30 November 2018 held an intense exchange of views between a representative of UPRAVAS and art dealers, sellers of art, artists, authors, and books about the work of artists. Formulated hard. Many in fact already managed to SIP down and out

• 

the event was hosted by the head of the Confederation of antique and art-дилеров Vasily Bychkov. In the hall were angry people. And it was with something. Prior to this, a number of museums, made the illustrated catalogs of its exhibitions, have received "letters of happiness" associated with copyright infringement. Moscow auctions has been invited to the Prosecutor's request UPRAVI with the requirement to provide contracts with customers. Journalists who dared to write about the modern artists, also received a claim for the use of images of their paintings. Who-то of museums has passed the first trials. Who-то overlaid codes instead of having to do their job. And who is-то away from sin, and completely stopped any projects associated with the potentially dangerous legacy of artists.

the Work arose. Sure, there was a settlement.

When it became hot, going to think, how to live. In fact, the professionals met before, only there was no one to oppose. The deputies, officials and other people who know as us to live and do business, such discussions do not come. But this time it was-настоящему. UPRAVIT delegated to a meeting of their representative — Alexei Kostochkina.

Below the — retelling of the positions of the participants of the conversation (not verbatim quotes, but only the essence from memory).

the Museum Schuseva: did an exhibition of Alexander Deineka, team: from museums and private collections. It has published a catalogue with images. They have received considerable expense from UPRAVA, poorly justified from the point of view of numbers. Assessment of the situation — "threats and blackmail".

Alex Kostochkin, UPRAVA: We carry out norm of the Civil code. Museum with paintings attracted people to the show, earns, and therefore, must pay contributions. The same Tretyakov gallery and the Garage come to us, "cleanse" the copyright. They have a no questions produce legitimate printed and souvenir products (for example, to the same exhibition Larionov). Rates on exclusive rights is taken from the practice of RAO (Russian authors society). They are low, much lower than in the West. The image on the cover is 3 500 rubles.

Dmitry Paykin, the Museum of the Institute of Russian realist art: the Principle of RAO — to take deductions from revenue. How much to sell concert tickets, with the amount paid. The concert was held — revenue is clear. And what about directories? Print them first and then sell another 10 years. How to pay with what hasn't sold.

UPRAVI: the Problem is that we have no feedback from the market. Here we are writing someone-то that the object was not cleared, and we are not responsible. Rate of 10 000 per image is needed in order to attract attention to himself.

Questions from the audience: the Interests of any of the authors you represent? Where's that list of names?

UPRAVI: We represent the interests of artists around the world, because we have signed agreements with other copyright societies. Full list to post on the site. Please contact us by email, we will reply. Or use the search bar on our website. If the artist of that name is not found, it means that is not guarded.Why is there no list of protected Russian artists? Legally we represent all artists of RAO, the list is on the site RAO. Understand the claim that there is a list of names, will bring to the attention of management.

Gregory levy, the international Confederation of antique and art-дилеров: I know that a number of organizers of exhibitions no longer work with artists who have died after 1948 (70 years after death had passed).

In many countries there is a reasonable bottom threshold of cost of works, subject to payment on the right route. For example, if 300 euros, then nothing is charged. It is reasonable. But we have no such. DACS (Design and Artists Copyright Society — Copyright society of artists and designers, UK, which deals with the protection of copyright of artists. — Approx. V. B.) also, as you collect for all artists. But, if you do not find the right holder, after three years, return the money to those from whom took. And UPRAVIT after three years, if you can't find someone to pay, takes the money himself for statutory activities. Publish the list of artists! And let's change the stakes!

Alexander Kiselev, Vice-президент MKAAD for exhibition projects: we Have broken three of the exhibition project. From-за you we do not take the exhibition of works by artists who died after 1948. You hinder us to do a charity exhibition. What do I do with the other artists in the future: to take or not to take to exhibitions?

UPERVIS: Write to us by email.

Maria Naymushin, Creative Union of Artists of Russia: In our Union is the largest number of holders: 15 000 artists and 50,000 affiliated members (widows, heirs, etc.) the idea is that UPRAVA works for us. Artists live in poverty, and never dreamed of the representatives of the antique community. The artists hope that what-то payments will accrue to their grandchildren.

But we are grateful to all who publish our pictures. And no need to disturb them. This was when UPRAVIT billed for the directory of the NCCA, which was happy to get all the artists. They are all scared.

