Search This Blog

Loading...

Do Modern Trends Require Us To Rethink Rules Governing Cultural Heritage?

Earlier posts on this site have noted the incongruity between rules governing street art and laws governing the art world. Citing an article in The New Yorker, Caroline Camp, in her post on Anonymous Art & Attribution, shed light on this disjunction vis-à-vis Exit Through the Gift Shop, the recent documentary on the renowned yet anonymous street artist Banksy. In keeping with the street art tradition, the documentary provided no credits, prompting filmmaker Joachim Levy to step forward and demand it. Levy argued that rules that govern street art are not appropriate to the film world.

A recent Los Angeles Times article points to another incongruity in rules governing the art world, a rupture caused by contemporary circumstances. Christopher Hawthorne suggests that modern schemes for solving issues of patrimony and cultural heritage may need an update to accommodate modern trends. Chandigarh, the Indian city designed in the 1950s by Modernist architect Le Corbusier and works by Banksy are his case studies.

Artists from Detroit's 555 Nonprofit Gallery and Studios recently removed a by Bansky-esque decorated concrete slab from an abandoned Packard plant. Artists at the gallery are allegedly acting to preserve the art from defacement by other graffiti artists and/or potential destruction when and if the plant is destroyed.

There are a number of problems with this argument. First, as Caroline notes, putting graffiti on top of other graffiti is an acceptable practice in the street art world. Second, the art loses meaning and arguably value when it is removed from its context. Purely on those grounds, there is good reason to question the motivations and repercussions of the actions taken by the 555 Gallery artists.

Additionally, modern trends invert our ideas about looted art. Pieces here are modern rather than classical. In Detroit, it is the locals who are looting the post-industrial cityscape in the name of preservation. This is dramatically different from the traditional situation where looting colonizers robbed locals of cultural artifacts.

While it is not clear who is removing parts of Chandigarh, the flow of artworks from the city shares one important feature with the situation in Detroit: the movement of art from the public to the private sphere. Whether it is the post-industrial landscape rife with contextual meaning or the city as modernist icon, looters are taking art from a public sphere viewable to all and in which it was intentionally put and placing it in the decontextualized, private sphere of an art gallery where it can be bought and sold. There are strong economic incentives to do so. For example, a Corbusier manhole cover recently garnered $25,000 at auction.

Chandigarh officials are acting to stop the removal of Le Corbusier objects from India. As for the Banksy-esque art, a lawsuit between the owners of the plant and the artists from the 555 Gallery is pending. How the legal world can respond to recent trends remains open to debate.

For more on the story visit The Los Angeles Times.

Art Loss Register Recovers Stolen Print in Less than Three Weeks

Working through diplomatic channels and with police, the Art Loss Registry (ALR) quickly recovered a famous stolen photograph. The Wave by Frantisek Drtikol was stolen from the Museum of Decorative Arts in Prague on March 13, 2011. Four days later, after being approached by someone selling the print, renowned photography dealer Joseph Bellows submitted a due diligence report to the ALR. Mr. Bellows was first contacted in January, prior to the theft. The print was returned to the museum on March 29, less than three weeks after the theft, making this one of the quickest recoveries in the history of the ALR, according to Christopher A. Marinello, ALR General Counsel.

For more information visit The Art Loss Register.

Art Authentication: another foundation comes under scrutiny

The Dedalus Foundation was created by Robert Motherwell, and it now owns the copyright to his works and operates to preserve his legacy. Two recent lawsuit have brought the Foundation under scrutiny for its authentication practices.
"Regardless of their legal outcomes, the two cases shed light on the closed world of artist foundations and the largely unregulated authority they have come to command in the world of art authentication and, by extension, the art market."
Killala Fine Art Ltd. has filed the most recent lawsuit, claiming that the Foundation gave "false assurances" regarding the authenticity of a painting. Killala had purchased the painting from art dealer Julian Weissman, also named as Defendant, on the strength of a letter of authenticity from the Foundation. Two years after the purchase, the Foundation withdrew the letter of authenticity and dropped its plans to include the work in the catalogue raisonné.

Although the authentication process is usually veiled from the public, an earlier suit filed by Joan Banach for wrongful dismissal sheds further light on the matter. Banach alleged that the President made "repeated misjudgments about the authenticity of works attributed to Motherwell," and had sought to challenge them. Read more about the employment suit at The Art Newspaper.

James Panero, writing for the Wall Street Journal, laments the current state of affairs:
"Despite their considerable influence, artist foundations follow no industry standards, are allowed to operate in complete secrecy, and are accountable to no outside individual or entity beyond the attorney general and the Internal Revenue Service, with only the courts offering glimpses of their operations. Surely it is time that changed."
Will Killala have a remedy? Will the Foundation have to re-instate the value of the investment by re-authenticating the work? Or will the Foundation or Weissman have a duty to make good the difference in value? This case follows on the heels of Simon-Whelan v The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. et al (2010). In that case, Simon-Whelan alleged further that the deceptive authentication practices of the Foundation violated anti-trust laws. After a 3-year legal battle, that plaintiff lost.

Read about the lawsuit against the Dedalus Foundation at the Wall Street Journal

NPS Withholds Grant Money from Mexican-American Museum Pending Dispute over Native-American Remains

The National Park Service is withholding $104,000 of grant money from a Mexican-American museum pending resolution of a dispute over tribal remains found during the museum's construction. Los Angeles County supports the museum. The remains, which were found by construction crews working on a garden, appear to be part of a cemetery originally thought to be completely exhumed in 1848. The bones were discovered in October and identified in January. Records kept by the tribes established that some of the remains come from the Gabrielino-Tongva tribes, as well as other tribes. Work on the garden stopped about a week after tribal leaders raised concerns. Issues include the reinterring of the bones and the possible disturbance of additional remains. County official are working with the Native American Heritage Foundation to reserve the issues. An NPS letter to county capital projects manager Dawn McDivitt says the funds will not be released until the issue is resolved by consultation with all concerned parties. The $104,00 comprises a small portion of the $24 million for the LA Plaza de Cultura y Artes project, which is scheduled to open April 16. 2011.

For more information visit artdaily.org.

Brush Up on Your Spanish and Art Crime Prevention -- Spain Publishes Catalog of Stolen Art and Robert Wittman Inc. Offers Lectures on The Same

To reunite art owners and stolen art, Spanish police have published a 192 page catalog of high value objects retrieved during various raids. These works include drawings by Pablo Picasso, sculpture, rare archaeological objects, watches, coins and medals.

As for those not in Spain, who's art has not been recovered yet, or stolen for that matter, Robert Wittman is offering a five-day seminar "on the practical application of investigative techniques to recover stolen art and cultural property." Wittman, former FBI agent and the founder of the FBI National Art Crime Team, author of the NY Times Best Seller Priceless, founded an international art security firm in Philadelphia and now he has assembled a truly stellar crew of lecturers to share the know how of art recovery, Investigation Techniques; Conservation and Forensic Techniques to Identify Fakes and Forgeries; Fine Art Insurance and Art Loss Database; Auction Protection Issues and much more.

