Tuesday, April 06, 2010

WaPo launches online virtual gallery of artwork by local artists

Calling all artists...Washington Regions newest talents. An online gallery for Washington area artists

The Washington Post recently launched Real Art D.C., a new platform for contemporary art in the Washington region, as well as a related competition open to all area artists.

Real Art D.C. is an online virtual gallery of artwork by local artists which will allow The Post’s audience to discover and connect with Washington’s newest talents. This online user gallery will be driven by the local arts community – the artists who submit work and the dealers and teachers who encourage artists to upload images. The site will display any artworks that members of the community chose to post.

Beginning the first week of May and continuing through the summer, The Post’s art critics will pick ten artists from the pool of Real Art D.C. uploads. Each of the ten finalists will get a studio visit write-up online, and once the last “finalist” is announced in early October, users will have the opportunity to vote online for the finalist they like best. The Post will interview the winner, and profile his/her career in print and online.

See all the artwork here: www.washingtonpost.com/real-art-dc

**Artists** Please read the FINE PRINT especially concerning the exclusive license you are giving in exchange for uploading images. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/delphi/delphirules.htm

User Discussion and Submission Guidelines - Read # 7.


  1. The online gallery seems like a great idea and provides wonderful incentive for the artist to post. However, I was concerned with the fine print: "For any content that you submit, you give us permission to use such content. You hereby grant to Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC a royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, exclusive, and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, incorporate into other works, distribute, perform, display, and otherwise exploit such content, in whole or in part in any form, media or technology now known or later developed."
    I am curious to what people think about this. -Michele

  2. Thanks for shining a spotlight on the fine print, Michele. It does make a difference in deciding whether to participate. I've forwarded this concern to the WaPo Director of Communications to see to whom questions should be directed.

  3. It's a good point Michele and I have now read all the language on the WaPo website for Terms and Conditions of the Real Art D.C. Promotion including the fine print. It would be helpful if there was a live link to the fine print on the site. Worldwide, exclusive, perpetual, sublicensable, royalty free. That's asking a lot to be featured in a virtual gallery for six months. Do you know of any other online sites that require this type of relationship to show your work online? This is likely a standard policy for other contributors of content at WaPo and it poses some problems for artists. I think you will have to weigh the pros and cons of uploading images, particularly not knowing how the images will be used in the future.

  4. Anne,
    Here is an example of the fine print on the online gallery at www.fineartamerica.com : "By posting any Content to the public areas of the Website, you hereby grant to FineArtAmerica.com the non-exclusive, fully paid, worldwide license to use, publicly perform and display such Content on the Website. This license will terminate at the time you remove such Content from the Website."
    The key points to note are the license is granted for use on the website only. Also, the license is terminated as soon as you take your work down. This seems adequate and fair. As an artist even after you sell an original painting you retain all rights to the reproduction or adaption of that work.
    As artists we are eager to share our work with our communities, but not that eager.
    I am happy that you brought it to Wapo's attention. Maybe they will review their terms. Love your site, Michele Norris