World Wide Tarot Decks Library/Museum

While I'm sure the publishers wouldn't go for this the OP did include the idea of a paid membership, so they could be paid for giving permission.

And - be honest - given taroteca etc - how many of us would actually pay ?

ALSO - that still begs the question - with many of the most desired decks there is no way to GET permission. Take Granny Jones - many would love a reprint, but Granny is long dead, her heirs cannot be found and the publisher has gone out of business. But the copyright is still in force.

ilweran said:

While I'm sure the publishers wouldn't go for this the OP did include the idea of a paid membership, so they could be paid for giving permission.

Click to expand...

It isn't really a matter of payment. I think for most publishers it's much more about protecting copyright, which is basically what we live on.

For us, having our work on sites such as a well-known one that shows the whole deck AND offers such things as calendars and notebooks with our images on them for sale, is just straightforward copyright infringement and theft. Not only are we not paid or given a share of the profit made from our images, we also have no control over quality - something that's very, very important to us. People throw any dreadfully bad scan through the automated system and come out with some low-quality, ghastly "products" by which the buyer may well judge Baba Studio. Acting on all this takes up time and energy that we'd rather use for something more worthwhile - like creating new pictures.

There is no legal "blurriness" in this - it's illegal. I agree with the people who have pointed out that if the owners of such sites really cared about tarot, they would have asked permission before scanning and showing all the cards. Asking isn't hard. What does the fact that they don't ask tell you?

This is about someone else making money from the pictures that we spent many, many hours producing. And mashing up the pictures in the process. Personally, I don't see such sites as public services - I see them as someone making money off other people's work and disguising this as a "service". To be blunt.

A "museum" might be different, but I think most publishers and artists are quite jaded with the amount of rip-offs they have to endure regularly and so I don't think there would be a great deal of enthusiasm.

We do show our cards online in any case - complete with copyright notices - and so I don't think there's much need for them to be elsewhere.

ps - we do care a lot about "costumers" - we are working with a very good costumer right now on some new costumes for the Cats

Drakkaenae said:

Maybe someday publishers care more about their costumers than money.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, that is rather a cliché perspective. Different publishers may have different approaches and values, but to categorize their defense of their products as not caring about their customers is a leap.

This whole copyright issue has been discussed on various other threads and it comes down to some basic points.

Having an online source that shows every card of every deck, may indeed be interesting as a reference point for academic study. It may also be helpful for "window shopping" in deciding to buy a deck or not.

This resource may be helpful in promoting a deck and improving its sales, it may on the other hand be a risk, in that the images can (and will) be used by third parties in ways that diminish the integrity of the product and might adversely effect sales. The important word is "might". Since there are pros and cons, I think its appropriate that the individual artist, publisher, or copyright holder has the right to decide what might or might not be better for them.

There seems to be a kind of naive association that tarot and making money from it are somehow immoral. But the two seem to go hand in hand on many levels. Many people are professional readers, charging money (often far more for one sitting than the price of the deck they are using). People write books, give lectures, give classes, and charge fees for speaking at tarot conferences.

If those books were reproduced and offered for free on this on-line tarot resource, as is being proposed for the card images, how would the authors of those books react?
If those lectures were recorded, converted to audio files for free access and download. Would that add value to the speaker, or diminish what they might be able to charge in the future, if one knew that the same material would soon become available for free.

There is a lot of work involved in all these various aspects of todays tarot world, and I think it actually is less blatantly commercial than most "businesses" today. There is undeniably a sense of community spirit that does raise the moral standard somewhat. But we have to maintain some sense of reality as well. Tarot decks do not simply pop out of the air, they are produced. That production cost time and money.

As Gregory alluded to in her last post I think, this has to make sense to all parties, otherwise the whole system grinds to a halt. Maintaining a control over the use of the source material is part and parcel of that. Without it there is chaos.

I'm not QUITE sure which post of mine you allude to, Cirom - but I agree with you anyway.

All my posts in this thread say much the same thing - no chance, and it would ultimately do the world of tarot a disservice in reducing the number of new decks that come out, I think. I did once own a scanned OOP deck. I felt VERY guilty and I bought the real McCoy as soon as I found one and had the money - but - let's be honest here - most people wouldn't; they'd be fine with the scanned one. And - follow the logic here.....

And yes - even the BIG publishers are having a tough time; very few are prepared to take a risk now - and smaller ones are not able to do anything. How much less if their slim profit margins are cut ? I THINK I even recall baba-prague saying they couldn't afford to do some of the things they would like to do - and goodness knows they have probably the most willing audience anywhere, right here on this forum.

Goodness knows I am a hopeless deck addict. If I thought it was a good idea (and if I had enough years of life left) I would scan and post all mine. But I WILL not breach copyright all over the web like that. It isn't fair.