Meet the Crew: 
 
Robert E. Goldman spent 32 years working as a state and federal prosecutor. His accomplishments include, prosecution of the first case in the nation under the federal Theft of Major Artwork Statute (18 USC 668) resulting in the first federal convictions under this law. Goldman was appointed by the Department of Justice as the first at large prosecutor in the nation for the FBI Art Crime Team. Today, he is the principle in the law firm of Robert E. Goldman Esq. and practices art law on a private basis.

James E. McAndrew has worked with the U.S. government for more than 27 years, first with the United States Customs Service and then with the Department of Homeland Security. He is an expert on international art and antiquity investigations and on customs and international trade law.

Herb Lottier, the Director of Protection Services at the Philadelphia Museum of Art since 1996, manages a security force of 175 contract officers and 35 proprietary supervisors. Prior to his current profession, Lottier served for 21 years in the Philadelphia Police Department. For the last six of those years he held the rank of captain.

To register visit www.robertwittmaninc.com The class runs from June 12-June 17, 2011

Director-General of UNESCO Worried About Libya: Who's next?

On Mar. 23, 2011, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemned the ongoing use of force by the rebels and the Moammar Gadhafi government in Libya.  He called "for an immediate end to violence by all parties, in accordance with Security Council resolutions 1970 and 1973, and for the responsibility to protect civilians.” The statement came four days after multinational air campaign began to enforce a no-fly zone. On Mar. 28, 2011, President Obama will address the Nation to explain why there is a NATO intervention in Libya with US forces .

According to the UN News Wire, both Libyan authorities and the international coalition enforcing a no-fly zone over the country have been asked to ensure that no military operations are carried out in areas where historical cultural sites are situated.  Just one week after deploring the threat to Egypt's cultural heritage, Irina Bokova, the Director-General of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), said Libya and the allies must respect the Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and its two Protocols. 

In a letter to the Permanent Representatives to UNESCO of each of the involved countries including Libya and the U.S., Bokova wrote “From a cultural heritage point of view, [Libya] is of great importance to humanity as a whole...  Several major sites bear witness to the great technical and artistic achievements of the ancestors of the people [of Libya], and constitute a precious legacy."

To remind, in part the 1954 Hague Convention provides that “[t]he High Contracting Parties (States) undertake to respect cultural property situated within their own territory as well as within the territory of other High Contracting Parties by refraining from any use of the property and its immediate surroundings or of the appliances in use for its protection for purposes which are likely to expose it to destruction or damage in the event of armed conflict; and by refraining from any act of hostility, directed against such property.”

UNESCO's World Heritage List includes five sites in Libya: 
  • The Old Town of Ghadamès, which stands in an oasis. It is one of the oldest pre-Saharan cities and an outstanding example of a traditional settlement;
  • The Rock-Art Sites of Tadrart Acacus, cave paintings, dating from 12,000 BC to AD 100, situated on the border with Tassili N’Ajjer in Algeria;
  • The Archaeological Site of Cyrene, established as a Roman province in 74 BC;
  • The Archaeological Site of Leptis Magna, founded in the first millennium BC;
  • The Archaeological Site of Sabratha, a Phoenician trading-post.

With unrest now brewing in Syria, the sites that UNESCO may be wishing to protect next include:

  • Ancient City of Aleppo;
  • Ancient City of Bosra;
  • Ancient City of Damascus;
  • Crac des Chevaliers and Qal’at Salah El-Din;
  • Site of Palmyra;
  • Noréas de Hama;
  • Ugrarit (Tell Shamra);
  • Ebla (Tell Mardikh);
  • Mari (Tell Hariri);
  • Dura Europos;
  • Apamée (Afamia);
  • Un Château du désert : Qasr al-Hayr ach-Charqi;
  • Maaloula;
  • Tartus : la cité-citadelle des Croisés.
  • Raqqa-Ràfiqa : la cité abbasside;
  • L'île d'Arwad;
  • Simeon Citadel and Dead Cities. 
Yemen has a few cites too.

Lawsuit Proceeds Against Art Dealer

Norman Waitt is the co-founder of computer maker Gateway, a multimillionaire and a serious art collector. So serious that the Wall Street Journal reports that, between 1996 to 2008, he spent more than $13 million for about 50 works from the Gerald Peters Gallery.

His habit couldn't have been fed without the help of Gerald Peters himself, who deals in New Mexico and New York. “Waitt came to trust Peters and relied on Peters’ expertise and what Waitt believed to be Peters’ integrity,” according to a lawsuit filed in 2009. Peters may have exploited his position in this dealer-collector relationship. Waitt filed suit against Peters and the gallery for breach of contract and negligent misrepresentation.

The lawsuit is mainly based around the sale of "Buffalo Standing in a River", a painting by Samuel Seymour, for $1.2 million. It was revealed during legal discovery that Peters had first acquired "Buffalo Standing in a River" for $200,000 in 2008 - a significantly lesser sum.
"The case illustrates the financial risks of the art market and highlights the difficulty of valuing an artist's work."
What legal duty did Peters owe to Waitt in valuing the works? Albuquerque Journal reports that, under New Mexico law, the buyer-seller relationship is not fiduciary. Peters' lawyer says, "Alleging Mr. Peters gave an express warranty as to the future value of the painting -- that would be an impossible thing to do. No gallery in the country will do this. We believe it was a fair market price for the Seymour and we stand by it today." But Waitt's lawyer argues that Waitt would not have bought the painting but for the negligent representation as to the value of the work.

"You can really get taken in this market," says Mr. Waitt. Or, as the gallery's lawyers say, is this just an example of extreme buyers' remorse?

A judge in a New Mexico state court ruled this month that the case can proceed.

* * * *
Read the article at the Wall Street Journal
Thanks to Donn Zaretsky for bringing the story to our attention

A Museum's Online Image Library


Carol Vogel at the New York Times has reported that the Los Angeles County Museum of Art [LACMA] will provide high-resolution images in its online Image Library. The images will be available free of charge and free of restrictions on use.

What about copyright? "So far about 2,000 images — only those in the public domain — are available from its collection of more than 100,000 works." So far? The exact expansion of the online collection is unclear. For artworks that are not listed in the image library, high resolution images may also be requested online.


Will people stop going to the museum if they can see the images online? Well, most things seem to be available online today, and yet people do still leave their computers, occasionally. As Vogel notes, "[i]n this age when it is possible to listen to hours of free music online, it is little wonder that museums are beginning to give the public access to images from their collections."


How will this affect the museum's revenue stream? According to the museum's Director, “It’s negligible in the long run. My view is that it’s better to get the images out there so people will want to come and see the real thing.” This blog has already considered the
Google Art Project, and it does seem as though online material will merely whet the public's appetite for art.

