Thanks to all who came to the Tank show last night. As a cartoonist, I (try to) create humor in a totally solitary environment. Man, it’s fun going to these events and getting actual, audible, in-person, human laughs.
And now it can be revealed: This week’s comic is featuring… BRAIN IN A BEAKER! Do I know how to build the suspense, or what?
Tonight, 8pm at The Tank (279
Church Street between Franklin & White, below Canal) I’ll be making a presentation at a comedy and comics show celebrating Jen Sorensen’s new book One Nation, Oh My God!
And my offer still stands: If you buy me a beer, I’ll reveal the long-absent character who will be featured in this week’s Tom the Dancing Bug. BRAIN IN A BEAKER! BRAIN IN A BEAKER! Damn, I blew it again.
ADMISSION IS
FREE. More info: http://www.thetanknyc.org and
http://laughingliberally.com/
The National Cartoonists Society (NASCAR) and the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists (AARP) have now joined the fight against the proposed Orphan Works legislation pending in Congress.
The Orphan Works bill would revise the copyright laws, so that if someone wants to use copyrighted material, but can’t find the copyright holder, then he can go ahead and use it. As long as he put in a “reasonable” effort to find the copyright holder, the damages he’d have to pay if the copyright holder eventually showed up, and objected to that use, would be very limited. The intention of this legislation is to allow the use of “orphaned” work — material essentially abandoned by its creator. The idea is that if you find an old photograph and want to include it in a book, but there’s no way to find the copyright holder, you can do so without worrying about paying huge infringement penalties if the copyright holder ever does show up.
I’m interested in this issue, and I’ve done some research; last week I went to an Illustrators’ Partnership Open Forum opposing the Orphan Works Act led by artist Brad Holland. The concern among artists is that the bill is written so broadly, it will apply not only to actual orphaned works, e.g. where the creator is dead or not in business, but to current works on which the creator is actively trying to make a living.
My take on this so far is that I’m not sure this will have a big impact on some creators, probably including myself. In my case, I include clear copyright notices on all my published work, and even if that is accidentally or maliciously erased from a copy, it would be hard to claim that I couldn’t be found — most of my comics are easily identifiable by people with knowledge of comics. Character names and key phrases could be googled to find out that I’m the author of a comic.
But even if a comic of mine did become “orphaned” under the Act, while such a situation would be galling, I probably wouldn’t lose much money — because the comic is syndicated, it’s priced to be published multiple times. For some of these, and other, reasons, I think that many other artists, such as filmmakers, novelists and playrights, may not have much to fear from this Act.
But some artists, particularly painters, illustrators and photographers, have legitimate, grave concerns about this legislation. Their work is often published without attribution, it is difficult or impossible to identify, and often priced for exclusivity (so that the damages they would receive if their work is orphaned would be far below the price they set in the market). I would think that online companies (Google, anyone?) would set up automatic systems to find images and “orphan” them by jumping through certain legal hoops that demonstrate some effort to find the copyright owner. They would then create huge archives of “orphaned” images, which they could sell cheap (thus competing with the works’ very creators for the same business). If the creator is able to track down the infringement, he would either have to accept low orphan-based damages, or fight a big legal-staffed company in court to prove that they didn’t do enough to find him.
There has been talk about using registries of images, which could be computer-matched, to keep works from becoming orphaned. A potential infringer would have to check these registries before using an image, or he couldn’t claim he’d done enough to try to find the creator, and thus the work couldn’t become legally “orphaned.” But the registration process would have to be onerous and expensive, if not impossible. Further, that process would be contrary to the copyright reforms that did away with technical registration requirements that used to exist in order to enforce copyright.
I’m all for getting museums and libraries access to material for which the creator is dead, out of business, or indifferent. I also think that copyright protection should be much more limited than it is under current law. But this legislation is written so broadly that it would certainly undermine very alive, very active artists who are in business and simply trying to make a living creating art.
If you oppose this legislation, let your congressperson know.
One of my cherished possessions is an original Humbug #6 (1958) given to me by one of the authors of the comic, Arnold Roth. I was at his apartment once, and when we started talking about the Humbug comic books, he took out a dusty bound collection of the comic’s complete run. I felt like Indiana Jones holding a golden artifact; I expected a giant stone ball to descend from the ceiling and chase me out of the building. Arnie later must have taken pity on me and decided to send me one of the comics.
I regard the first issues of Mad, produced in the mid-’50s to be the pinnacle of cartooning — hilarious, exuberant, subversive satire made by the absolute masters of the form. As I understand the story, after 28 issues, Mad’s editor and primary writer Harvey Kurtzman had a falling out with the publisher, EC Comics, and left the company. Mad continued its success, but without Kurtzman.
Kurtzman went on to create a very short-lived satirical magazine published by Hugh Hefner, Trump. (Somehow The Donald’s ability to get things named after him started at a very early age.) Kurtzman then decided to create his own comic book with two of the original Mad artists, Jack Davis and Bill Elder, along with two other immensely talented cartoonists: Al Jaffee (who went on to decades of fame in the Kurtzman-less Mad Magazine, and his run continues there today) and the aforementioned brilliant illustrator/cartoonist Arnold Roth. The name of that comic book was Humbug, and its run was not much longer than Trump’s, lasting only 11 issues.
Anyway, as far as I’ve always known, these issues of Humbug have never been reprinted, and aside from their very small initial print run, have been totally unavailable. For a comics and humor fan, this has been the equivalent of Lennon, McCartney and Harrison making 11 albums in the early ’70s, with, say, Ringo replaced by Keith Moon — but the records are only held by a handful of collectors and have never been heard by the public.
Well, Fantagraphic Books is reprinting the entire run of Humbug this summer, in a hardcover, boxed set, and I can’t wait to see this. The only issue I’ve ever really read is the one Arnold Roth gave to me. Fantagraphics is apparently doing an amazing job of reconstruction, and if the work they’ve done on another (probably, THE other) all-time comics masterpiece, Peanuts, is any indication, these books will be amazing.
Jen Sorensen’s May 14 promotional event, at which I’ll be appearing, was listed in the Spare Times section of yesterday’s The New York Times — the only Event listed for that day. I’d like to know how someone pulled that off.
Some have surmised that the name of Nate’s neighbor might be Ira Q.
He actually has a name, revealed in a previous comic that featured a different analogy — it’s John. If only I’d planned ahead.
I’ll be appearing in New York City with my comic strip colleague Jen ("Slowpoke") Sorensen Wednesday May 14, in a promotional event for her new book "One Nation, Oh My God!" for which I wrote a scintillating Introduction. Her book is hilarious and certainly worth promoting.
There will be comedians and a slideshow by Jen, and I’ll do a slideshow too. I’ve asked that there be stiltwalkers there, but I’ve been told not to hold my breath. I’d better get my bowl of M&Ms with all the yellows taken out.
It’s a "Laughing Liberally" event (what, do they think I’m a Liberal or something?!), and it’s free, although if you’ll have to buy me a beer if you want to find out what next week’s comic is about (it’s Brain in a Beaker… DAMN, I just blew a free beer).
INFO: Wednesday, May 14, 8pm at The Tank, located at 279 Church Street between Franklin & White, below Canal. ADMISSION IS FREE. More info: http://www.thetanknyc.org and http://laughingliberally.com/
Yes, "Tom the Dancing Bug" now has a new blog format. You’re soaking in it.
According to some emails and message-boards, some people’s attitude about Obama is so insane, they thought that my comic speculating that he’s been raised as a secret, radical muslim operative who will deliberately destroy "Ameriqa" if elected was serious. Could I have possibly made the scenario more ridiculous?