Artist's contract.
Peter H.M. Brooks
contract for an artist to make with a buyer.
--
Madness is rare in individuals-but in groups, parties, nations and ages
it rules.
- Fredrich Nietzsche
Fair sale of art contract
Preamble
This contract shall be binding under the law of the country of sale of
the work of art and under the law of all future countries in which this
work may be sold in future. It is intended to reward the artist, and the
estate of the artist for his or her work in perpetuity. The current
owner of the painting is not constrained in fee negotiation or ultimate
returns apart from the terms of this contract.
Terms
1. The copyright of the artwork vests with the artist, or the estate of
the artist in perpetuity.
2. If the artwork, or a part of it, is ever sold, given, bequeathed, or
in any other manner passed on to another person, company, association or
other entity the receiving party shall be subject to this contract with
no exception. No negotiation of the terms of this contract shall ever be
admitted no matter what the consideration might be.
3. On any change of ownership the artist shall be informed of the name,
address and contact details as well as the DOMICILIUM CITANDI ET
EXECUTANDI of the seller and purchaser or agent of the purchaser. A fee
of 10% of the total amount, by sale, barter, auction or other means of
sale, including gift (the transfer value will be established by
independent insurance valuation if unclear for any reason) shall be
payable to the artist at the time of exchange of the work, or at time of
the ratification of the sale, whichever is the earlier.
4. Subject to the applicable law of copyright any reproduction of the
work, in photography, film, electronic reproduction, or any other means,
shall be subject to this contract where the approval of the artist must
be sought and a negotiable fee agreed, not less than 10% of the value of
the work to the campaign, decided as the proportion of the sale, or
anticipated sale, of the work, or reproduction of the work or part
thereof or, if an advertising or other campaign, the actual (if known)
or projected value of the work to the overall project envisaged or
actually carried out (independently assessed). Should the campaign for
which the work is used not achieve its projected result the fee shall
still be payable. If the actual return is higher than anticipated, then
the fee shall be based on 10% of the actual return. The fee shall be
decided upon the ultimately achieved return. (so, for example a film
contract shall pay based on final returns on top of initial
expectations). Partial payments based on initial expectations and actual
results shall be agreed between the artist and other parties so as to
maximise the return to the artist. Anticipated fees shall be payable at
the onset of the agreement.
5. Should a sale, or other any sort of transfer, be anticipated in
which the return will be less than or equal to the immediately previous
sale price (that is the price realised at the last change of ownership)
then the artist, or the estate of the artist, will have first refusal,
that is the right to re-purchase the work at the immediately previous
price.
6. The artist, in concordance with the law of copyright, shall have the
right to refuse exhibition of the work or part thereof, in public or in
private, if it is demeaning, undermining, obscene or in any other way
likely to reduce the status or standing or repute of the artist. This
clause to be determined by the law of the land and the sensitivity of
the artist or independent panel selected by the artist. The artist
retains the right to repossess the work if not consulted under the terms
of this agreement - for a consideration not more than the actual
original purchase price from the artist.
7. The purchaser takes responsibility to inform the original artist of
any possible implications of any action imagined or taken in terms of
this contract.
8. The owner of the work undertakes to insure the work sufficiently to
compensate the artist for any loss of earnings possible from the terms
of this contract.
--
Madness is rare in individuals-but in groups, parties, nations and ages
it rules.
- Fredrich Nietzsche
Andrew Werby
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@new.co.za>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.fine,alt.art.marketplace,alt.art.scene
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 3:22 PM
Subject: Artist's contract.
> So, what do you think? Here is the draft of what I think might be a fair
> contract for an artist to make with a buyer.
>
>
> --
> Madness is rare in individuals-but in groups, parties, nations and ages
> it rules.
> - Fredrich Nietzsche
[A buyer would have to want your piece of art really desperately (or be one
of those rare individuals) before signing something like that. To say that
it's unrealistic would be understating the case. The state I live in,
California, has instituted something like it - the Resale Rights act, but
it's generally ignored. Nobody I've heard of of has ever collected a dime in
resale rights when their work was resold. And when you get into the part
about how the producers of a film have to give you 10% of something- it's
hard to figure out if that's of the film's gross, its net, or the
infinitesimal value your art piece hanging in the background adds to the
whole- you're way out in Fantasyland. But I like the "DOMICILIUM CITANDI ET
EXECUTANDI"- that's got real class...]
Andrew Werby
http://unitedartworks.com
Barry Stevens
to an artist selling her work around the world.