According to the website, "[t]his image library represents our commitment to making the breadth and depth of the museum's collection broadly accessible online and to the widest possible audience. LACMA plans to continue adding images to this library over time."

Read more at ArtForum and at Art Daily

The UCL Panopticon, and Protests: A lack of arts funding in the UK?

University College London [UCL] has recently dropped what The Art Newspaper has called "one of the UK's most ambitious university museum projects" due to a lack of funding.

UCL's Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archeology houses 80,000 pieces of "pottery, sculpture, jewellery and mummy cases." The University's special collections have a number of important objects of cultural heritage, including an archive of George Orwell's letters, and even Agatha Christie's picnic basket. The Museum's current building is too small to contain all of these treasures. In 2009, the Petrie Museum held an interesting exhibition titled, "Disposal? Rethinking What to Keep in UCL Collections." This blog reported on the exhibit together with the University's Cultural Property Policy, which lays the groundwork for disposal of items from the collections.

Rather than dispose of these objects, why not move them to a bigger space? UCL had been in the process of moving its collections to a new building, "the Panopticon", and establishing what would be an institute for Cultural Heritage.

Dixon Jones, an architectural practice, won a competition in 2001 to design the Panopticon, and it had been scheduled for completion last year. Since 2001, the Heritage Lottery Fund, the Wellcome Trust, and a private foundation have awarded significant amounts of money to the collections. However, the amount of funding secured was not enough for the Panopticon, and the project has been dropped.

"The Panopticon was culled by the credit crunch,” said Sally MacDonald, the director of museums and collections, UCL.

What will happen to cultural heritage in these times of economic woe? Some of these issues were considered in a blog post in January 2011. Sources of both private and public funding are drying up. The project's cut does come at a time of a funding cuts controversy in the UK. Government cuts to public spending have led to a massive protest today in London. As demonstrated by a report in the the guardian, many of these cuts will have a serious impact on arts and culture.


For more information about the UCL Panopticon, read the article at The Art Newspaper


For more information about the anti-cuts protest, read the article at the guardian

Photo credit: Jose Mirza

Revisited: Aphrodite Leaves U.S. For Sicily

Along with the agreement for 39 other prominent objects from their antiquities collection, one of the greatest sculptures of the J. Paul Getty Museum's collection, The Aphrodite, left for Italy last week after being disassembled in December.

A former museum director said the delayed return of the sculpture "was intended to help the Getty as an institution prepare for the loss of an object that helped establish its reputation as a cultural force."

This delay corresponds with a deal between Italy and the Getty formed in 2007, in which Italy will lend 50 objects of similar prominence to the Getty overtime in turn for permanent return of these objects.

The Aphrodite statue was bought in 1988 for $18 million dollars. The provenance of the work had long been questionable, but in 2006 Getty investigators uncovered photos from 1980 of the sculpture in fragments leading them to believe that the title was suspect. A book about the discovery and museum's involvement is set to come out in May entitled "Chasing Aphrodite: The Hunt for Looted Antiquities at the World's Richest Museum."




If you are interested in Cultural Heritage join us on March 31, 2011 for the symposium: Human Rights and Cultural Heritage: From the Holocaust to the Haitian Earthquake (CLE credits available)


Yes Rasta: Richard Prince loses copyright suit

Patrick Cariou spent many years living in Rastafarian communities, immersing himself in Rasta culture and snapping hundreds of photographs. He published his work in a book titled, "Yes, Rasta" in 2000.

Richard Prince probably spent a fraction of that time altering Cariou's photographs by painting over them with guitars and shapes. In 2008 he exhibited these new versions as part of his "Canal Zone" series at the Gagosian Gallery. The exhibit was a smash success. The Guardian reports that eight works sold for a total of more than $10 million, and "seven others have been exchanged for other works of art for between $6m and $8m."

Cariou was not impressed. The French photographer immediately took legal action against Prince and Gagosian Gallery for copyright infringement and conspiracy under the 1976 Copyright Act. Manhattan Federal Court Judge Deborah Batts handed down a judgment on March 19, 2011.

Batts granted summary judgment in favor of Cariou on the issue of copyright infringement. Prince admitted to using 41 of Cariou's images for "Canal Zone", but argued fair use as a defense. The Art Newspaper gives a good analysis of the four fair use elements and concludes, like Batts, that there is no defense. In addition to using substantial portions of original works, Prince made little transformative use of the work and showed bad faith by making no effort to contact Cariou. Batts also found that there was a potential market for derivative-use licenses for these works.

Gagosian Gallery was also found directly liable for the infringement, in large part because of the significant financial benefit gained.

The conspiracy claim was dismissed...

The ruling on damages is yet to come, but Prince has been ordered to immediately destroy the works he has and to notify current and future owners that the works were not lawfully made and cannot be lawfully displayed.

However, both Prince and Gagosian still have time to appeal!

Is this consistent with recent fair use rulings? The "String of Puppies" case that featured Jeff Koons (Rogers v Koons, 1992) was cited, but quite a lot has happened since then. ArtInfo provides a good round-up of recent developments in the field, including Koons' latest, here.

Cariou tells ARTINFO, "To me Richard Prince is more of an art director than an artist. I think he's a good art director, and a great thief."

Looting of Cultural Heritage Sites Remains a Problem in Latin America

How far has Western civilization come since the colonization of the Americas?

Like the archeologists and conquistadors that came before them, gangs of looters known as huaqueros are removing cultural artifacts from historic sites in Peru and other Latin American countries. In Peru, this is happening at some lesser-known sites. Besides the Incas, Peru was home to the Moche and Lambayeque civilizations, which produced their own unique cultural works. Today's looters, like their predecessors treasure hunters authorized by Spanish colonial authorities and archeologists acting for the advancement of knowledge, can leave a wasteland behind them as they ransack heritage sites for items to sell or display.

Most huaqueros are poor, local farmers. Jeff Morgan, executive director of the Global Heritage Fund, sees a solution in revenue sharing. He urges that locals should get at least 30% of all revenue generated by heritage sites. But, in order for this to matter, Peru will have to find a way to get tourists to visit one of the country’s many heritage sites other than Machu Picchu.

For more information visit The Guardian.

Loyola hosts a conference on "Reclaiming Art and other Heirlooms Lost in Atrocities"

On March 11, 2011, Loyola Law School organized a symposium entitled "Remnants of Genocide: Reclaiming Art and other Heirlooms Lost in Atrocities." The panelists discussed Nazi Era Looted Art,  and the growing number of legal cases involving art looted during the Armenian genocide, as well as the ramifications of looting on cultural heritage.

One of the cases discussed was the case involves pages from a medieval Armenian Bible now in the Getty Museum. The Southern California-based Armenian Apostolic Church sued the Getty for the return of seven pages ripped from a medieval Armenian bible. The church alleges the pages were stolen from the bible while the museum is alleging it legally bought the manuscripts in 1994.

