.livejournal.com]

I had an experience similar. The way I handle it is: I try to get consent of all involved characters' owners for the drawing before starting the commission. After that if later anyone wants the image removed from my gallery it's my decision based on their case, but they can't force me to do anything.

If a person's character was drawn by you without their consent, then they have a case and maybe you should straight out accept the request for taking it down.

Basically my advice is to get consent from everybody involved before making the art, after that they can ask but it's only your choice to keep or remove from your gallery.

[leongon.livejournal.com]

Yeah that's my point. In a commission that has character A with character B you obtain consent from both owners of A and B to be in that drawing before start working on it, regardless if A or B owner is paying. If both owners want the drawing, then it's not your problem anymore if they fight each other later.

[sbneko.livejournal.com]

In this case, person A got a commission with person C. Person B, the partner, wasn’t ok with it and they wanted it taken down.

So getting permission wouldn’t have helped here, as the other person,B, wasn’t actually drawn at all.

[leongon.livejournal.com]

Really? I misunderstood the mess then. In this case the whole issue is super dumb, this has absolutely nothing to do with the artist.

[lavenderpandy.livejournal.com]

I have a consent policy but this situation had nothing to do with it as the commission was done years ago before the SO started having issues with the image. I'm not sure if they were together or not, but things blew up my art became the center of their problems.

[leongon.livejournal.com]

Someone else clarified the situation to me. Bringing their problem to the artist was really weird, blocking those people might have been the best thing you could have done regardless of accepting to remove the art or not.

[aietradaea.livejournal.com]

Blimey. Somehow, I...don't think the issue in their relationship is a two year old piece of art. o_O

[lavenderpandy.livejournal.com]

I didn't think so either but I did want to dig any further.

[thaily.livejournal.com]

If I still had the PDF I'd change the "offending" character's colour palette and replace the original with the edited version.
The stuff in your gallery is effectively your portfolio and I wouldn't let other people's unstable relationships curate said portfolio.
I've done commissions where people broke up before the art was finished, if I started letting purrymurryfurry relationships dictate the contents of my galleries, there'd be no end to the deletions and re-uploads.