Now in UPRAVIT changed direction, and began scandals. Chapter TSHR Konstantin Khudyakov call art, which came claims from UPRAVA. Imagine when she calls the doctor and asks, "are you us let loose?". Or when the journalist Olesya Stroeva and "Strata" after the publication about the artists receives from UPRAVIT terrible paper? To us, this approach is not close!

Critics to cite artists and publish their picture without their permission. Because nobody ever gives you permission to abuse, and society has the right to criticize.

Konstantin Khudyakov asked me to convey that he believes UPRAVIT "harmful and destructive" organisation. And wants to terminate the contract, not called and threatened those involved in the promotion of the arts. If you come to the Museum, say in a quiet voice. Then you will begin to understand. The armor need to be left at the door. For us if you are deprived of sleep researchers, it is not necessary to protect our rights.

Nadezhda Stepanova, Director of IRRI: We have received "the happiness letter" for the exhibition catalog Alexander Labasa, despite the fact that the successor copyright Olga Labas were against it, with it we had a fullunderstanding.

UPRAVI: Artists and heirs to forgotten to inform us that giving someone-то resolution. Although we warn and ask in advance. Labas signed a contract with us, but the time has not informed us of your arrangements. At IRRI question has long been removed. Khudyakov, too, and he agreed to start claims work.

Nadezhda Stepanova, IRRI: Lenin library in IRRI posters for publication. As they have threatened UPRAVA. Now they don't give anything to anyone. As RGALI. The work is paralyzed.

Mikhail Perchenko, Advisor to the Minister of culture: do you Know why closed RAO? They had a 16 % real contracts. The rest is stolen. Who are you working with the Ministry of culture? At least Dmitry Lucianin (Department of control over the circulation and preservation of cultural values) knows nothing about it.

Denis Lukashin, CEO UPRAVO to 2010: RAO, which was the opponent UPRAVA, was denied accreditation because they were "scaring business" (concert market, the production of a CD, etc.). UPRAVIT should not be a fiscal organization. There are different situations. For example, the lots declared sold at auction, but in fact was not paid. How to be in this situation? Or the person bought the painting for some money, and sell had cheaper. He's already got a loss, but he still has to pay royalties to authors. UPRAVA, you should find a lot of compromises.

Alexander Kiselev, MKAAD, gallerist: As PI on simplified taxation system I by law to pay 6 % of turnover and all. Q: where do I "stick" your 5 %? I have double taxation. I'm so not obliged to pay. Let's change the law.

Question from the audience: what you need from auctions to give you the address of registration and complete information about the sellers?

UPRAVI: We do not need information about the sellers. The auction house to pay for it myself to include a separate item in the contract. As it has done one well-known auction.

Nikolai Zaichenko, the lawyer: UPRAVIT requires more than just fines, and the seizure and destruction of copies of publications for which there is a claim. Offer to burn books?

UPRAVI: No, we just offer to come to us.

Olga Ryzhova, legal adviser of the exhibition company: If we make the catalogue of the exhibition, what is the matching algorithm with you? What analysis we should conduct in order not to fall under sanctions? To write to you? What are the terms of consideration?

UPRAVI:, We answer e-mails from two hours to two days. Yes, our reply mail may be used as evidence in court.

Calves: From UPRAVIT position on the work — and how to coordinate. In conclusion, I want to read out a prepared text of the resolution on the results of our event.

the Draft resolution is published below. Briefly, the gist of it is that all the participants of the open discussion agreed with the need for royalties to artists and heirs (actually not all. — Approx. V. B.) But disagree with the system and procedure for collecting these payments. Still.

In fact, the history of our market, but for the whole country is quite natural. We watched under the task of collecting funds, creating scope of work, under the guise of plausible goals are written in the law or that-то equivalent. A discussion with the professional community (whichfor him to continue to live) is not carried out. Obviously that noise was not. And if you ask an opinion, only for the species: all the reasons specialists still ignored. Obvious negative consequences for the investment climate is also not taken into account. In the end, all agreed, signed and comes into effect: with a bunch of holes in the cheese. Comply with people too bad to understand how works of art-бизнес. After volunteering does not work (and could not: a coherent mechanism is not) to take the course repression — fines, lawsuits, public Prosecutor's check. Result — scandal, anger, emotions. In the end, satisfied no one. As here now. State museums go to court, the organizers of the exhibitions and sit surrounded by lawyers, auctions are reshaping the business, the Ministry of culture carries another reputational costs. All evil. And even artists (as well it's all for their sake) is finally beginning-то-то walk. But only later.

