ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Copyright Law Blogs -> The Art Law Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Copyright Law

: The Art Law Blog

"Frequently these things are less than black and white"

By Intellectual Property Law, Esq.

ADVERTISEMENTS
A lot of people seem very bothered by the news that the Orange County Museum of Art recently sold a group of 18 paintings. This time the trouble is not that the sales proceeds are to be used for something other than acquiring more art; rather, it's that the works were sold "to an undisclosed private collector," instead of at auction. There is also a question about whether the museum "got a good price for the works sold."

The AAMD is okay with the transaction. Its executive director says that "frequently these things are less than black and white" and that a private sale to a collector "isn?t in that level of egregious behavior" and "could easily be a very legitimate decision."

Two quick comments:

1. Does anybody know what the numbers are on deaccessioned works sold at auction vs. those sold privately? I could be wrong, but it certainly doesn't strike me as unprecedented for a museum to sell a work privately. Is there a new norm that museums must always sell at auction?

2. If the works were sold for less than full value, then that's another story. From Marie Malaro's A Legal Primer on Managing Museum Collections (2d ed. p. 227):

"Private sales, although not wrong per se, are more vulnerable to accusations of favoritism or inept bargaining by the museum. See, for instance, the complaint in Lefkowitz v. Kan, Index No. 40082/78 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. , N.Y. County, Jan. 3, 1978). (Kan, a museum curator, deaccessioned and sold certain museum objects to a dealer. Kan also collected personally and did business with the same dealer. The attorney general charged Kan with violation his fiduciary duties by not obtaining the best price for museum objects so that Kan could benefit in his personal transactions with the dealer. The case was settled in January 1983.) See M. Brenson, 'Auctions: The Museum Connection,' New York Times C17 (Jan. 6, 1984), for a discussion of disposal routes used by New York City art museums. Private sales to employees and trustees should be avoided because hey raise ethical, if not legal, problems."

Full post as published by The Art Law Blog on June 16, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0024 secs (from cache 11/05/26 02:52:07)