By Julie McIntyre
Since the first warnings in March, provincial arts groups have been primarily focused on trying to get their concerns addressed regarding proposed 40 percent to 50 percent cuts to the British Columbia Arts Council. The cuts to arts funding have turned out to be so much more severe, and the community is in a justifiable state of shock and outrage. Eclipsed in B.C. are the national consultations underway on a new copyright bill, expected to be presented this fall in Ottawa.
So far, the copyright debate has revolved around user rights and the abuse of power by some corporate rights holders. Artists, the people for whom the law was designed in the first place, have been all but ignored. Many people are talking about balance. With visual artists earning 61 percent less than the average Canadian worker and being pressured from galleries to sign away their rights, creating balance needs to include artists.
Copyright reform
Jason Crocker: Technological neutrality must guide Canadian copyright reform
Jennifer Mercurio: Canadian copyright reform should not weaken consumer rights
Jake Daynes: Pirate Party of Canada strives for reasonable copyright balance
Darrell Evans: Challenging the B.C. government's abuse of Crown copyright
Russell McOrmond: Canadian law should be updated to protect us from digital locks
Graham Henderson: Canada needs copyright rules that foster digital music market
Ferne Downey: Performers seek made-in-Canada consensus solution to copyright
Danielle Parr: Canada's video game industry needs copyright law that protects digital locks
Bill Henderson: Voluntary music file-sharing fee would benefit songwriters and fans
Geof Glass: How Canada's new copyright law will affect you
Elizabeth May and Griffin Carpenter: Canada needs principled approach to copyright
Charlie Angus: Will the Conservatives get the message on copyright reform?
Marian Hebb: Collective licensing would help Canadian writers get paid on-line
Copyright fees presently account for approximately 12 percent of visual artists’ income. Unlike writers and musicians, who have the ability to disseminate mass quantities of books, CDs, and DVDs, visual artists are usually the creators of a singular, original object and generally do not produce multiples. Improving compliance and recognition of Canadian copyright laws and the inclusion of a “resale right” could help redress this disparity.
As the national voice of visual artists, Canadian Artists’ Representation/Le Front des artistes canadiens has had a long history of involvement in the evolution of copyright legislation in Canada. In 1988, our lobbying efforts facilitated changes to the Copyright Act which enable artists to be paid when their work is shown in a public exhibition. We are supportive of fair legislation that adequately protects copyright holders, while also providing reasonable access to the artist’s work.
In particular, CARFAC is looking for the implementation of an artists’ resale right, which would entitle an artist to receive a small percentage from all subsequent public sales of their work. When an artist sells a painting through a dealer, for example, they receive a percentage of that sale price. However, if it is resold later on, the artist receives nothing—even if the sale price has drastically increased based on the experience and growing reputation of the artist.
Canada’s aboriginal artists would potentially have the most to gain. Aboriginal artists have established themselves in the international art market, and their work often commands high sales prices, yet the artists are losing out on the tremendous profits being made on their work in the secondary market. This same situation motivated the Australian government to consider the resale right, after the late Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri’s painting, Warlugulong, sold for $2.4 million in 2007, 30 years after the artist sold the work to the Commonwealth Bank for only $1,200. The artist’s estate received nothing from the recent sale.
Fifty-four countries worldwide have adopted the resale right or are in the process of adopting it, including the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand, as well as California. Once established here, Canadian artists will be able to benefit from reciprocal arrangements with other countries where the resale right exists and where that artist’s work may be resold. For example, if a British artist’s work is resold in France, that artist is able to benefit from the resale right there because it has been adopted in both countries. By comparison, a Canadian artist would not benefit if their work was resold in France because we have not yet included the right in law.
Canada has been a world leader in terms of copyright “firsts” for visual artists. We feel that now is the time for us to adopt the resale right into Canadian law, in order to strengthen its merit within the international community, and to bring in greater income potential for Canada’s visual artists.
Julie McIntyre is the president of CARFAC B.C., the regional branch of Canadian Artists’ Representation/Le Front des artistes canadiens.




Comment (13)
Comments
When someone re-sells a painting, the artist has done no work and hence gets NO cash. It's that simple.
..this is how current new work is valued .. if people value something you've created in the past ..it naturally increases the value of any new work.. so .. just keep working .. and creating quality work .. and charge appropriately on the basis of your growing reputation .. that's just the way it is in the world of one of a kind artistic pieces...
..however..if you are determined to collect royalties for your work ..you may have to create something that will give you those royalties.. photos or art prints of your pieces .. or whatever creative way you come up with .. .. like .. I dunno .. leasing out your pieces to corporations for a finite period of time??..
..marketing is a creative venture too.. .
As a practicing artist, it is frustrating how people can buy art, lock it away for a few years, then sell it at an auction for far more than they bought it for. If those auction prices were used in the gallery, the paintings would never sell.
Art is a game where artists are the lowly pawns.
Kyle Clements: So far, it appears that the resale right has not had a negative impact on the art market in Europe.
Prime Numbers: Copyright is not unlimited – it expired 50 years after the artist dies as would the resale right.
Except for a handful of 'mega star' artists who have sold a lot of art in the first place, Resale royaltys are of no benefit to most artists--- in the UK resale scheme just twenty artists have gotten %50 of all the money collected !
The costs of these schemes will always be paid for by those who have the weakest market position; the young artist.-Buyers will simply lower their offering price.
What these schemes do deliver is lots of management fees, for the people advocating the scheme.
-----------------------------
ashwilson
Robert
************************
Mark
================
======
plrprivatelabelrights