Friday, December 25, 2009

Christmas Gift Holiday House Portraits

Below is an example of one of the house portraits I did for a client this holiday season.

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.
May you have a great New Year.

Monday, December 21, 2009

French court decision against Google

On Friday, 18 December 2009, a Paris court has ruled against Google in a lengthy copyright infringement case filed by a French publisher, La Martinière, and later joined by the French Publishers Association and French authors group SGDL.

The French court ordered Google to pay 300,000 EUR in damages and interest to the French company. The court stated that Google was infringing the copyright of the publishers' books by scanning excerpts (‘snippets’) and including these in its Google Book Search results. As part of the ruling, Google is further requested to pay 10,000 EUR each day until it removes the snippets.

Unhappy with the verdict, Google, reportedly, has plans to appeal the ruling.

Friday, December 4, 2009

Custom Designed and Built Kitchen Cabinets

Here is a photo of the recently completed Kitchen cabinet work. I designed, built and installed these just before Thanksgiving.
They are white paint with aging glaze and a beaded edge. My Facebook page shows the entire collection of cabinets and my website will show all of the cabinet work I have done in the next few weeks.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Cherry Corner Bookcase

Here is a custom cabinet project for a corner of a living room that I designed and built in Cherry. It goes with a second piece that holds a large screen TV. The room has high ceilings and the large size allows for plenty of storage.

Monday, November 30, 2009

Orphan Works Panel at The Artist's Congress

Sitting on the panel for the Artist's Congress, I was surprised to find how many people were unaware of the issue or complexity of the Orphan Works Bill. Many in attendance were shocked to learn that one artist's organization in particular had paid over $210,000 the past three years for lobbyists to support the Orphan Works Bill while claiming they opposed it.

These types of conferences on artist's issues are needed more than ever, if only to expose the issues and create transparency to the problems we all face. If you are a creative artist consider joining MALC which is free to everyone.

Massachusetts Artists Leaders Coalition (MALC) ensures that Massachusetts artists of all disciplines have a voice in dialogs, decisions, and key public policy initiatives that impact the artists community and the creative economy. MALC works to ensure that artists have a permanent place at the policy making table.

Membership in MALC is FREE and open to Massachusetts individual artists of all disciplines, and to Massachusetts artist(s) run organizations, businesses, and initiatives.

“Artist(s) run” means the following:

for an organization with a board structure, the majority of the governing board must be comprised of working artists;
for an organization without a governing board structure, it must be operated by an individual artist or group of artists.

PHOTO CREDIT © 2009 Craig Bailey/Perspective Photo

Friday, November 20, 2009

Steele v. Turner Broadcasting, Major League Baseball, The Boston Red Sox, Bon Jovi

( I sat on a panel discussing Orphan Works last month and listed those "organizations" that support the passing of the bill. Bart Steele joined the panel midway to talk about his case. While those of us on the panel outlined what Orphan Works is and how easy it will become to borrow and create derivative works, Bart Steele's example also highlights how hard it is today, given current copyright law to protect your work. Ken)

Bart Steele, a songwriter living in Chelsea, MA, has filed an appeal in his lawsuit against Turner Broadcasting, Major League Baseball, The Boston Red Sox, the rock band Bon Jovi, and other defendants. The case is Steele v. Turner Broadcasting et al, case #08-11727, and is pending in federal court in Boston. Steele argues that his song and an MLB/TBS commercial, which he believes was created using his work as a "temp track," are similar enough to support his claim that the commercial infringes upon his copyright.

"Basically, the District Court believed the defendants' argument that this was all a bunch of coincidences," Steele says. "But it wasn't. It was copyright infringement, pure and simple. In 2004, I wrote my Boston Red Sox-based country baseball anthem entitled 'Man I Really Love This Team.'

"I emailed my song and also mailed the song with lyric sheets to the Red Sox and Major League Baseball several times, including in October 2004, June 2005, and June 2006. I also told them I had another version called 'Man I Really Love This Town' that could be used for any team in any town. To this day, neither the Red Sox nor Major League Baseball has denied receiving my letters, song, and lyric sheets. I never heard back from them.

