Sora the wonder @soranova - Tumblr Blog

What are all these new buttons…

A lot changed

I haven’t used my tumblr in years.

I wanna start using it again looking back at old messenges and post I realized I was a lot immature and it’s so cringy lol. I don’t know how to feel.

funcdyscat-blog

GUYS WHAT THE FUCK

I’m honestly fucking disgusted by this.

kaze-hime

Just a short update on the Jeanette Hayes issue...

A week ago, I wrote up a blog post on the whole issue about how Jeanette Hayes has taken one of my artwork, copied it and sold it. You can read it via the hyperlink, if you haven’t already. I am only in the process of meeting lawyers and seeking legal advice, and seriously, it’s not cheap.

I hate having to do this but I am in need of donations. It can be done via Paypal. Any amount you can spare would be great. It’s at least $819 for my upcoming legal sessions just this week. I don’t really want to set up a GoFundme or anything quite yet until I learn more about my situation. Otherwise, you can commission me. For the first time in a while I’m taking commission. I can’t guarantee you when they’ll be done, I sometimes take quite a while or I take no time at all. At the moment my wrist needs a rest so, it won’t be super soon. Please submit commission orders via email to holly(@)soundlesswind.com ; and not via tumblr message, thank you. Please also seek this original page for status updates on when I’ve stopped accepting commissions/donations.

Bust sketch /w flat shading: $35 usd / chara.

Bust sketch /w light shading: $50 usd / chara.

Traditional copic sketch $50 usd / chara. + free CA/US mailing for 2 or more charas.

soranova

Donateeeee

kaze-hime

I woke up to some pretty terrible news today. I found out someone named Jeanette Hayes (NYC “artist”; not be confused with London Jeanette Hayes) stole my artwork by unlawfully using it without my permission, never bothering to contact or credit me, modifying it, treating it as her sole work, and selling it for a huge sum of money.

And the worst part is, I’m not the only victim.

She’s stolen from several dozen other artists, sometimes not even attributing but fully replicating, and the galleries won’t do a thing about it except continue to back her up. When she’s confronted on the matter, she simply blocks people or deletes the comments; same with any media-outlet hosting or promoting her. In the end money talks. I don’t believe this to be artistic expression in good faith. Based on her notoriety and her responses, she’s clearly belittling the art and the artists whose works she steals from.

And really, whatever pretentious excuse is made on behalf of this “contemporary art”, it’s really just vandalism to me; absent of my feelings on the matter, absent of my love for the subject matter, absent of respect for me; because my artwork isn’t just some official stock art to be used freely.

I don’t want more people to have to feel this way, and the galleries need to know that this isn’t okay, and that this sort of behaviour shouldn’t be endorsed.

Here’s the link to the gallery: https://www.artsy.net/artwork/jeanette-hayes-there-will-be-blood Here’s the email of the gallery: [email protected] Here’s a Buzzfeed article on some of the other works she’s stolen: https://www.buzzfeed.com/krishrach/an-artist-has-been-accused-of-plagiarizing-japanese-artists?utm_term=.ra8k96k63#.qdBDvoDoQ

Please help spread the word; or if you can also, please email the galleries explaining to them that things like this should not be condone. It’s sad to say, that the galleries aren’t likely to do anything unless notably pressured, and the reality is…Hayes is not at all remorseful and still continues this line of insincerity.

kaze-hime

So in an update, this is the Gallery’s response (thanks to Eric, ‘cause they’ve been ignoring me completely). Which, to be honest, this much I was expecting, even though I’m under CC2.5 no-derivative, and it really isn’t legal. But to compare my situation to either Bildo or Levine is a rather ridiculous given the context.

If I could contact Jeanette, I would? Which in itself is another major issue.

Even if there has been precedence…times and laws are always changing. I’m not some big-time hot shot painter like Andy Worhol to be brought up as a part of Art Criticism, I’m a modern day, small-time hobby artist who gets nothing out of this except feeling trampled by the pretentious world of Fine Arts.

And honestly, I’m not even upset that someone has taken my work and tried to interpret it in a different artistic form, I’m upset by the sheer lack of consent and respect Jeanette Hayes displays, and for someone painting things as a commentary on social media movement, she seems to lack a fundamental understanding of its boundaries of consent and respect, and continues to not address it, while building herself up as a sole-creative force uninspired by anything but her own mind.

coochienervoussystem

I’ve been emailing back and forth with Kathy Grayson, and basically got the same response. I did note in your original work, you ask that the art not be modified, sold, or reproduced in any way.

This is what I said:

“Hi Kathy,

Please take a look at the following image:

I personally disagree with how you define an original creation, but you can not deny the fact that the artist’s oil painting was clearly inspired by this digital image. The watermark says “do not publish, modify, sell, or reproduce.” In any case, the original artist should have at least been credited as inspiration for the work, but that common courtesy wasn’t even extended. I’m sure as an artist and someone who appreciates art, you can understand how difficult it is for small-time digital artists to get work. The difference between a credited and uncredited image can mean the difference between an artist being commissioned for a job or not. I am simply asking that you background check artists and their works more thoroughly, and to respect your fellow artists.