Most of the complaints I've heard about this issue, including resale,
creation of derivative works, etc. seem to have centered around subsequent
uses of an original work. It's somewhat similar to the creation of any
intellectual property, in any form. The best protection of it, in any form,
is - speed. Create the product, identify all (reasonable) subsequent uses,
implement and market those uses, and use enough speed that youi're in the
market before someone who might copy it can be. Take the money, say thank
you, and withdraw. Then, become one of your own "copiers". If there are
additional derivatiove works that can be done, do them. Get back into the
market, sell, take the moneym, and say, "thank you".
And... as part of this strategy in the art world... keep the original. Wait
until your name is recognized, and the value of the original goes up. Then
**sigh** part with the original, but for a higher price. And one of the
other posts here is right on - the subsequent appreciation in price accrues
to the buyer, not to the artist. But, done using this strategy, the artist
gets as much as possible from his or her work.
I know that my wife, if she sells an original, sells only the image itself,
and retains all other rights.
Barry
"Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@new.co.za> wrote in message
news:9alfl5$kbb$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
Peter H.M. Brooks
Marilyn Welch <wq...@victoria.tc.ca> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.1010407103905.1144A-100000@vtn1...
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I couldn't read beyond the "copyright in perpetuity."
> The strictest international copyright on art work that I know of is 50
> years after the death of the artist.
>
You are, of course, correct. However there is nothing to stop somebody
agreeing to a contract that binds them to a longer term, or a shorter
one, for that matter.
Peter H.M. Brooks
Andrew Werby <and...@computersculpture.com> wrote in message
news:j0Iz6.1220$ix4.8...@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com...
>
>
> [A buyer would have to want your piece of art really desperately (or
be one
> of those rare individuals) before signing something like that. To say
that
> it's unrealistic would be understating the case. The state I live in,
> California, has instituted something like it - the Resale Rights act,
but
> it's generally ignored.
>
particularly realistic for most people, however, as with many other
things, it could be a useful negotiation point - when asked for a
discount you could counter with saying that you are prepared to waive
the contract.
Actually you wouldn't need anybody to sign it. All you need is a line on
your standard receipt saying that all work was sold subject to the
agreement in small print - just like insurance salesmen, then the
presumption is that the buyer agrees to the contract unless it is
specifically stipulated otherwise.
Still, I suppose that this is why artists aren't businessmen and
insurance salesmen (or insurance lawyers) aren't artists in general.
The way things like this have worked in the past is that an agreement of
this sort is adopted by an association that represents individuals (like
a trade union) and the association argues with more muscle than one poor
artist in discussion with one rich buyer.
In fact at the moment, artists retain posession of the copyright when
they sell a painting, all this contract does is to extend the rights
attached to it.
>
>Nobody I've heard of of has ever collected a dime in
> resale rights when their work was resold. And when you get into the
part
> about how the producers of a film have to give you 10% of something-
it's
> hard to figure out if that's of the film's gross, its net, or the
> infinitesimal value your art piece hanging in the background adds to
the
> whole- you're way out in Fantasyland. But I like the "DOMICILIUM
CITANDI ET
> EXECUTANDI"- that's got real class...]
>
Thank you. I rather liked that bit too.
As to the film question, I agree that it is vague, that is in the nature
of things that are negotiable. If it were me, I would argue for gross
first and settle for the price of a good meal if I wasn't that short of
the readies.
Peter H.M. Brooks
> Peter,
>
> There is a railroad service here "The E & N" (Esquimalt & Nanaimo) and
it
> was granted to the people in perpetuity circa 1920 by the provincial
> government. Guess what?
> It's not making any money and the government is just tired of
subsidizing
> it. There goes the perpetuity, out the window.
>
Of course, I agree with you, the human race will cease to exist and the
earth will fall into the sun, so there is ultimately no perpetuity.
However, for all practical purposes it means the estate of the artist.
>
> The question remains who would be there to protect that copyright you
> speak of?
>
If there is nobody to protect it (that is no association, trade union,
non-profit company or other means) and no descedents of the artist are
around or bothered abou it, then, clearly it will lapse.
The same is true of ownership of any property, if there appears to be
nobody interested in asserting ownership then, after a sufficient period
of time, somebody else can gain title by squatting or using the
property.
The real point isn't these edge cases, which clearly don't matter as
there are no interested parties about, but the situation where, say, a
famous artist would like to bequeath some sort of royalty to his
children - just as a print author can assign royalties in a will.
>
> Marilyn