"Three years later, MLB's "I Love This Town" commercial aired on TBS, with Bon Jovi providing the audio. And I started getting phone calls asking me when I had sold my song. The answer was - and is - never.

"I was never asked for permission to use my work, much less paid or even given credit for it. Defendants admit, in Court documents, receiving my song in October 2004. Defendants have not denied receiving my letters informing them I had created a derivative work, which replaced "team" with "town."

"Defendants admit "access," which is a big part of any copyright claim. It is hard to believe TBS and MLB when they say their commercial's similarities to my song were all a series of unbelievable 'coincidences.'

Steele elaborates, "A close analysis of the MLB/TBS commercial proves that it, and the Bon Jovi audio, was derived from my work," says Steele. "They left a pretty blatant trail of evidence behind,"

"There are just too many places where the visuals match up exactly with my lyrics to be coincidence. For example, at the exact time I am singing "Yawkey Way," the video shows a Yawkey Way street sign, and Bon Jovi is singing "this street." Another obvious example, at the exact time I sing "Tigers," the video shows a Detroit Tigers player."

"As for the lyrics, at the end of my song's bridge I sing "come on and let 'em know say here we go;" the Bon Jovi audio's bridge ends "come on now here we go again." Compare my song to the MLB commercial and see if you can find all the other 'coincidences.'

"In fact, over 50% of the commercial's lyrics are identical to, or paraphrased from my song, according to a number of professional musicians and video experts.

"96% of the commercial's frame-cut edits (149 of 155 video sequences) are in perfect synchronization with my song's tempo, beat, and measure. And the commercial and my song are exactly the same length, both fading out at 2:38.

Steele says the Court failed to properly consider his experts' statements, and that is a major reason why he is appealing.

"I registered 3 titles as both writer & publisher with the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP): 1) 'Man I Really Love This Team' 2) 'Man I Really Love This Town' and 3) 'Man I Love This Team,' and this can easily be confirmed at by title search.

"Everyone tells me that this kind of thing happens all the time in the music business even though it's illegal. The big corporations think musicians will just give up if they have to face a big law firm hired to wear them out. But I'm not giving up.

"When ASCAP saw my evidence, their exact words to me were: "We find it very hard to believe this was independent creation on their (Bon Jovi's) part with the whole baseball and video thing."

"ASCAP subsequently opened a "Discrepancy" case file and requested statements from me and from Bon Jovi. In fact, an ASCAP title search for "I Love This Town" returns only an ASCAP request to call the "Clearance Line" with respect to the "Discrepancy" on that title code (392590937). I replied immediately to ASCAP's request.

"Bon Jovi never replied to ASCAP's request.

"ASCAP eventually froze all royalties on Bon Jovi's audio, "I Love This Town," from the MLB/TBS commercial.

"Amazingly, Bon Jovi never questioned or challenged ASCAP's royalty freeze. Actually, since MLBAM (MLB's non-baseball media/marketing arm) - and not Bon Jovi - owns the copyright to the TBS/MLB commercial, including the audio, maybe it's not that amazing."

Steele concludes, "Bon Jovi is a major client of MLBAM and has been for years. In fact, Bon Jovi, TBS, and MLB teamed up yet again just this fall to promote baseball on TBS. Please check for yourself, this is all public record."

To view and listen to the MLB commercial with Steele's song, go to

To view and listen to the MLB commercial with the Bon Jovi audio, go to

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Butter churn plans

I'm looking for details or woodworking plans to make this type of shaker style butter churn. Please email me if you know where I could find them Thanks, Ken

Sunday, November 8, 2009

One Year Anniversary of Petition Against Graphic Artists Guild (GAG)

This week marks the one year anniversary of the petition that artists formed against GAG for their lawsuit against five individuals.

For those who did not know , the Illustrators Partnership of America and 5 individuals were served with a lawsuit over one year ago by the Graphic Artists Guild, claiming damages of a million dollars and demanding that a court order IPA to cease and desist from supposedly defamatory public comments about GAG’s activities and use of industry reprographic royalties, even when IPA is merely quoting GAG’s own statements.

