Allegedly!
Authors try very hard not to write under the same pen name as another author. Sharing a name tends to confuse and annoy readers.
How is an established artist to know if there is an obscure dabbler (no pejorative intended) somewhere who has the same name? Is it his legal responsibility to know? If the established artist is asked to agree that a work signed with "his name" is authentic, and is threatened with a multi-million dollar lawsuit to force him to lie, what's he to do?
The legal blog of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter and Hampton LLP tells a story every bit as intriguing as anything written by Jeffrey Archer (in my opinion).
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=698a4030-3edd-416b-a1e8-a3e9eae086f9&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2016-08-17&utm_term=
I do hope the jurors are fascinated!
The art law blog of Boodle Hatfield also discusses the same dilemma with some added details. I cannot help wondering why the established artist doesn't countersue for defamation.
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=cf755b74-7a2b-4a7d-b46b-9a183ce53e94
On the other hand, if there is consternation in the fine art world over this legal coercion of an artist to "authenticate" a work that he denies creating, it is unlikely that anyone will ever want to buy the daub in question.
My apologies for the short post!
All the best,
Rowena Cherry
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment