It was great meeting you Natalya, and missed you at the conference Emily!

I agree with Emily. But, I think you are being generous with the three year exclusive use of the work, and that's fine, it's reassuring to the client. If it's a single-use license or a first-use license (having a hard time coming up with the exact word right now, still jet-lagged) and NOT work for hire, then they should not have the right to veto or screen or approve ANY future licensing of the work. That's what it's all about.     
 I comprehend their reservations to seeing the work they paid for in another venue, but ...... they are getting a good price for this limited licensing. 

Very Important to understand who you are contracting with, the exhibits designer or the institution. No matter who pays you, it should be clear in the contract who you are licensing to. I have licensed to the institution, but am paid as a subcontractor from the design firm.

Not sure about the question of Licensing the figures? do you mean registering a copyright? Depends on who owns the artwork copyright.

I'm glad you enjoyed the conference. Hope to see you next year.


Linda M. Feltner Artist, LLC
P.O. Box 325
Hereford, AZ 85615
(520) 803-0538

On Jul 15, 2013, at 1:54 PM, Emily S. Damstra wrote:

Natalya, I have interspersed a few short answers within your text below.
Is your contract with the design firm or with the botanical garden?
In my experience, it can be a bit trickier when you are signing a contract with and being paid by the exhibit design firm rather than their client in the sense that the exhibit design firm doesn't really have the power to enforce certain things in the contract, such as proper illustrator citations or such as the client selling merchandise with your illustrations on it.

Emily S. Damstra
natural science illustration
Waterloo, Ontario
(519) 616-3654
[log in to unmask]

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Natalya Zahn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I've never worked with a large institution like this before, or on exhibits. Is there a standard protocol for exclusivity in this case, since the work will be a semi-permanent fixture on their grounds?

I don't think there is a standard protocol. Every case is unique.
Is it wrong for me to want to be able to re-sell the artwork after a given period?

No, that's perfectly normal. I would call it "license" rather than "re-sell."
Is their request to have veto power as ridiculous as it sounds to me?

Yes, absolutely, unless they are willing to pay extra.  If they want total control perhaps they should reconsider paying the extra to own all rights.


Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at


Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at


Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at