This time last year over 700 artists ( many past or current GAG members signed this petition.

I wish to thank them for their efforts on our behalf and I appreciate their support as we move into year two of this lawsuit against artists.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Summer blast

A trip to Canobie Lake Park with the Dubrowski and Ellie girls...
The loudest screams belong to Sara

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Stimulus Illustrations

Above are illustrations for BroadBased Communications...

Friday, March 27, 2009

Why no posts?

Due to the impending lawsuit brought on against 5 illustrators including myself by Graphic Artists Guild (GAG) I will stop posting on this site with the exception of promotional illustrations until we have cleared our names and reputations.


The Illustrators Partnership of America and 5 individuals have* been served with a lawsuit by the Graphic Artists Guild, claiming damages of a million dollars and demanding that a court order IPA to cease and desist from supposedly defamatory public comments about GAG’s activities and use of industry reprographic royalties, even when IPA is merely quoting GAG’s own statements.

The Complaint alleges that IPA, by bringing together 13 diverse illustrators organizations with the goal of creating an illustrators rights collecting society, is wrongfully interfering with GAG’s current claim on foreign royalties, calling it an effort to “siphon off” money from GAG. The Complaint specifically alleges that IPA and IPA members defamed GAG by a verbatim reading of minutes from a GAG steering committee meeting at which GAG’s President reported on their organization’s use of foreign funds. IPA’s statements relied on public assertions by GAG’s officers that GAG does not have to account for its use of artists’ reprographic royalties.

Reprographic royalties are funds derived from the photocopying of material by published authors. In many other countries, illustrators receive royalties from collecting societies for the photocopying of their work. In the US, they do not, because currently, no such collecting society exists. IPA denies that its comments are defamatory, as it has relied on and reported GAG’s own statements verbatim. IPA seeks an understanding of GAG’s activities and transparency about GAG’s use of these funds. IPA has retained legal counsel and will respond to the Complaint in an appropriate manner.

• The individuals named in the lawsuit are: artist Brad Holland, Founding Director of Illustrators’ Partnership and Co-Chair American Society of Illustrators Partnership; medical illustrator Cynthia Turner, Director, Illustrators’ Partnership and Co- Chair American Society of Illustrators Partnership; Terrence Brown, Executive Director, American Society of Illustrators Partnership; Renowned intellectual property attorney Bruce Lehman, Founding Director of Illustrators’ Partnership and Counsel to American Society of Illustrators Partnership; commercial illustrator Ken Dubrowski, Director of Operations, Illustrators’ Partnership.

Monday, February 2, 2009

Download self-promotional mailer

A here is the second promotional mailer in my more traditional, classic style...

New Downloadable Self-Promotional Mailers

The following two posts are for art directors who wish to download a sample of my illustration work.
The first image is my current editorial illustration work which is done in my newer media style. My web will have a collection of these new images available for your review in the coming weeks.

Sunday, January 11, 2009

What Would Ben Franklin Think About Orphan Works?

The temporary defeat of the Orphan Works bill was stated on the Library Journal's blog as coming from the hands of "... a fear inducing campaign".

This is not an accurate account, in fact the defeat came from the growing consensus of a grass roots movement that saw the bill for what it truly is, artistic socialism.

Websites that openly support the Orphan Works bill have stated the passage of this bill is one of the six needed steps to overturn copyright and the protection it holds artists.

Artists and photographers already have their work protected by US copyright law but this end around to copyright would have forced every image that an artist has, to be scanned and registered at great expense to as yet created orphan works registries. These registries could range from organizations which see this as an opportunity for new revenue to businesses that have already "spidered" and collected digital images in the millions and are waiting to deliver these images for usage provided artists cannot afford the expense. These for-profit orphan registries, see this as an new business model, much like the creation of web hosting or domain name registries but on a much larger scale, to provide income for search engines and start up businesses/ companies.

The money we are talking about here is huge for businesses.