Loyola Program
Panel 1: Nazi Looted Art Recovery
Moderator: Stanley Goldman, Professor of Law, Loyola Law School & Director, Center for the Study of Law and Genocide
  • Donald S. Burris. Esq., Partner, Burris, Schoenberg & Walden, LLP (CA)
  • Monica Dugot, Esq., Senior Vice President and Int'l Director of Restitution, Christie's (NY) 
  • Thomas R. Kline, Esq., Partner, Andrews Kurth LLP (DC)
Keynote Speakers:
Mark J. Geragos, Esq., Principal, Geragos & Geragos, Los Angeles
Brian S. Kabateck, Esq., Managing Partner, Kabateck Brown Kellner LLP, Los Angeles

Panel 2: The Armenian Genocide and Recovery of Looted Cultural Objects
Moderator: Michael Bazyler, Professor of Law and "1939" Club Scholar in Holocaust and Human Rights Studies, Chapman University School of Law and Visiting Professor of Law, Loyola Law School
  • Heghnar Watenpaugh, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Art History, University of California, Davis (CA)
  • Jason Felch, Staff Reporter, Los Angeles Times (CA)

Panel 3: Other Vital Issues
Moderator: Christine Steiner, Esq., Law Office of Christine Steiner and Adjunct Professor of Law, Loyola Law Scool
  • Lucille A. Roussin, J.D., Ph.D., Adjunct Professor and Director, Holocaust Restitution Claims Practicum, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (NY)
  • MaryKate Cleary, Manager of Historic Claims and Research, Art Loss Register, London, (UK)
  • Sermid Al-Sarraf, Esq., Executive Director, International Institute for the Rule of Law, Baghdad, Iraq (CA)
  • Seth M. Gerber, Partner,  Bingham McCutchen LLP, Los Angeles (CA)

Recent Developments on the Herzog Collection -- Nixon Peabody Advises Hungary with Restitution Issues

Herzog Family Sues for Return of Art Collection
Nixon Peabody, firm with an Arts and Cultural Institutions Team led by Thaddeus J. Stauber, is representing the Republic of Hungary and the Hungarian National Gallery in a case involving the Herzog Collection. On Feb. 15, 2011, the firm moved to dismiss a complaint filed by United States citizen David L. de Csepel and two Italian citizen-relatives alleging that the claims resolved by the U.S. government in a 1973 agreement with Hungary.

Claimants are seeking custody and control of at least 40 artworks that were once part of the Herzog Collection, formerly belonging to Baron Mór Lipót Herzog (1869–1934). The case may be hard to win because in 1973, Hungary and the United States entered into an agreement settling all WWII and communist-era property claims between the two countries and their respective nationals. Pursuant to the agreement, Hungary a certain sum in exchange for the United States settling all claims by U.S. nationals seeking recovery of property taken by Hungary between 1939 and 1973. Apparently Hungary and Italy had entered into a similar agreement.

The heirs of Baron Herzog, filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on July 27, 2010 seeking to recover the art taken in the early 1940s that either remained in or came into the possession of Hungarian government museums. The art in question includes works by El Greco, Lucas Cranach the Elder, Zurbarán, and Gustave Courbet. Claimants maintain a website about the collection and their legal actions. For copies of the briefs and a sampling of press articles, visit Commission for Art Recovery.

On its face, if the United States was under an obligation to resolve individual nationals' claims and distribute the Hungarian reparations pursuant to the 1973 agreement, this claim may not be resolved in a court setting unless heirs can prove bad faith on behalf of the Hungarian government and museums in dealing with the heirs in the aftermath of the war.

SAFEConnect: The Cultural Heritage Network

Saving Antiquities for Everyone  (SAFE) has created an online cultural heritage network, SAFEConnect, "that enables individuals and organizations around the world to work together to save cultural heritage."

The new portal is designed as a "meeting place" for individuals and organizations working to save cultural heritage. One of the events listed on SAFEConnect now is the upcoming conference at Cardozo on Human Rights and Cultural Heritage, which is taking place at Cardozo on March 31, 2011.
 

A Moving Museum: The Merce Cunningham Collection

A dance is a lot more than just a lot of steps. Choreographers, dancers, composers, musicians, lighting designers, set designers, costumers, visual artists and others perform import roles, on stage and off, and add integral elements. All of these elements will be tied to the choreography, and a dance company's collection will move with the dancers, quite literally.

Art in America notes that Merce Cunningham "choreographed some 200 dances, working with visual artists, designers and musicians over his 67-year career." Merce Cunningham incorporated into his dances an impressive collection of "set pieces, costumes, painted backdrops and props created for the dance company by such artists as Robert Rauschenberg, Jasper Johns, Andy Warhol, John Cage and Frank Stella."

“[The collection] was a working piece of art, and its job wasn’t to be in a museum,” Trevor Carlson, the executive director of the Cunningham Dance Foundation, told the New York Times.

Following Merce Cunningham's death in 2000, the Merce Cunningham Foundation's Legacy Plan came into effect, and outlines the closing of the Company and the preservation of the dances. As part of the plan, the Cunningham Dance Foundation has agreed to transfer 150 of the art objects to the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis. The price of the acquisition has not been disclosed, although the proceeds will go towards administering the Cunningham Trust. The New York Times claims that "the agreement represents the most important transfer to date of works from a modern-dance company to a museum."

"The first challenge — a huge one — was simply to figure out what the collection contained." Selling this collection to a museum is one way of documenting its history and ensuring its preservation. The next challenge, according to Debra Levine, may be that "dance fans will have to traipse to Minneapolis to see [these] made-in-NYC seminal performing arts collaborations[.]"

Read the article at the New York Times and the Huffington Post

A Museum in the Making: The Guggenheim Abu Dhabi

New York, Berlin, Bilbao, Venice ... Abu Dhabi?

"The new Guggenheim Abu Dhabi will be located in the Cultural District of Saadiyat Island in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Designed by internationally renowned architect Frank Gehry, the 450,000-square-foot museum will house its own major modern and contemporary art collection and present special exhibitions that will include works from the Guggenheim Foundation’s extensive collection." This blog reported on the development of the museum in November of 2010.

There's only one thing standing in the museum's way - a group of 130 artists, curators, and writers.

The group is threatening to boycott the Guggenheim, at all of the museum's locations, unless labor conditions are improved.

According to the New York Times, the museum is one of the most high-profile construction projects in the Middle East, and will form part of a complex including a branch of the Louvre and luxury resorts. According to the group threatening the boycott, the workers involved in this construction project are dealing with unpaid recruitment fees, withheld wages, and hazardous conditions. ArtInfo reports that this is not the first time that the museum has faced such charges.

“Artists should not be asked to exhibit their work in buildings built on the backs of exploited workers. Those working with bricks and mortar deserve the same kind of respect as those working with cameras and brushes," says Walid Raad, an organizer of the boycott, as quoted by the New York Times.

