logo

Against Monopoly

defending the right to innovate

Monopoly corrupts. Absolute monopoly corrupts absolutely.





Copyright Notice: We don't think much of copyright, so you can do what you want with the content on this blog. Of course we are hungry for publicity, so we would be pleased if you avoided plagiarism and gave us credit for what we have written. We encourage you not to impose copyright restrictions on your "derivative" works, but we won't try to stop you. For the legally or statist minded, you can consider yourself subject to a Creative Commons Attribution License.


back

Artist's resale rights? What's that?

One of the things we do not do is pay enough attention to IP developments in other countries. The Economist has a piece entitled "Sharing the wealth; Artists do battle to enrich their heirs link here." The story brings up a subject new probably to most Americans. The operative paragraph is, "For the past two years 4% of the price of a work by a living artist sold through an auction house or by a dealer has been payable to the artist. Sales of less than €1,000 (£796) are exempt, and the tax is capped for anything worth €500,000 or more. Throughout the European Union the tax is payable on sales of works by living artists or those who have died within 70 years; in Britain it is only works by living artists that qualify. The EU allowed Britain this exemption until 2012..... Damien Hirst, Britain's most commercially successful artist, [and] more than 500 signed a letter to the Telegraph urging the government to give them that right. 'Our loved ones often sacrifice a lot to support an artist in the family," [so that] Hirst and his colleagues would like to make sure it is not extended.'" That is a rich extension of copyright with no obvious benefit to society like encouraging innovation.

The Economist notes that the change will have an adverse effects on the British art market and then goes on to note that the gains are collected by only a relative few. "The artist's resale right (ARR) benefits a far smaller proportion of artists than its supporters might assume. A study sponsored by the Antiques Trade Gazette showed that, in the 18 months to August 2007, 10% of the 1,104 artists benefiting from ARR in Britain (around half of whom are British) got 80% of the pot; the bottom 30% received less than £100 each. The royalty has also proved cumbersome and costly to collect.


Comments


Submit Comment

Blog Post

Name:

Email (optional):

Your Humanity:

Prove you are human by retyping the anti-spam code.
For example if the code is unodosthreefour,
type 1234 in the textbox below.

Anti-spam Code
QuatroSevenSevenUno:


Post



   

Most Recent Comments

How to extract money for using copyrighted performances The New York Times Magazine followed up on its earlier piece about The Copyright Enforcers with

NYTimes finds more IP news but doesn't report its consumer cost Enabling people to set up contests or awards of prizes is what I hope my Contingency Market can

NYTimes finds more IP news but doesn't report its consumer cost A couple of things can be done to encourage phamaceutical development without creating a monopoly.

Comment Posting Announcement Justin Levine's post has comments disabled again: Paul Allen Files Patent Lawsuits Against The

Germany Not many comments on that article. I presume that means it has a tiny audience. Oh well, I guess

NYTimes finds more IP news but doesn't report its consumer cost To start with, shift the cost burden of later-stage clinical trials to the FDA and

NYTimes finds more IP news but doesn't report its consumer cost If I may ask a very simple question. What would you do to encourage the "invention" of new and

Free textbooks If you are unable to get free textbooks but need cheap college books, I recommend visiting

Comment Posting Announcement Lewis Hyde's Justin Levine has disabled

Music without copyright Thanks for the healthy info. rent