But the need for artists to maintain and monitor their work will become so cost prohibitive that most artists will likely fall into non-compliance. A current example to the dangers is that of people who have seen their own domain names bought out from under them or watch them expire and sold to companies as a form of commerce.
The same can happen very easily as images will become commerce for start up businesses. If artists do not comply, they risk losing their images to these new for- profit digital registries as "new orphans" and risk having to compete against their own works which could be redesigned and manipulated and resold as new images without an artist's consent. This is not a scare tactic as suggested by Library Journal's blog but a business reality artists face.

Libraries can and should work to remain as they were intended by it's creators, a vestibule of knowledge / a collection and protector of information. Not as a pawn for businesses to suggest the public does not have access to information.

From the Illustrator's Partnership website is a solution for libraries and one that makes the most sense:
"Digitizing the Collections of Libraries and Museums Digitizing someone’s work is an act of reproduction and is therefore subject to the authorization of the copyright holder. But to let accredited libraries and archives bypass these authorizations, the law could grant them certain exceptions to reproduce works without the prior consent of the rights holders, mainly for preservation purposes. To avail themselves of this privilege, institutions could file a notice of intent to infringe with the Copyright Office, documenting that they’ve made a reasonably diligent, but unsuccessful effort to find the copyright holder. These exceptions should not be extended to cover reproductions on a mass scale, because that would clearly conflict with the artists’ own exploitation of their works and that would prejudice the legitimate interests of the copyright holders, a clear violation of the 1976 Copyright Act, the Berne Convention and Article 13 of the TRIPS agreement, to which the US is a signatory. This proposal is consistent with the submission of the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations (IFRRO) to the European Union’s i2010 Digital Libraries project. This means our proposal would meet the needs of libraries, museums and archives, harmonize US policy with our trading partners overseas and win wide praise from the creative community in the US, who would not see the rights of their own work put at risk."

Finally, as a freelance artist I support that stated position of a true Orphan Works bill that allows for libraries to work with copyright holders, allow those who visit libraries to have access to these images for their own education and pursuit of knowledge. I do not support any bill that puts undo financial pressure on people or artists especially in these hard times.

Libraries should be in the business of what is best for the public and not what is best for business.

"The first mistake in public business is the going into it." Benjamin Franklin

Saturday, January 10, 2009

Lessig + Orphan Works = Artistic Socialism

Lawrence Lessig appeared on the Colbert Report as shown in the above post.
The new argument being thrown out is that current copyright law is turning kids into ..criminals...

As with the Orphan Works bill this nonsense is being exposed for what it is "Artistic Socialism".

Some websites like the following Library Journal have tried to explain the lack of support for Orphan works as "scare tactics".
Imagine that...scare tactics.

The truth is that people are not scared into opposing this bill they instead "get it" for what it is.

What's even more ironic to Lessig's comments on Colbert is that while Lessig offered to allow his book to be downloaded for free on the Colbert website, the publishers did not .

See web screen capture.

Let's hope more people get the issues and move away from forced artistic socialism and libraries getting into the business of business.

(From the Library Journal Website)

The Sad Story of Orphan Works

"...We’ve been covering efforts to open up access to orphan works for years, but in 2008, legislation came close to passage—and in dramatic fashion. The Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Bill of 2008passed late on September 26. As Congress headed into overtime in late September to address the troubled financial markets, a flurry of activity in the House of Representatives seemed to open the door to a passage. Ultimately, significant differences between the House and Senate on competing orphan works bills, as well as a well-organized, fear-inducing campaign against the bill by artists and photographers, and a late letter from the Motion Picture Association of America squelched any would-be deal.

Still, the issue remains vital. If passed, an orphan works bill would reduce liability for those who make use of copyrighted works provided they make, and document, a reasonably diligent effort to find the owner. For libraries, this would ease the burden on large-scale archival digitization efforts. Publishers, meanwhile, at odds with libraries on many issues in 2008, also embraced and worked on the bill.

With economic and international crises sure to command Congress’ attention in 2009, it’s questionable whether orphan works will rise again anytime soon. Nevertheless, this year’s effort, the result of continuous hard work and some masterful politicking by library groups and their allies, stands as an achievement worth noting, and at the very least establishes a benchmark for continuing efforts. "

Friday, January 9, 2009

Colbert shows how stupid Re-Mixing is.