Re: [dvd-discuss] Nutty art laws (CRRA) about resale of art.

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

Thanks for making my day....

As for what to do with the law...scrap it. It violates first sale 
doctrine.....you know there seems to be a common thread 
here...what you buy you don't own anymore...you are leasing it or 
you are the custodian - what nonsense!

Date sent:      	Fri, 16 Nov 2001 20:18:10 -0500 (EST)
From:           	Scott A Crosby <crosby@qwes.math.cmu.edu>
To:             	<dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Subject:        	[dvd-discuss] Nutty art laws (CRRA) about resale of art.
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> You think that these laws are strange, well, check out:
>    http://www.artswire.org/current/2000/cur032100.html
> 
> 
> ``BRITAIN COMPROMISES ON RESALE ROYALTIES FOR ARTISTS''
> 
> which basically says that each time someone sells an artwork in
> britian, the origional artist gets 2-4% royalty.. Cute, but
> regretabily, this is not a British invention.
> 
> Cause of the ``California Resale Royalty Act''
> http://www.cac.ca.gov/secondary_page/programs/CA_Resale_Royalties%20Ac
> t.htm which:
> 
>     ``Under this law, if a work of art is resold for $1,000 or more
>     and
>       that price exceeds the price the seller paid for that work of
>       art, the seller must pay the artist five percent of that resale
>       price. It is the seller's obligation to locate the artist and
>       pay the royalty due.''
> 
> And, it applies for the lifetime of the artist+28 years?!?!?
> 
> Here's a choice quote:
> 
>     ``"This right of artists to share in the appreciated value of
>     their
>       works when resold is important both in principle and in dollars,
>       CAC states.''
> 
> 
> As purchasing something like art for appreciation is a risk, something
> that the origional artist will not accrur, this law seems unbalanced.
> It rewards someone for doing nothing. I propose that an amendment be
> made, such that if the cost of the artwork depreciates, the artist is
> liable for 5% of the difference.
> 
> Its only fair, don't you think?
> 
> Well, either that, or repeal the law, both there, and around the world
> [partial legal analysis of this type of law around the world
> http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:FuQKyzXdtaw:www.simpsons.com.au/l
> ibrary/documents/visarts/visarts89/9Artists.pdf+CALIFORNIA+RESALE+ROYA
> LTY+ACT+&hl=en]
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
> PS: After hearing about this, I will never purchase an artwork in
> california or from a california artist.
> 
> PPS: Damned whiney artists.
> 
>