{"title":"后续创新中的中介责任与贸易","authors":"Alexander Cuntz, Matthias Sahli","doi":"10.1007/s10824-023-09470-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intellectual property rights have changed the market value and direction of artistic innovation throughout art history, in particular when new creations built on the art of predecessors. In this paper, we test how changes in legal frameworks and litigation risks affected market value and commercial trade around artistic reuses in the figurative arts and the 'Appropriation Art' movement in particular. Appropriation artists borrow images from different sources and incorporate them into new, derivative works of art. By doing so, they risk infringing copyright but also put auction trade and artwork availability at litigation risk as liability can extend to market intermediaries, such as auction houses, museums, or galleries. Using a differences-in-differences model and large-scale online data, we investigate the causal impact of the prominent <i>Cariou v. Prince</i> U.S. higher court decision on intermediary trade and the availability of artworks on sale in the Appropriation Art. As an exogenous shock, this decision changed the perceived litigation risk for market intermediaries around what constitutes fair use. Following the court decision, we find a temporary decline in the total number of global auctions in the Appropriation Art, a lower sales probability of these artworks, and a relocation of related auctions to non-U.S. houses.</p>","PeriodicalId":47190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Economics","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-42"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10900993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intermediary liability and trade in follow-on innovation.\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Cuntz, Matthias Sahli\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10824-023-09470-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Intellectual property rights have changed the market value and direction of artistic innovation throughout art history, in particular when new creations built on the art of predecessors. In this paper, we test how changes in legal frameworks and litigation risks affected market value and commercial trade around artistic reuses in the figurative arts and the 'Appropriation Art' movement in particular. Appropriation artists borrow images from different sources and incorporate them into new, derivative works of art. By doing so, they risk infringing copyright but also put auction trade and artwork availability at litigation risk as liability can extend to market intermediaries, such as auction houses, museums, or galleries. Using a differences-in-differences model and large-scale online data, we investigate the causal impact of the prominent <i>Cariou v. Prince</i> U.S. higher court decision on intermediary trade and the availability of artworks on sale in the Appropriation Art. As an exogenous shock, this decision changed the perceived litigation risk for market intermediaries around what constitutes fair use. Following the court decision, we find a temporary decline in the total number of global auctions in the Appropriation Art, a lower sales probability of these artworks, and a relocation of related auctions to non-U.S. houses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47190,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cultural Economics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"1-42\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10900993/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cultural Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-023-09470-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/2/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-023-09470-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在整个艺术史上,知识产权改变了艺术创新的市场价值和方向,尤其是当新的创作建立在前人艺术的基础上时。在本文中,我们检验了法律框架和诉讼风险的变化如何影响了具象艺术,尤其是 "挪用艺术 "运动中艺术再利用的市场价值和商业贸易。挪用艺术家从不同来源借用图像,并将其融入新的衍生艺术作品中。他们这样做不仅有可能侵犯版权,还可能使拍卖交易和艺术品供应面临诉讼风险,因为责任可能延伸到拍卖行、博物馆或画廊等市场中介。我们利用差分模型和大规模在线数据,研究了著名的 Cariou 诉 Prince 案中美国高等法院的判决对中介交易和《挪用艺术》中艺术品销售的因果影响。作为一种外生冲击,该判决改变了市场中介围绕合理使用的认知诉讼风险。在法院判决之后,我们发现 "挪用艺术品 "的全球拍卖总量暂时下降,这些艺术品的销售概率降低,相关拍卖也转移到了非美国拍卖行。
Intermediary liability and trade in follow-on innovation.
Intellectual property rights have changed the market value and direction of artistic innovation throughout art history, in particular when new creations built on the art of predecessors. In this paper, we test how changes in legal frameworks and litigation risks affected market value and commercial trade around artistic reuses in the figurative arts and the 'Appropriation Art' movement in particular. Appropriation artists borrow images from different sources and incorporate them into new, derivative works of art. By doing so, they risk infringing copyright but also put auction trade and artwork availability at litigation risk as liability can extend to market intermediaries, such as auction houses, museums, or galleries. Using a differences-in-differences model and large-scale online data, we investigate the causal impact of the prominent Cariou v. Prince U.S. higher court decision on intermediary trade and the availability of artworks on sale in the Appropriation Art. As an exogenous shock, this decision changed the perceived litigation risk for market intermediaries around what constitutes fair use. Following the court decision, we find a temporary decline in the total number of global auctions in the Appropriation Art, a lower sales probability of these artworks, and a relocation of related auctions to non-U.S. houses.
期刊介绍:
Cultural economics is the application of economic analysis to all of the creative and performing arts, the heritage and cultural industries, whether publicly or privately owned. It is concerned with the economic organization of the cultural sector and with the behavior of producers, consumers and governments in that sector. The subject includes a range of approaches, mainstream and radical, neoclassical, welfare economics, public policy and institutional economics. The editors and editorial board of the Journal of Cultural Economics seek to attract the attention of the economics profession to this branch of economics, as well as those in related disciplines and arts practitioners with an interest in economic issues. The Journal of Cultural Economics publishes original papers that deal with the theoretical development of cultural economics as a subject, the application of economic analysis and econometrics to the field of culture, and with the economic aspects of cultural policy. Besides full-length papers, short papers and book reviews are also published.Officially cited as: J Cult Econ