Human Rights Watch suggests that the group's boycott pledge is bringing much-needed attention to a documented cycle of abuse of migrant workers on Saadiyat Island. The Guggenheim has responded by announcing that it will strengthen regulations to have fees reimbursed and will appoint an outside monitor to address complaints. Human Rights Watch told the New York Times that, "the monitor would only track compliance with Emirates law and the agency’s employment practices policy, which don’t meet stricter international labor and human rights standards."

Here is an example of human rights intersecting with art law. Art and architecture should not be produced in violation of important labor laws, and neither should the museums that showcase them. Even if a great museum is built in violation of workers' rights, it cannot stand without art to fill its interiors. These boycotting artists may be able to make important strides for human rights in the UAE, because the museum will need them.

Read the article at the New York Times and The Art Newspaper

U.S. Amends and Extends M.O.U. with Colombia

On March 1, 2011, the U.S. and Colombia completed an exchange of diplomatic notes that extends the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which protects the cultural patrimony of Colombia, for another five years. The original MOU was created in response to a request by the Colombian government under Article 9 of the 1970 UNESCO Convention. The MOU articulates a basis for the agreement; the high degree of technological, agricultural, and artistic achievement that requires scientific study and the importance that cultural objects play in connecting people to their past and their identity. Additionally, it defines the categories of objects subject to import restriction and supplies a designated list of items, and, allows for exportation of the items not the list only where there is a valid export permit from Colombian authorities.

For more information, including a pdf of the amendments, see the Colombia Information page at the U.S. State Department, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs website.

Government sues to seize St. Louis museum's mummy mask

According to St. Louis Today, the U.S. attorney's office moved to seize a 3,200-year-old mummy mask that was stolen from Egypt before being bought for display in the St. Louis Art Museum. The museum is not taking this lightly and had moved to preempt the government's taking of the mask.

Effectively, "the government wants custody of the mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer through a civil forfeiture complaint, and also seeks a restraining order to prevent the museum from doing anything with the ancient artifact while the issue plays out in court. U.S. Attorney Richard Callahan called the dispute "unfortunate." "I truly regret we could not reach some sort of accommodation with the museum," he said. "Since this matter is now definitely in the courts, I think (saying) anything further would be inappropriate.""

Museum has not issued any comments yet but when the government is asking for something, it might be hard to refuse.  By way of background, the mask was excavated in 1952 and has been in St. Louis since 1998, when the museum purchased it from a New York art dealer for $499,000.

Parties in Adams Photo Dispute Settle

The parties in Ansel Adams Publishing Trust v. Norsigian have settled. While details are secret, no money appears to have changed hands and both sides will bear their own legal costs.

The issue began 10 years ago when Rick Norsigian bought 65 plate-glass negatives at a garage sale in Fresno. The Adams Trust disputed that Adams took the photos. They sought to stop Norsigan and PRS Media, a consulting company, from using Adams' name, likeness, and trademark in their efforts to sell prints and posters. By virtue of the settlement, they have succeeded. Norsigian and PRS had counterclaimed for defamation and conspiracy, adding the University of Arizona's Center for Creative Photography, which houses an archive of Adams negatives, as a defendant

As part of settlement, both parties agreed to cease defamatory statements. The battle of words reached its heights when Adams Publishing trustee Bill Turnage likened Norsigian's authentication efforts to Nazi propaganda techniques. Thankfully, the parties have resolved any gross injustices without further litigation, or war. The prints, currently selling for $7,500 to $1,500, will remain available online with a disclaimer approved by the Adams Trust. Sales efforts cannot use the Adams' name.

For more information visit The Bay Citizen.

China Displaces Britain as the World's Second Largest Art and Antiques Market

One of our Most Favored Nation, China is now the world's second largest art and antiques market, overtaking Britain. It is possible that the EU tariffs on art imports planned for 2012 would further shake its position in the art market.

The report, commissioned by the European Fine Art Foundation, estimated the value of the global art and antiques market in 2010 at 43 billion euros ($60 billion), up 52 percent from 2009 when values slumped as a result of the financial crisis. According to the research, the changes in the industry are driven by a strong performance in the United States and huge growth in China.

For the full story, visit International Business Times and ArtDaily.

Abramovic Victory

Can performance art be appropriated? How can there even be a reproduction of something so transient? Unlike 'performance art', the other ephemeral artform of dance is actually grounded in technique that is hundreds of years old, and systems of recordation have been developed to enable reproduction. Performance art seems the most transient of all, designed to exist only in a particular moment. Should performance art have the protection of copyright? What would amount to the infringement of the copyright in such a work?

This blog has considered the copyrightability of performance art in discussing a German case involving the estate of Joseph Beuys. Reference was made to Marina Abramovic's recent retrospective at the Museum of Modern Art. To make a retrospective in a museum possible, Abramovic trained artists and actors to recreate her works. Museum visitors were also asked to participate in these works by interacting with the "living" pieces in the museum, causing the works to become even more transient. What happens when performance art is fixed in film?

In 1998, Pierre Coulibeuf made The Star and The Balkan Baroque, two short films that feature performances by Marina Abramovic. “[The Star] is an experimental fictional film in which Abramovic appears as an actress directed by Coulibeuf," says Chantal Delanoë, a producer at Regards Productions, as quoted by The Art Newspaper.

Abramovic disagreed with Delanoë's description of the film, and brought a lawsuit claiming that the director had unlawfully used footage of her work after ignoring her directions. She lost because the court found that she had transferred rights to use the footage via contract.

However, "Marina did not sign anything stating he could make installations or photographic or video editions of [this] work,” a spokeswoman told The Art Newspaper. After Coulibeuf placed The Balkan Baroque in an installation in a Portuguese museum, Abramovic was able to bring another lawsuit in 2009.

She told the Art Newspaper, "Coulibeuf moved from a filmmaking role into the realm of an artist. He was not saying that the footage was taken from my films; he was calling it his own work of art."

The superior court in Paris has ruled that Abramovic is a "co-author" of the film, and is entitled to damages for infringing her rights and for damaging the integrity to the work. The case, although decided according to French law, raises interesting questions about copyright ownership of performance art and performance art that is fixed in film.

Read the story at The Art Newspaper and at ArtInfo

Run DMC, Transformed? A street artist claims fair use

Is Thierry Guetta (AKA Mr. Brainwash) for real? Only real legal persons can be sued... Like Shephard Fairey, Guetta has thrown off the cloaks of anonymity typically worn by street artists and has exposed himself to claims of copyright infringement. Street art is based on the use of popular images from the cultural mainstream, but when fame and success are part of the picture, the use of others' images just might not be fair.

