Artist selling drawings of my house

[TechGinny]

I've just discovered that an artist local to the area is selling drawings of my property on her website. It's not easily viewed by the road, which means she would have had to enter the land to draw it.

I'm feeling quite annoyed about this, as she has never made contact to ask permission.

AIBU unreasonable to feel like this, and would you make contact to ask her to remove it from her website?

OP is imagining, assuming and guessing that the artist camped on her property for hours at a time to do a life drawing.

Seems unlikely.

‘This thread has made me realise how brave the people involved in the right to roam movement were. Even working-class townies should be able to enjoy the countryside without the threat of a shotgun and large dogs being set on them.’

‘If people didn’t leave broken glass in a field full of animals, threaten me with violence because I’m small and female, and tell me to fuck off, for politely asking them to remove themselves from a field containing a herd of cows in calf, then I’d probably look more favourably upon people ‘enjoying’ the countryside. Despite no legal rights of way through my land.

Alas, they have no respect for it or the animals at all. And so no, I won’t be welcoming them with open arms. It goes both ways.’

@Onairjunkie you are so right; unfortunately you cannot reason with irrational.

[quote AlvinSimonTheo]@EspressoDoubleShot sorry you're making me laugh trying to imply this woman who has simply sketched a building is a master criminal.

You're using language you've heard on The Bill reruns

The local pizza place does not have "explicit consent" when they flyer drop. It's not illegal though, nor is it illegal for them to take a photo while they are there are pass it to their artist friend to draw.

Calm down. Someone drew a picture. [/quote]
It is illegal to take a photograph on private property without the owner/tenant's consent.

So people who disagree with the farmers on this thread are thick and irrational.
Nice.

@Hdhdjejdj

This thread has made me realise how brave the people involved in the right to roam movement were. Even working-class townies should be able to enjoy the countryside without the threat of a shotgun and large dogs being set on them.

I agree that the Right to Roam movement were (for the most part) in the right.

However - I live rurally. The farmers I know are not rich at all, and often need their OH to work to support the family because farming brings in too little. Their land is worth a fair bit (although many rent) but it has covenants on it that it can only be used for agriculture so can't just be sold to make way for housing developments.

The vast majority of tourists and hikers are lovely and respectful, but there is a small but significant percentage who treat farmland like it belongs to the public, despoil crops, allow their dogs to menace livestock (and sheep will miscarry and/or die at the drop of a hat, it's extraordinary), let their children chase lambs and feed random horses, causing death from shock (lambs) and laminitis (horses - a very painful way to die).

Respect goes both ways.

Nobody is trying to defend thoughtless people.

@Hdhdjejdj

So people who disagree with the farmers on this thread are thick and irrational. Nice.

People have responded with clear, evidence based arguments. Instead of engaging you’ve continued to make ad hominem attacks, use emotional and hyperbolic language and have no other argument apart from ‘people should have a right to X because they should’. And ‘landowners have been unreasonable too’. As someone who works a lot with conservation societies encouraging people out in nature we are also responsible for inculcating respect for it. It’s not people’s personal playground. What have you done about this? I bet nothing.

Anyway for some reason you’re only here for a rant - so no point in engaging further. Glad to see that most people are capable of rational discussion.

I think if the house is old and notable in the area, out is highly likely that photos of it exist somewhere. More and more on Facebook recently I'm seeing people post old p photos of local places so she could have accessed it from something like that.
Alternatively if it isn't in England what are the rights of access in the country, e.g. is there a right to roam that could be used to see it?

Op ypu say that tree cover would obsure the view to make it almost impossible to draw. Are the trees evergreen? Just as if they were not, she could have gone in winter when the trees were bare and zoomed in a lot. Or someone else could have used a drone, maybe someone in her family did and simply showed her a picture?

