Beyond the obvious artistic coup of obtaining another classic work, the recent discovery of a portrait which may be a lost Da Vinci painting raises an interesting point. When analyzing the painting before deciding to buy it, Peter Silverman, the art collector who purchased the painting, found the work to be exquisite and something beyond the norm. It doesn’t take a skilled art lab technician to recognize talent (especially considering it took no less than four types of technology to uncover elements that pointed to Leonardo’s hand). It just takes an enjoyment and appreciation of great artistic works. Of course, purchasing a renaissance painting does not guarantee a windfall of discovering a potential Da Vinci, but art collectors should remember to trust their guts.

And, if nothing else, this certainly shows that every now and then a $19,000 investment in a beautiful painting can get you 15 minutes of fame… and about $149,978,150 in added value.

Guest Blogger: Rebecca Korach Woan

"Just because you bought it doesn’t mean you own it."
-Lawrence Shindall, CEO, ARIS Corporation

The heightened sensitivity surrounding the provenance, or ownership history, of valuable works of art is a relatively recent phenomenon. While provenance and the related but distinct issue of legitimate title have always been factors in the assembling of art collections it was only in 1998 that the Association of Museum Directors issued guidelines for museums to first determine the provenance of their works to the best of their ability, and then to disclose it.

This was followed a year later by a similar directive from the American Association of Museums. These directives made particular reference to art that had changed hands during the World War II era (1933- 45), a time when looting and theft of artworks by regimes and individuals reached unprecedented levels of scale and value. Also highlighting this relatively recent attention to provenance was the formation in 1998 of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets, which published its final report in 2000. Provenance alone does not tell the whole story. Good title is spoiled by theft, which includes the "forced sales" that occurred during the Second World War.

(more…)

Charles ("Teenie") Harris was a photographer in mid- 20th Century Pittsburgh, who chronicled life, big and small. His work was exceptional. Carnegie Museum owns the rights to all of Mr. Harris’ works. You can see their extraordinary collection here. We post a photo from the collection of Charles Harris here on our art law blog every Friday. We provide these with the permission of Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh. Let us know what you think.

A portrait of jazz singer/actress Lena Horne seated in an armchair, and surrounded by roses. Possibly taken in one of the back room of the Stanley Theatre.


Lena Horne at the Stanley Theatre, c. 1944

Over lunch the other day, a coworker asked whether it was true that there was no need to register work with the Copyright Office as long as you put it into an envelope and mail it to yourself. Gazing past the rigatoni stuck in his teeth and focusing on the question, I realized that I had heard it before. Many times before. "So what’s the deal?" he asked, "Is it true or not?"

The answer is … buried in the following multiple-choice test.

(more…)

The Wall Street Journal has an update on a proposed bill in the Senate (Schumer – NY) to revive tax incentives for fractional gifting of art to museums.  Read the article here.  Senator Schumer’s proposed bill can be read here. 

Stay tuned.

A related note:  Earlier in the year, Senator Schumer introduced a bill to permit deductions for works of art donated to charities – if (among other requirements) you can get an appraisal.   This bill was introduced in February and sent to committee.  Until (or if) it’s heard from again, you can read this bill here.

Charles ("Teenie") Harris was a photographer in mid- 20th Century Pittsburgh, who chronicled life, big and small. His work was exceptional. Carnegie Museum owns the rights to all of Mr. Harris’ works. You can see their extraordinary collection here. We post a photo from the collection of Charles Harris here on our art law blog every Friday. We provide these with the permission of Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh. Let us know what you think.

Members of the Nimrod Hunting Club with strung up deer.

Copyright 2006 Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh

Charles ("Teenie") Harris was a photographer in mid- 20th Century Pittsburgh, who chronicled life, big and small. His work was exceptional. Carnegie Museum owns the rights to all of Mr. Harris’ works. You can see their extraordinary collection here. For as long as we can, we will provide a Friday photo from the collection of Charles Harris here on our art law blog. We provide these with the permission of Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh. Let us know what you think.

@2006 Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh. Woman powdering her face before a mirror.

(more…)

Recently, a Nevada photographer found that social networking privacy settings may not seem so cool. She found a photograph of hers she had posted to her profile used in an ad by a sunglasses company she had never heard of. Although this may seem like blatant infringement (as she thought), whether it is may depend on permissions you give to third parties without even knowing it.

The web has been abuzz recently about this issue (a popular example being a husband whose wife’s picture popped up for a dating site ad), and the sites and advertisers have been pointing the fingers at each other. Regardless, artists should be particularly mindful of the risks and benefits posting pictures may create—and that means clicking on and actually reading those links at the top or the bottom of home page entitled "Privacy" or "Settings" or "Terms of Use."

(more…)

You probably read that you can get a Masters in art crime (if not, you can read it here) Law school instructor and fellow art law blogger Derek Fincham wrote an excellent letter in response, estimating that:  

If we were to collect all of the stolen works of art into one museum, that museum of art theft would easily eclipse the Met or the Louvre or any of the World’s great museums. 

Alas, he NY Times didn’t publish it, but you can read his response and letter here.

 As we discussed in Pitfall No. 1, copyright protection for nature-based works is a different animal (so to speak). While judicial opinions may seem intimidating to most artists (and people generally), it’s important to understand how courts handle copyrighted works since court is where you go to have your protections enforced.

(more…)