Artists Rights, Disclaimed Works and Auction Contracts

The Art Newspaper recently ran an interesting article on a now dismissed NY State lawsuit involving the Visual Artists Rights Act, Sotheby's and the owner consignor.  The issues stems from an artwork bieng considered by damaged by the artist, who then disavowed the work under Varsa, and it was then pulled from a Sotheby's sale.  The owner is now appealing the dismissal and the next court date is scheduled for early June.

The Art Newspaper reports

When Noland disclaimed the work, she was asserting her rights under a federal law, the Visual Artists Rights Act (Vara), that permits an artist to prevent use of his or her name as the author of a work “in the event of a distortion, mutilation, or other modification” that would injure the artist’s reputation.

The consignment contract permitted Sotheby’s to withdraw the work if the auction house doubted its attribution. The court ruled for Sotheby’s, given Noland’s assertion of her Vara right to prevent the use of her name in connection with Cowboys Milking.

Because Sotheby’s had not breached the contract, Noland could not have interfered with it, the judge ruled in open court on 1 May.

Sheridan hopes the appeals will provide “clarification of the standards courts use” to interpret Vara. Permitting artists to determine those standards, such as how much damage constitutes material damage and how much is just wear and tear, “is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house”, he says.

Source: The Art Newspaper