In Scotland (it’s right to responsible access here, rather than a right to roam), it doesn’t extend to gardens. Unless there’s a right of way, the usual assumption is that a garden can be up to about 8 acres or so (depending on layout). I’d guess most countries have the same kind of law - enclosed garden ground of up to x acres are private with no public access rights.
My understanding is that “reasonable” enclosed agricultural land (eg fields of livestock and annual crops) are also excluded from any right of public access. Moors, hills, mountains, waterways, most woodland etc are all included (except for specific land management (deer stalking, forestry operations) type reasons).
I don’t own land (beyond small garden measured in metres and cm rather than acres and hectares), but would like to keep public access to private land as is... I quite enjoy a nice walk.

That's bizarre and intrusive, and I wouldn't like it at all.

Put it this way, if I found out someone had been painting and selling pictures of my house, I would be massively, massively freaked out. But then my house is very ordinary and not much different to the others on our ordinary street.

Interested to hear their response if they do reply!

@ManifestDestinee

OP is imagining, assuming and guessing that the artist camped on her property for hours at a time to do a life drawing.

Seems unlikely.

You're imagining, assuming and guessing that it's a piece of art that would take hours to complete without having seen it. It's not.

She is probably ignorant of the implications and hasn't thought carefully. It's very naive of her - to be sure: she is treating the house as though it's just a local landmark.

If it's a one off pic, I'd be tempted to buy it and say "Don't do any more please; I don't like it".

If she says anything say: "How would you like it if my son took photographs of your house/dog/ you and posted them on his social media home page".

And say: " I shouldn't have to explain and justify myself, it's just not on. Go and draw some other people's houses, and you'll see they object too. But actually don't, because it's very impolite".

I assume given it is a “prominent” property locally, photographs exist of it.

The house is definitely mine, it's named as well as being very distinctive. I'm not sure about right to roam where the house is, but it's very obvious that you're entering private land, and there isn't any public land around it that would mean someone might think it's ok to walk through.
It's also on a rural road with national speed limit and no pavement, so it's not a place you can wander past and stop to have a gander - you either drive past at speed or park up deliberately.

I'm going to send a friendly email to her and see if she used a photo... I'll report back if I get a response. I'm far less disgruntled about this than I was earlier, but I do still feel it's off.

Behave @TractorAndHeadphones with the pomposity. I’m not the person who was bragging about scaring people off with guns and dogs. I am not guilty of what you say I am, but no doubt that will provoke you to call me thick again.

Ask her for a free picture, hang it up in the hall and forget all about your grievance.

Just in case people are curious, it's this style of drawing, but obviously of my house and without the wording!

I work in property. It is trespass. If you don't want people to photograph your house without permission you can follow it up legally, won't necessarily get you anywhere but may stop them doing it again. We get people photographing properties all the time that are private, if we choose to allow them to we do so for commercial income. We also have security to stop people which obviously isn't practical at home. For those who cant see why this is a problem how would you feel? Whilst it is probably innocent it does bring elements of risk with it that should be addressed.

Interesting thread. I have a feeling that once the words like 'in the family for a hundred years', 'property of local interest', some people have switched off and not really focused on how they may actually feel really feel if this happened to them.

About three months ago a friend of mine in the US was given the head's up that her very unremarkable home had been painted by a local artist. The picture included her actual car parked in the driveway. Yes, the property was visible from the road so in principle fair game? I guess? There it was in a gallery. She was freaked out about and couldn't really explain why. Partially it was the car but also she was sort of thinking - what if her kids or dog had been there? If it was blurred would it be 'okay' to have included them, as long as they mostly looked like generic kids. It seemed to me like some sort of cynical ploy to drum up business and a few people did say to her: "Awwwww....how SWEET...you should buy it." This picture was over $200. For me there was a bit of a manipulative element to it.

So I can see where this OP is coming from.

I mean - this doesn't help the OP. But at least if the property was actually attractive you could see why someone might paint it? But a common or garden US house with a car in front??? Your car??? Bizarre.

Two issues here.

1. The legal stuff. If she is selling a picture of your property then I think she needs a property release form (like a model release form). Send angry legal letter saying no release has been given and the sales are unlawful etc.

1. Her local reputation. Phone her if possible and pressure her to remove the pictures and stop selling them, saying you will take legal action for trespass if not. It’s possible she didn’t think you’d care / find out but will stop if asked to.

@Skysblue what legal action for trespass do you think the OP can take?