As argued by Rosie Gray at BlackBook, "[N]ow that street artists are becoming mainstream and having gallery shows (like Mr. Brainwash, who according to Exit Through the Gift Shop burst onto the scene in 2008 with a massive show in L.A.), their appropriation of pop culture images could get them in trouble. "

Guetta became well-known for his participation in Exit Through the Gift Shop. However, the truth of his identity has been heavily debated. The whole film stirred up controversy surrounding anonymity in street art, and the blurring line between fact and fiction in documentaries.

The New York Times reported in April 2010 that, "Mr. Guetta did not respond to a request for comment [as to whether or not the film was a hoax] — though he does seem to exist and to be as idiosyncratic as he is in the film." This blog also explored the issue in January when, ironically enough, a filmmaker involved with the film sued for lack of attribution.

The truths and practices of street art are now called into question again. Glen Friedman, an LA-based photographer, has brought a lawsuit against Guetta for copyright infringement. Guetta allegedly used one of Friedman's photographs, a 1985 image of Run DMC, as the basis for a number of his works which were distributed through different channels.

According to the Los Angeles Times, "Friedman's attorney, Douglas Linde, said in an interview that Guetta is a 'blatant plagiarist.' The artist's lawyer, Alan Gutman, did not immediately respond to a request for comment."

An article in The Art Newspaper discusses these claims in the context of the history of appropriation art and fair use. "The ease with which photographs can be copied was seized upon in the mid-1970s by the Pictures Generation—a group of US artists including Robert Longo, Sherrie Levine, Cindy Sherman and Richard Prince—who borrowed from television, films, magazines and popular art forms."

So is this really 'blatant plagiarism', or is this an example of the ever-elusive Fair Use? A trial date is set for later this year.

Stolen Rodin Sculpture Found but Disappearance Still a Mystery

Three years ago, the Israel Museum reported that Balzac Nude with Arms Crossed was missing. Though the sculpture was recovered shortly afterwards, neither museum officials nor Jerusalem police had much to say by of explanation. Reportedly, the bronze sculpture is so heavy that it would have been nearly impossible to remove it without a vehicle. The nude is part of a series on renowned French novelist Honoré de Balzac. The value of the stolen piece is not clear but other Rodin sculptures have sold from between $3 and $19 million.

The sculpture disappeared during a five-year renovation of the museum. While the majority of the renovation was competed last summer, portions of the Billy Rose Sculpture Garden, where the sculpture was displayed, remain under construction. No other works of art have been reported missing. The museum would not discuss details of security with the public but said it remains a high priority.

For more information visit The Jerusalem Post.

Can Living Art be Granted Copyright Protection?

Chapman Kelly is a well-known artist, who is famous for his landscape paintings and woodworks. In 1984, the Chicago Park District approached him to create an outdoor display of wildflowers. Kelly envisioned two large ellipses containing native wildflowers surrounded by gravel and steel. By 2004, Kelly's creation was in disrepair and the city made arrangements to change and remove parts of his concept. Kelly brought suit against the Chicago Park District under the Visual Artist's Rights Act of 1990 and breach of contract. He claimed that the garden was a sculpture or painting qualifying for a "work of visual art" under VARA and that reconfiguration was intentional mutilation of his work.

The 7th Circuit released its decision after almost a year and half, holding that Kelly's conceptual piece does not qualify for copyright protection because the work is neither authored nor fixed. The 7th Circuit held that the law must have some limits when it comes to copyright, and although authorship and fixation are usually broadly defined for copyright protection in this circumstance they are not met. Therefore, the work does not fall under VARA's protection because to qualify for moral rights under VARA the work must first satisfy the general copyright standards.

To Read More: See Chapman Kelly v. Chicago Park District

Danish Cultural Treasure in the United States Seeking Political Asylum?

"Man rejser sig fra bordet", a.k.a. "The Anniversary Dinner at Adelaide" is a 105 yrs old painting by the Danish painter Laurits Tuxen.

Ten years ago, in 1991, the Danish National Cultural Treasures Committee decided that it was of such major cultural importance for Denmark that it could not leave the country without a permission. However, today, the painting finds itself in the United States. Politiken reported that The Danish National Cultural Treasures Committee and the  the Junior Counsel to the Treasury are investigating the how and the who of this mysterious journey.

“It is now up to the Junior Counsel to the Treasury to evaluate the case in all of its aspects,” says National Cultural Treasures Committee Chairman Erland Kolding Nielsen adding: “This is clearly an illegal export – so you could call it a case of smuggling.”

In 1995, the nonagenarian painting somehow was sold in Denmark, and then again in New York in 1997.  The mystery is that neither the identity of the purchaser of the painting in Denmark nor the identity of the consignor of the painting for the 1997 Sotheby's New York sale are know. The current possessor of the painting is John Oden, allegedly a principal at the Alliance-Bernstein LP (NY). The painting served as a backdrop and an inspiration for dinners held by Oden.  In an interview given in 2007, Oden admitted that "Someday [the painting] probably belongs back in Denmark. But I'm going to own it for the next few decades. I'm in no rush to release this painting."

Starrs not Paying Taxes?! You can't be serious!

Tell me what side you are on, so I know what side I am on. To start, in December 2010, Wesley Snipes reported to a federal prison in Philadelphia to serve a three-year sentence for tax evasion. Now, Accounting Today and various tabloids have broken the story that some other film industry icons, namely Martin Scorsese and Al Pacino, have been served by the Internal Revenue Service with tax liens $2.85 million and $188,283.50 respectively for unpaid taxes.

Scorsese’s spokesperson stated that the tax demands were a ‘mistake’ and that it had been paid off in full. Representatives for Pacino acknowledged that the actor is looking to remedy the situation.  Accountant who advised Snipes, Scorsese and other celebrities so well so far, Kenneth I. Starr has been convicted of running fraudulent financial schemes and is now serving a 90-month sentence in a Manhattan jail.

Apparently, the IRS has not commented but for the liens.  Silence is ominous and it remains to be seen whether Snipes or Starr will get new cellmates in the fall.

Cultural Diplomacy: Engaging a Changing World

On March 7, 2011 at the TimesCenter, Alliance for the Arts presented an Arts Forum on "Cultural Diplomacy: Engaging A Changing World."

What is cultural diplomacy? Vishakha N. Desai, speaker and President of the Asia Society, explained the differences and connections between cultural exchange, engagement and diplomacy. Despite their important differences, these are not mutually exclusive concepts and they all cross over into the public and private sectors.

In a cultural exchange, there is a physical exchange across borders of artists, performers, and cultural products. The New York City Ballet famously stepped behind the iron curtain in 1962 to perform for Soviet Russia. Cultural engagement refers to the longer-term project of building lasting relationships. Cultural diplomacy has the strongest governmental element to its definition. Efforts in cultural diplomacy connect cultures to state efforts. Under the Bush administration, cultural diplomacy, still within the ambit of the U.S. Information Agency, was used as a one-way promotion of democracy.