I think your idea sounds good in theory, but it will never see the light of day in the real world for reasons which the other have already mentioned.

Drakkaenae said:

And Gregory I know there are a lot of sites showing whole decks. I do have one too. But I'm considering to put it offline. Nowadays, I don't see the point to have one.

Click to expand...

I must echo some of the others and say that I hope you will reconsider. Personally, your website is a great help to people like me; but then I have the best of intentions (window shopping!) and would not dream of using it to produce pirate decks. Anyway, whatever decision you make, it will be the right one.

gregory said:

I'm not QUITE sure which post of mine you allude to, Cirom - but I agree with you anyway.

Click to expand...

gregory said:

Thing is - if they were all up there - there would be far fewer customers. Also - us buying decks is what keeps artists making them. ANYTHING that reduced sales would put the whole industry at risk - it is precarious as it is

Click to expand...

This is the post I was referring to, I hope I didn't mislead and assume a different meaning.
I personally don't have any objection to my work being available for such a proposal as this on line museum. Other than it just makes it even easier for the third party CD manufacturers who will in turn "sell" them to others as they already do now. I doubt that will effect me too much one way or another, but it could be a really big help or disaster for someone new to the game. And that can not be good for Tarot in the long run surely.

I basically agree that an artists work should have protection against people who snaffle the images, and then produce physical copies in order to re-sell them claiming that they are the originators. That to me, is out & out theft.

But if I can't see pics/scans of a deck I'm interested in, I won't buy it.
Additionally if I've bought a deck, it's mine. And if I want to show it to my friends, I can & will. What would be the point of buying something that is 'for my eyes only'?

Furthermore, what about professional/public Readers, their customers are allowed to see the cards in a deck......... and as was said earlier by a previous poster, commercial readers ask for payment. As far as I know, online sites with card scans arn't making money out of doing so.

Also, if card images are likened to Old Masterpieces; you can buy copies of them quite legally, and display them wherever you like. Why not the same with cards?

This copyright business & card-images seems like a can of worms.

Bee

cirom said:

This is the post I was referring to, I hope I didn't mislead and assume a different meaning.

Click to expand...

No - you got me right

cirom said:

I personally don't have any objection to my work being available for such a proposal as this on line museum. Other than it just makes it even easier for the third party CD manufacturers who will in turn "sell" them to others as they already do now. I doubt that will affect me too much one way or another, but it could be a really big help or disaster for someone new to the game. And that can not be good for Tarot in the long run surely.

Click to expand...

Indeed. Look at all the threads here about Those CDs on ebay Not to mention that programme which I will not name so as not to give it the oxygen of publicity... that offers them and claims it has permission and which doesn't have any such thing....

Eta

Bernice said:

I basically agree that an artists work should have protection against people who snaffle the images, and then produce physical copies in order to re-sell them claiming that they are the originators. That to me, is out & out theft.

But if I can't see pics/scans of a deck I'm interested in, I won't buy it.
Additionally if I've bought a deck, it's mine. And if I want to show it to my friends, I can & will. What would be the point of buying something that is 'for my eyes only'?

Furthermore, what about professional/public Readers, their customers are allowed to see the cards in a deck......... and as was said earlier by a previous poster, commercial readers ask for payment. As far as I know, online sites with card scans arn't making money out of doing so.

Also, if card images are likened to Old Masterpieces; you can buy copies of them quite legally, and display them wherever you like. Why not the same with cards?

This copyright business & card-images seems like a can of worms.

Click to expand...

If your sitter sees your deck - fine. They don't get to take it home and make a copy.

If you have bought a postcard of an Old Master - chances are it was printed by the museum that holds the copyright. If it wasn't it shouldn't have been printed !

You can display the CARDS you own. What you do NOT do is reproduce them (and scanning IS reproduction) and give copies to your friends. And reproduction IS illegal - and on line scans by people like us are illegal for that reason. The 10% for study clause covers the ones we post for readings, I THINK - but I wouldn't like to defend that one in court....

Bernice said:

Also, if card images are likened to Old Masterpieces; you can buy copies of them quite legally, and display them wherever you like. Why not the same with cards?

Click to expand...

Bea, the Old Masters are so old they are Dead! More importantly, their original images are not copyright--only the photographs of the originals may be copyright to the museum or photographer who made the photo.

Lending someone a book you buy is not the same as xeroxing a bunch of copies and giving them away free, or scanning it and putting it on line so people can download it for free. Showing someone my cards or sending them pics of particular images so they can see what I'm talking about if I'm doing an on-line reading is fair use.

Artists and writers work for love but eat food that costs money. Copying their stuff without permission and selling it is a rip-off.

Copyright is kind of complicated, but the principle behind it is not.