Just so people don't get the two issues confused.

What the gallery is seeking to do is impose a contractual obligation on the buyers, which requires they pay a certain percentage of any resale price to the artist (as well as restricting sale on ebay). Effectively they are reserving certain rights in the sale of a copyright work, which they are perfectly entitled to do. Now there are questions whether the clause is enforceable, but if the buyer signs the contract then the gallery will have very good arguments that it is. Question whether the Gallery would actually go to the effort and expense of suing someone if they don't pay the royalty or stick the print on ebay, but they certainly could.

The Artist's Resale Right, which CBL has outlined, seeks to achieve the same thing as part of the clause. However, the contractual obligation the gallery is trying to impose exists separately to the ARR.

The ARR is derived from an EU directive and was implemented in the UK early last year. Essentially, it applies to the re-sale of artworks (including prints), which are sold by or with the assistance of "art market professionals" and have a value over 1000 Euros. It doesn't currently apply to private individuals selling privately.

ARR royalties are generally administered through a collecting society (DACs being the main one in the UK), rather than by the artists themselves. If you've got hundreds of prints in the market, you basically don't want to be chasing up sellers for your percentage of the resale price. I believe even Banksy is a member of DACs (despite the anti-copyright stance he took early in his career).

As things stand, there's some debate on what constitutes an "art market professional". Obviously, the galleries and auction houses are, but what about people buying art to sell on Ebay? Possibly - though only time will tell. Interestingly, a lot of sellers already build in a margin on sales to cover this cost - effectively pushing the expense on the buyers.

The Laws an Ass ;D

Maybe. Though this one is widely supported by the art community. After all, it's designed to benefit the artist.

Sorry lesbianwednesdays, didn't mean anything personal at all, I'm about to start my sunday drinking very soon, then we'll be eye to eye.

good point and a good point. i don't know much of nick walker but it would take a very arrogant man to ostracise one's-self in such a way. i'd be surprised if many artists would go down this route.

i hope we're all talking about the principle here rather than the artist in question?

CBL, i don't take any of it personally, not really in a fit state to , i'm just trying (badly) to play the old devil's advocate and that. crack one open my friend and get on it, don't know about eye to eye, more like eyes to eyes ;D (double vision, yeah?) ;D you know it's a bad'n when you have to explain it. sorry everyone.

Basically it's an ancient french law, intially set up to support artists, 99% of whom cannot afford to pay their mortgage or usually live in rented accommodation until the day they die.. now if some fat collector fuck is gonna buy to sell on..let's see some of that cash going back into art and not into his sports car colelction IMO.

It applies to books and CD's.. everytime a passage is published or a track played, the artist gets paid. Easy as.. they retian the intellectual rights to their own work. If you want a society with art, something to redress the balance and make the world a little better.. then you should support this. It's basically a union for artists...who normally get a pittance.

You're not buying "product", you're buying art...

Like someone mentioned, as far as I'm aware, it only applies to original work with a price of over 10k.

I'm all for it ! ;D

I am glad to hear Nick's official position on the matter. I bought more than one Ghetto Ghost and didn't mind the clause on the invoice because I bought them to keep, I hardly ever sell anything and prefer trade if I must get rid of something (then only to get something else). Everything I read about Nick Walker gave me the impression he is a stand-up guy and I didn't really believe that nonsense was his doing.

I agree Bombhugger - great point.

[Directed at nobody in particular] As a thousand forum members have said again and again, you have to first and foremost BUY WHAT YOU LIKE. Banksy's appeal is universal. His images are powerful, simple and laden with meaning (surface and deeper). He holds a mirror up to our society and he embarrasses us. And for good reason, and shame on us for not noticing it ourselves. He's frickin' stellar and we already all know that and that's why we're all here. It's a no-brainer to want to buy and keep Banksy's artwork. Some of us discovered him sooner than others, and good for us who did, 'cause boy did we have the pickings! But Banksy, being the incredible artist that he is, still is very adamant about continuing to keep his art accessible for the masses, thus POW. So everyone still has the chance to own a Banksy. Gotta love 'im.

If you're buying what you like (rule #1) and you're looking to add another layer to your purchase consideration (e.g., investment potential), then you need to do exactly what Bombhugger mentioned: imagine the art market 5 years from now (hell, imagine your own tastes 5 years from now) and decide whether you think you're still going to be wanting to look at that image in that time. Forget about standing the test of time, will that image/artist stand 5 years with you? If you answer yes, then don't second guess yourself -- you bought something nice for your wall and probably made a nice investment while you were at it, not that you care too much 'cause you love it anyway.

Otherwise, don't get caught up in the current madness and keep buying and buying and buying prints from every artist you hear of. 'Cause you're just going to wind up running out of wallspace, cash and your lady's patience The art market will look a LOT different 5 years from now. Buying art with reckless abandon will lead to empty pockets in the long run -- it's true, my friends.

There's no doubt we'll be talking about Banksy 50 years from now. Feel free to buy his art up with reckless abandon, just save some for me.

Curious to see what artists other forum members think will stand the "5 year test". I'll throw out Swoon, Espo, Barry McGee, Blek, Bast, Faile, Johansen and Invader for starters.

Also, Silky/AB - I find it ironic that "Banksy" doesn't pass the spellcheck in the Banksy Forum. We should probably change that, no?

Alright, enough ranting for one day and forgive me in the morning, please. It was a beautiful 78 degree day in New York City and I enjoyed some champagne outside in the sun. Well, "some" is an understatement...

Good post DKLA, as for artists standing the test of time IMO there will only be a handfull from todays collective left. My thoughts are that Banksy, Micallef, Matthew Small and possibly Conor Harrington will be the only ones left in the forefront. I like all the others but theres just no background in most of their works but the likes of the above mentioned have a growing following outside of just street art collectors which stops the whole frenzed buying by us lot and keeps the interest high by different collectors of modern art.

its just silly.

In terms of the Arist's Resale Right - I'm 100% with Nu on this one. This is a piece of European legislation, which was introduced for the benefit of artists and is widely supported by the art community. Including by Banksy - he is a member of DACs and collects royalties on the resale of his works.

I really don't see how anyone can begrudge an artist a small percentage of any resale of their works. After all, it is the artist that has invested their time, heart and soul in a piece of work. Like Nu says, most struggle to make a living.

In terms of the legal position, I re-iterate the points in my post above. The ARR and the contractual obligation which the gallery is seeking to impose are separate issues - although seeking to achieve similar aims. I have no qualms about either.

Can't get much clearer than than can you.

When I have dealt with Nick Walker he has always been a stand up guy and it's been a pleasure to do business with him. I am glad all the nonsense has been cleared up and maybe a lesson has been learned.

normal service resumed

I find the attacks on Nick mystifying - jeeeez