Now, U.S. cultural diplomacy is spearheaded by U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs [ECA]. Joining the discussion at the TimesCenter was Maura M. Pally, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges. Pally also discussed cultural diplomacy at the Dance/NYC Mid-Season Symposium on February 26th.

Recently the ECA sent a hip hop group to perform in Yemen. It was a great success, and Yemeni youth turned out for the performances where they might not have turned out for ballet or jazz. However, the ECA faced criticism from certain political groups on the home front after lyrics criticizing the government were found in one of the artist's older songs.

The ECA uses taxpayer funds to support its exchange programs, and so is held to high account by the public. Not everyone in the U.S. public will feel that certain cultural movements here represent the country. Nor will everyone in the U.S. government will feel that way, either. The arts can be subversive, and they can be used to criticize the government. It can backfire if the government expects to use artists to support a singular message.

Despite arguments as to what is showcased here and abroad, sharing arts and culture through cultural diplomacy helps build and maintain relationships between different cultures. Cuban-born ballerina with ABT Xiomara Reyes had told audience members at the Dance/NYC symposium that art forms like dance help break barriers between peoples because they expose the artists' souls. She recounted how seeing American ballet dancers from America tour in Cuba had helped her understand America and influenced her decision to move there.

Dances With Bisons Starring Costner and Detmers -- UPDATED 5/15/12

Rapid City Journal reported on the case brought by Pegy Detmers, an artist who created a bronze sculpture for Kevin Costner, against the latter to force the actor/singer to sell her work of art.

The first hearing took place on Feb. 22, 2011. Detmers allegedly she spent more than six years creating the sculpture, titled  "Lakota Bison Jump," of 14 bison and three American Indian hunters for a resort Costner was planning to open in South Dakota's Black Hills. According to the artist, her sculpture may be worth between $2 and $4 million.

The issue before the Fourth Circuit Judge Randall Macy is "whether or not there was a mutual agreement between Detmers and Costner on the site where the massive artwork now sits." Supposedly under the terms of the contract, Costner was obligated to display the sculpture by 2010. Given that the resort was not finished, Detmer wishes Costner to sell the work.

Costner testified that he still wants to build the resort he planned 20 years ago. He also testified that he paid Detmers a $350,000 artist's fee.

Image: Detmers Studios.

** UPDATE: 

On May 10, 2012, the South Dakota Supreme Court ruled that Kevin Costner did not breach a contact with the artist.  The court, in its ruling, wrote:

"We restate and consolidate Detmers’ issues on appeal to whether the circuit court erred in determining that the sculptures were “agreeably displayed elsewhere,” as required under the contract. Under paragraph three, Detmers would only be entitled to specific performance if The Dunbar was not built or the sculptures were not “agreeably displayed elsewhere.” The issue at trial was whether Detmers agreed to displaying the sculptures at Tatanka, which is a factual inquiry. The circuit court concluded Detmers agreed, as demonstrated by her conduct and actions, to permanent display of the sculptures at Tatanka."

Source:  WSJBlog.
The South Dakota Supreme Court ruled Thursday that actor Kevin Costner did not breach a contract with an artist when he placed commissioned sculptures of bison and American Indians at a different site than was originally planned.

More Information: http://www.artdaily.org/index.asp?int_sec=2&int_new=55288[/url]
Copyright © artdaily.org
The South Dakota Supreme Court ruled Thursday that actor Kevin Costner did not breach a contract with an artist when he placed commissioned sculptures of bison and American Indians at a different site than was originally planned. The Hollywood superstar, who filmed much of his Academy Award-winning movie "Dances with Wolves" in South Dakota, paid Peggy Detmers $300,000 to make 17 bronze sculptures for a resort called The Dunbar he planned to build on the edge of the Black Hills gambling town of Deadwood. The resort never was built and the sculptures instead are at his Tatanka attraction near the proposed resort site.

More Information: http://www.artdaily.org/index.asp?int_sec=2&int_new=55288[/url]
Copyright © artdaily.org
Source:  SArt Daily.

Egypt Super Sad Antiquities Saga

Perhaps we were too quick to report about the situation regarding Egyptian museums and antiquities in January because conflicting updates have been coming out of Cairo and environs nearly every day.

Last week Ahram on-line news source reported that armed gangs have been to antiquities storages in the Giza region. Here are some high/low -lights:

  • "The Ministry of Antiquities is waiting for prosecutors to inspect the scene and is yet to make an inventory of the items remaining in the warehouses...
  • Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs Zahi Hawass said the army left archaeological sites when police were redeployed after having been withdrawn 28 January...
  • Ali Al-Asfar, head of the Giza plateau area, said that the ministry has set up a committee to determine what items have been stolen. Hawass is calling on all Egyptian citizens to protect the country’s heritage..."
Also last week, ArtInfo reported that Zahi Hawass quite his post as the Minister of State for Antiquities. Whether he stepped down because Husni Mubarak was no longer in power or because students and archaeologists have been clamoring for his resignation may be evident in Hawass' blog or interview with the New York Times. For example, when asked why he was leaving now, Hawass, responded:

“I am leaving because of a variety of important reasons. The first reason is that, during the Revolution of January 25th, the Egyptian Army protected our heritage sites and the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. However, in the last 10 days the army has left these posts because it has other tasks to do. The group now in charge of the protection of these sites is the Tourist Police, but there are no Tourist Police to do this either. Therefore, what happens? Egyptian criminals, thieves (you know, in every revolution bad people always appear…), have begun to destroy tombs. They damaged the tomb of Hetep-ka at Saqqara, the tomb of Petah-Shepses at Abu Sir and the tomb of a person called Em-pi at Giza. They attacked a storage magazine at Saqqara and we do not yet know how many artifacts are missing; they opened two storage magazines at Giza; one tomb dated to the 19th Dynasty, the only one in the Delta in fact, was damaged at Ismaïlia; and a store at El-Qantara East has been broken into and looted for antiquities. People have begun to build houses and to excavate at night, everywhere, putting heritage sites all over the country at risk.


In any case, Mubarak' replacement, Essam Sharaf, has asked the army to become caretakers of the valuable sites to protect Egypt's cultural heritage. For now, some are starting to speculate if the only protection left for Egyptian antiquities is the mummies curse.

"Limited Edition" Murakami Lawsuit Settled ...

In 2007, artist Takashi Murakami made the bold move of incorporating a boutique into his exhibit at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles, "(c) Murakami". It was the first time anyone had incorporated a boutique into a formal exhibit this way. The New York Times reported that "visitors were indeed snapping up the limited-edition leather goods, embellished with Mr. Murakami’s cartoon hands and Chibi Kinoko mushroom-shaped characters."

Not everyone was thrilled by this move. The New York Times also reported one art critic as complaining, “it has turned the museum into a sort of upscale Macy’s." However, most critics were not so upset as to take legal action. On the other hand, Clint Arthur, who actually purchased an item from the boutique-within-the-exhibit, sued Louis Vuitton in 2008.

