about how U.S. laws regulate the rights of the artist to have sold the product, wrote in the Wall Street Journal Daniel Grant (Daniel Grant), author of "Being an artist - this is business", illustrating his concern occurring examples of jurisprudence.

• DAVID Escalon Holocaust Memorial. 1994
  initial appearance. Source: online.wsj.com

When the Jewish Federation of Greater Harrisburg (Pennsylvania) in 1993 to decide on who will be the author of the monument to the Holocaust, the choice naturally fell on a Jewish sculptor David Escalona (David Ascalon) from New Jersey. Escalon knew firsthand the horrors of the Nazi atrocities: the Nazis killed his grandparents and other family members. His proposed monument was a simple and symbolic: out of the ground, which is a Star of David, raised several pillars shiny stainless steel, symbolizing the indomitable Jewish people, and around them on the upward spiral curls rough rusty barbed wire, which is identified with fascism. For sculpture height of about 4.5 meters, hoisted in the park on the banks of the Susquehanna River in 1994, Escalon received 35 thousand dollars.

10 years later, when the required restoration of the monument (barbed wire over Corroded ), the author volunteered to conduct it, asking only about the subsequent recovery of the costs incurred.

Imagine his surprise when he was refused. Instead, in 2006 the Department of Parks and Recreation Harrisburg referred the case to another restorer, who just killed the original plan of gradually stainless barbed wire, making a new stainless steel. On the pedestal was knocked down Escalona name and the name of the "new" author - a man who carried out the restoration. Lawyer of the Jewish Federation, said Escalona, that he no longer is the author of the monument. Outraged sculptor sued for moral damages to the Parks Department, the Jewish Federation and restorer.

• DAVID Escalon
  Holocaust Memorial after restoration. Fragment
  Source: online.wsj.com

in U.S. law protects the author's artwork Rights Act figures of Fine Arts (VARA), made in 1990 as an amendment to the Code of the copyright of the United States. According VARA, the owners of "recognized" works of art is forbidden to destroy or alter them without the consent of the author, because such unauthorized alterations could harm the reputation of the artist. By law, the author has the right to regain the job when the owner is going to change it, or renounce the rights to it, if it is altered. VARA a work of fine art understands paintings, sculptures, drawings, photographic prints limited edition (200 copies).

However, since the adoption of VARA new questions. Does the author the right to know the exact spot where his statue will be installed? Can the authors claim that their products, no matter what kind they are, properly cared for? If the restoration was imminent, but the author is dissatisfied with how it did, whether he could argue that the work was "destroyed" - and implies a restoration carried out to save the work, its "destruction"? Replacement of rusted metal from which the wire was made Escalona, more durable steel extended the life of the monument, but came into conflict with the intention of the authors, using different materials precisely to emphasize the contrast between fascism and its victims.

Yet few seem to ensure that owners of works of art deliberately doing their damage. However, precedent is not the only monument of Escalona.

lawyer Brooke Oliver (Brooke Oliver), which often protects the rights of artists in court (mostly cases where the building owner wants to remove the murals) notes: "the courts is difficult to determine what protects the law, because it is not clear that a work of art" - such as in Switzerland's Christoph Büchel installation (Christoph Buchel) against the Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art. Museum Büchel allocated funds to establish a large-scale installation "Polygon Democracy" and has agreed to acquire selected author for this subject, including a cinema, a caravan, a carousel, voting booths, the police car, bus and oil tanker. This list, as it turned out, was not final and does from time to time there were new positions. When the money ran out at the museum, Büchel refused to finish "Polygon" and sued the Massachusetts Museum in order to forbid him to stand or remove the installation. Initially the claim was rejected by Büchel with the wording of the Law on the Rights of the leaders of Fine Arts does not apply to unfinished work. Installation of the museum decided to close yet. And in January 2010, Büchel addressed with a new suit, a decision on that yet.

In the early 1990's sculptor Audrey Flack (Audrey Flack) booked for the Queens (New York), a monument to Queen Catherine Braganskoy. The project was suspended when the sculptor has produced some of the cast bronze details and a clay mold of the head height of 10 meters. A few years mold and parts remained in the open air near the foundry, and suffered greatly. However, by the end of the 1990 non-profit organization, began the project, agreed to their financial problems and is intended to complete a monument, inviting finish the monument itself is not the artist, and one of her assistants. Ms. Flack has filed a lawsuit to the customer. The matter was resolved without a trial in favor of the author. The court agreed to admit a clay mold and manufactured parts in works of art to be protected.

author comes to a paradoxical conclusion. Rights Act figures of Fine Arts (VARA) was established primarily to ensure that future buyers know: They will not be able to alter purchased the product at its discretion - otherwise they risk prosecution. However, twenty years of this law designed to protect authors, turned so that the latter are increasingly forced to sign contracts for their complete renunciation of the rights to their creations.

material was prepared by Mary Onuchina, AI

Sources: online.wsj.com , artinvestment.ru