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
SevenTwoNineSeven:


Post



   

Most Recent Comments

IP is not a joke Bill: Absolutely. Parody and satire are protected under fair use. Mad Magazine (among many

IP is not a joke Couldn't it be used under the fair use

Goldman does in AIG, you, and me Predatory Lending is a major contributor to the economic turmoil we are currently

Common Sense Seth - I'm not sure how your comment @ 5:57pm casts any illumination on your earlier position. If I

Lessig: Congress is broken and Obama has failed Anon, state granted monopolies are effectively licenses for corporations to collect taxes on

Lessig: Congress is broken and Obama has failed It does seem strange to me that when we are faced with the possibility of a 23 trillion dollar

The Patent, Copyright, Trademark, and Trade Secret Horror Files Fred, I recognise that 'natural monopoly' may have a more specialised meaning for economists, and

Lessig: Congress is broken and Obama has failed Fred, I'm doing something immediately. I'm working on the Contingency Market. this is something

The Patent, Copyright, Trademark, and Trade Secret Horror Files @Crosbie: I agree *natural monopolies* do exist, despite any tendency for SK and Bill Stepp to shut

Lessig: Congress is broken and Obama has failed I thank John Bennett for this post, and for the quality of his posts here in general. I've been