The items sold in the boutique were supposedly limited edition, and Arthur paid $6,000 and $10,000 for two. However, these were "not created just for the exhibition, as advertised, but made of mass-produced canvas used for handbags." He alleged that Louis Vuitton fraudulently concealed the true nature of these goods.

The U.S. District Court dismissed the claims for fraud on the ground that Arthur could have learned the truth had he actually asked, and the case reached settlement on March 3rd.

However, the LA Times reports that the settlement leaves open the question of whether Louis Vuitton is in violation of the Fine Prints Act. If so, the California attorney general, L.A.'s city attorney or the county district attorney could take further action against Louis Vuitton. This state law provides a very interesting twist by specifying disclosure requirements for the sale of prints. (Speaking of transparency in the art market ...)

For now, perhaps it should be said that just because a designer handbag is in a museum does not mean that it is fine art.

Read the article at the Los Angeles Times.

Art Dealers Under Review: The Wildensteins

Transparency in the art market is a hot topic at the moment. Shady art dealers are receiving most of the blame for various obfuscations and deals gone wrong, and the Wildenstein family is doing little to improve their image.

The Los Angeles Times discusses the controversy surrounding the family in a recently published article entitled, "Cultural Exchange: Wildenstein Art Dealers Scrutinized."

Wildenstein & Company was founded in 1852, and now operates a gallery on 64th Street.
"Over the past century, five generations of Wildensteins have been involved in the business of fine art." As respected and renowned as the dynasty is, company president Guy Wildenstein is currently facing a number of legal challenges.

The first came from his deceased stepmother, Sylvia Roth, who accused him of tax evasion and illegal concealment of portions of his father's estate from her and other heirs. The case continues, and continues to be a sensation in France.

In January, French police seized 30 paintings from the Wildenstein Institute. Some of these paintings were actually part of an estate that Yves Rouart was supposed to inherit. This prompted Rouart to bring a second legal attack on Guy Wildenstein, alleging "concealment of theft."

The L.A. Times suggests that Wildenstein is Guy is facing several lawsuits over his father's estate, and several more lawsuits related to the allegedly looted art that was discovered at the Institute. It is also suggested that the family "has never entirely shaken off claims of links with looted Nazi art."

Let us not forget the appraisal gone wrong in Mandarin Trading Ltd. v Wildenstein, a case which went to the NY Court of Appeals in February 2011. Although Mandarin's claims against Wildenstein for fraud, breach of contract, and negligent misrepresentation all failed, the case brought negative attention to certain practices.

At the Art Industry Summit at Park Avenue Armory, it was concluded that more transparency in the art market would be a good thing. Clarity of the law, in regards to the responsibilities of selling, appraising, and collecting art, might also be a good thing for the art market.

Art Industry Summit at the Park Avenue Armory

Yesterday at the Park Avenue Armory, alongside "the Art Show", the Art Dealers Association of America [ADAA] and The Art Newspaper presented a panel on "Transparency in the market: can we have more of it..."

The panel included art dealers, an art consultant, an art lawyer, the chairman of Christie's International, and the founder of The Art Newspaper. The title presented a double meaning for these panelists to deconstruct. Should we have more transparency? Is it possible to have more transparency? The tension between these two questions underpinned the entire discussion, which unfolded in three segments.

First, the panelists discussed third-party guarantees at auction. The rules on this practice are different at each auction house. At the summit, no sense of agreement was reached as to how much information regarding minimum sale prices and third party guarantees should be revealed at auction.

Second, they discussed the recent English High Court decision regarding a sale of a Leonardo Da Vinci involving multiple dealers. There is no specific legislation in place regarding these practices of dealers, and matters are often left to the common law of contract, misrepresentation in particular. Although many people in the art world "pride themselves on handshakes," all of the panelists agreed that precise documentation and clear contracts are needed when a sale reaches a certain amount.

Third, it was debated whether or not dealers and gallerists should be able to support artists at auction. Peter Stern, an art lawyer, reminded the audience that many artists will contractually require their galleries to support them at auction. Larry Gagosian is known to support his artists at auction. It was suggested that, due to current auction practices, nobody knows the real market for Damien Hirst. How many of the sales at his record-breaking 2008 auction were real sales? And because the market preceded a huge market collapse, how many of the real sales were actually concluded? With everyone bidding for different, secret reasons, what can auction figures tell us about the true market?

An audience member asked whether or not resale agreements between artists and gallerists were legally enforceable. The answer was ambiguous. Both sides have been supported, and no court case has determined the issue. However, it was suggested that a contract in which a gallery requires a return from the buyer, without any such stipulation by the artist himself, would probably not be enforceable.

It was ultimately concluded that transparency was a good thing, of course! Although how much transparency and in what areas it should be were matters left open for debate. As to achieving more transparency, better contracting practices were promoted, as was the principle of caveat vendor.


Armory Week continues around the city.

Con Art Dealer on Trial for Fraud

Spring is in the air. What could be better than a trial of an art dealer convicted of tax fraud?! The Associated Press reported that the former art dealer from Rhode Island, Rocco DeSimone, stands trial for mail fraud beginning Mar. 2, 2011. DeSimone was convicted of tax fraud in 2005 but has pleaded not guilty to mail fraud and other charges in the case.

Reportedly, DeSimone's defense attorneys declined to deliver an opening statement.  According to the ArtDaily "John McAdams, an assistant U.S. Attorney, told a jury in U.S. District Court in Providence that DeSimone convinced acquaintances and others to invest in inventions he said major international corporations, including Nintendo and Sony, had offered to buy for millions of dollars.  "He made false promises and outright lies to get their money," McAdams said. "He took their money, and he spent it."

Prosecutors say in an indictment that he used the money to buy sport utility vehicles, several centuries-old Japanese swords, a 1915 painting by French Impressionist Pierre-Auguste Renoir and "one Japanese scroll painting of an eagle sitting on a branch."

Re-visiting Barnes -- One more time with feeling

On March 18, 2011, a Montgomery County judge will hear from the Barnes Foundation and the state Attorney General's office their reasons why the case of the Barnes Foundation's move from its home in Lower Merion Township to the Parkway in Philadelphia should not be reopened.

"The judge's move follows the filing of a petition Feb. 17 by Friends of the Barnes Foundation seeking to reopen the case based on statements from former state Attorney General Mike Fisher in the documentary film The Art of the Steal. The petition accuses Fisher of misconduct for being involved in Lincoln University's decision to drop its legal opposition to the transfer of the art collection to a new museum in the city."

To review: in 2006, Ott approved the move of the famed art collection of Renoirs, Cezannes, and Matisses that has been housed in Lower Merion since the 1920s. If for some reason the court now decides to leave the collection where it is, Philadelphia will have a state of the art empty museum in 2012. Perhaps it could be donated to hold the Russian avant-garde collection currently kept in the dessert in Uzbekistan.

News source: Philly.com