Thank you,

My Name”

To that, Kathy responded:

“I wasn’t aware of this back in April. I would have suggested to Jeanette that if she is using an illustrator’s works to adapt rather closely into a painting, she should credit them

In fact I emailed her to that effect yesterday when this was brought to my attention, that she should credit her sources whether in the title of the work, the press release about the work, or interviews about the work

If the artist feels Jeanette violated her copyright, she should talk to a lawyer. In my experience these cases are impossible to win because even directly copying someone else is protected as its own art

For contemporary art to exist, or be meaningful in any way, it has to be like that, 100% anything goes. I didn’t make those rules, they were hashed out by others decades ago

Anyway I often find that when the artist who feels they were copied talks with the artist they feel copied them, that a personal dialogue can often resolve these disputes in a normal way”

And then she went on to speculate “Attacking Jeanette on twitter and going nuts on some hysterical witch hunt is def NOT the way to do it. Try contacting her through her website or her gallery for civil level headed conversation”

I responded by asking if she could provide me with Ms. Hayes’s email, because I can not find her website or gallery through a Google search or in the biographies of her social media platforms. I honestly don’t even know if such a website exists, because the top articles about her don’t link to her website, just Twitter or Instagram.

kaze-hime

Amazing and incredulous how far she’s going to try and save her own skin… because not only are they both STILL ignoring me, Kathy’s even blocked me on Twitter today and indirectly (but kind of obviously—belittling me), even though previously all I’ve directly sent to her is that one email asking her to take an action on the situation. That’s it.

And it’s true. She’s putting the onus on me to contact Jeanette Hayes when I can’t. Her only form of contact right now is her Twitter and her Instagram. Both of which are locked, and she’s chosen to remain silent and secluded on the matter. Meanwhile, Kathy’s only giving vague/terrible answers and hypocrisy (to anyone not me)…

As of right now, they’ve simply removed that piece from their website which is…..well…not…solving…the…problem…

I don’t even get an apology.

Y’know…I will be going to see a lawyer. It may not end well, but I have to make an attempt anyway. Otherwise, she’s going to keep doing this to other people, because evidently, neither of them feel remorse about this whatsoever.

Seriously, thank you to everyone for replying. The more this post gets circulated, the more feedback I can collect. It’s helpful and maybe that might contribute something, as I’m trying to go around and collect everything in a folder to bring to the firm.

jjak

Stealing from another artist has NOTHING to do being “meaningful in any way, it has to be like that, 100% anything goes.”

Those so-called “rules” that were established by privileged men that thought they can pass their art off with an explanation that is structured on some pretty wording and their ego (I am very aware of how biased I sound). Contemporary art’s path has been paved by those who did not really do the work for themselves, they just had the *jazz hands* IDEA.

If Jeanette Hayes has contracted @kaze-hime to create the artwork for the purpose of the artwork, I would say that yes by definition, Hayes is well within her rights to sell that painting and stake claim to it because it would have been contracting work, and there would have been a contract written up along with many other legal/financial intricacies. This was not the case.

Jeff Koons didn’t toil and learn how to craft his giant chrome balloon works, he contracted “collaborated” the work out to other people. It is his because it was his idea. (Kathy Grayson was so gracious enough to tell people to Google the information, feel free to do so to confirm.)

Glen Ligon is the same, he did not learn how to create neon lights for his “America”, he contracted the work out to someone who knew how. It was his because it was his idea. Hell, even in his interviews there’s someone in the background doing the legwork for most of his typography pieces. (Let’s once again aspire to be like Kathy Grayson and Google information for ourselves.)

The work Jeanette Hayes “did” is not HERS. It was not HER idea to draw @kaze-hime’s Sailor Moon piece. It was quite literally something Hayes found, took, and pretty much mutilated by spewing her ego and red paint onto it. (Oh boy, there’s that bias again.)

Unless Jeanette Hayes’ idea is to be an artist that poaches other artists’ works and has some backward way of explaining that the complete disrespect for the artist community IS the actual art all along? She is in the wrong.

If anything on the internet goes, then the whole deal with Shepard Fairey versus the Associated Press would have never been an issue where he infringed on their copyright by using Mannie Garcia’s photograph of President Obama for his Hope posters.

Here’s a tip to everyone out there that has ANY misconception about copyright laws. Copyright of a product is yours the moment you create it. The reason why we apply for copyright is so LEGALLY we are back up by our (in this case, the United States) laws. Whether it is a stick figure on a napkin or a piece that signals the Re-Renaissance, it doesn’t matter if someone transforms 99.999% of your work—they are infringing on your copyright.

kaze-hime

I woke up to some pretty terrible news today. I found out someone named Jeanette Hayes (NYC “artist”; not be confused with London Jeanette Hayes) stole my artwork by unlawfully using it without my permission, never bothering to contact or credit me, modifying it, treating it as her sole work, and selling it for a huge sum of money.

And the worst part is, I’m not the only victim.

She’s stolen from several dozen other artists, sometimes not even attributing but fully replicating, and the galleries won’t do a thing about it except continue to back her up. When she’s confronted on the matter, she simply blocks people or deletes the comments; same with any media-outlet hosting or promoting her. In the end money talks. I don’t believe this to be artistic expression in good faith. Based on her notoriety and her responses, she’s clearly belittling the art and the artists whose works she steals from.

And really, whatever pretentious excuse is made on behalf of this “contemporary art”, it’s really just vandalism to me; absent of my feelings on the matter, absent of my love for the subject matter, absent of respect for me; because my artwork isn’t just some official stock art to be used freely.

I don’t want more people to have to feel this way, and the galleries need to know that this isn’t okay, and that this sort of behaviour shouldn’t be endorsed.

Here’s the link to the gallery: https://www.artsy.net/artwork/jeanette-hayes-there-will-be-blood Here’s the email of the gallery: [email protected] Here’s a Buzzfeed article on some of the other works she’s stolen: https://www.buzzfeed.com/krishrach/an-artist-has-been-accused-of-plagiarizing-japanese-artists?utm_term=.ra8k96k63#.qdBDvoDoQ

Please help spread the word; or if you can also, please email the galleries explaining to them that things like this should not be condone. It’s sad to say, that the galleries aren’t likely to do anything unless notably pressured, and the reality is…Hayes is not at all remorseful and still continues this line of insincerity.