Intellectual Property Office (2014)

From Copyright EVIDENCE

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Intellectual Property Office (2014)
Title: Artist’s Resale Right - Summary of IPO survey findings
Author(s): Intellectual Property Office (2014)
Year: 2014
Citation: IPO (2014). Artist’s Resale Right - Summary of IPO survey findings
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Surveys were sent out to art galleries and art dealers. Responses from 43 of the 53 returned surveys were analysed.

Collecting Societies were also contacted directly to provide information on the topic.

Data Type: Primary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: Yes
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2014
Funder(s):

Abstract

This report contains results from an online survey of art market professionals seekingevidence relating to the scale and cost of administering the artist’s resale right (ARR), particularly in relation to the lower payment band. IPO also contacted the two collecting societies – ACS (Artists’ Collecting Society) and DACS (Design and Artists Copyright Society) - to seek evidence as to the numbers of artists who are benefitting from the Right, again with an emphasis on the lower payment band. This exercise sought to gather up-to-date information, in part to inform any UK contribution to the periodic review of ARR by the European Commission, which is expected in 2015.

Main Results of the Study

  • Annual volumes of art sales varied considerably between respondents. 19% made fewer than 50 sales annually; 16% made 50-100; 30% made 100-250; 12% made 250-500, 21% made over 500.
  • Two thirds of respondents (67%) reported that ARR was payable on less than 25% of their art sales. 88% stated ARR was payable on less than half of their art sales.
  • Respondents stated that most of their sales that are liable to ARR are above €3000 (approximately £2,450). 60% of respondents reported that less than 25% of their ARR liable sales are below €3000.
  • Of sales liable to payment of ARR, the proportion of sales that incurred ‘double payment’

varied. Of those who gave an answer, 37% stated that double payment occurred on less than 25% of sales; 23% on 25-50% of sales; 14% on 50-75% of sales; 19% on over 75+% of sales.

  • 35% of respondents invoice ARR as an additional charge to buyers. 63% bear the cost themselves.


Policy Implications as Stated By Author

Information sought from art market professionals to seek evidence relating to the scale and cost of administering the artist’s resale right (ARR), particularly in relation to the lower payment band.

Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Green-tick.png
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Green-tick.png
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Green-tick.png
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Green-tick.png
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

Sample size: 43
Level of aggregation: Art Market Professionals
Period of material under study: 2014


Sample size: 2
Level of aggregation: Collecting Societies
Period of material under study: 2014