Alas, completely back off, to do everything in mind hopeless. There is that chance of decreasing the negative effects of legislative innovations, "customizing" system-level regulations: to simplify, to Refine, to remove the frankly absurd requirements. However any development of the national market of art speech still there. In the best case, this "setup" will allow as-то participants to hold. Yeah, looks like another legal diversion, but do you still wonder?

Vladimir Bogdanov, AI

the Draft resolution on the results of the discussion "Copyright and the right route. Current issues and problems of application"

on 30 November 2018 hosted an open discussion entitled "Copyright and the right route. Current issues and problems of application". The event was attended by publishers, collectors, museums, artists, organizers of exhibitions and fairs, lawyers, representatives of authors ' societies, the owners of art galleries.

Experts have expressed concern about the current situation with the collection of royalties in the field of art. The precedents, in case of escalation in usual practice, will lead to the rejection of any public activities related to the artists of the XX–XXI centuries, including the organization of exhibitions, publication of albums and catalogs, research work, and also deals with these subjects in the public field. This, in turn, will lead to undeserved oblivion of the art of this period.

Expressing the common interest in the study and popularization of the national cultural heritage, the participants consider it necessary to ensure implementation of the following provisions:

— All participants agree with the need for royalties to artists and heirs. But the system of collecting these contributions should be clear, transparent and fair;

— Need to ensure that the interest of copyright societies in the search of heirs and their rights. Royalties and payments on the right route should be levied only if the heirs are found, their rights are reserved and copyright society signed a contract with these heirs to represent them@the semicolon

— taking into account that the production of exhibitions and the work on catalogues and albums —a long and expensive process, pursuing not only commercial but educational and scientific objectives, should ensure transparent, clear, unambiguous system of charging or exemption from payments;

— Based on the need to develop cooperation between museums and private collectors with the ability to use objects from private collections in research and educational activities, should consider the possibility of vesting of all items that fall in the Museum exhibition, the same legal status from the point of view of royalties to the subjects of Museum Fund of the Russian Federation;

— Given that the state museums are publishing the items in the electronic catalog of Museum Fund of the Russian Federation and this work is part of the state task for the implementation of which museums receive public subsidy, we must understand that in the event of claims of rights holders, in the form that was already stated in several letters of Uprovisa, this activity will completely paralyzed;

— In the case of legal justification and verification of the relevant authority, UPRAVA should consider presenting all the facts falling under the above contract, the initial requirements for payment without the imposition of penalties regardless of the period of limitation;

— participants of the art market need accessible and clear information: on the website UPRAVIT must be placed a detailed roster of authors, whose interests the organization represents in part the copyright and droit;

— Given that auction and gallery activities involve a small staff, the expansion of which leads to the market operator to serious business costs, should provide the minimum amount of resale when the collection of royalties is impractical because the costs of collection (paperwork etc.) exceeds the amount of deductions. The proposed minimum amount is 15-20 thousand rubles. Russia;

— Given the current situation in the art market, when the product in the secondary market are sold at a lower price than they were purchased before or with a small margin, it is necessary to consider a return to Government Decision No. 285 of 19. 04. 2008, which considers the application of 1293 CC and result in compliance with the RF Law on copyright and related rights (article 17, paragraph 2: it provides that "in every case of public resale of visual art works using art salon, shop and so on, at a price exceeding previous not less than 20 %, the author is entitled to receive from the seller of compensation in the amount of 5% of the resale price (droit)";

— When making a claim, UPRAVA don't have to talk about the destruction of the circulation and other actions of this kind without the consent of the author or copyright holder of the relevant measures.

In General, the participants of the artistic process I believe that the mechanism of collecting royalties, including, the right route should exist to protect the interests of artists and their heirs. All parties to the process are willing to have these interests to take into account. All parties benefit from the existence of the operator, which effectively ensured the realization of the rights of authors and heirs because it is a huge job.

In its current form, it is obvious that this process is in conflict with the interests of authors and the heirs, becoming an obstacle for scientific, research, publishing, educational activities, and the limiting factor in the development of the national art market. This directly affects the financial component of royalties including. The participants of the artistic process is ready for active work, for example, in the composition of the relevant working group, to normalize the process.