Olivia Rybak-Karkosz
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 1/2023 (9), 2023, pp. 19 - 36
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.23.003.18115NFTs in museums – challenges and persuasion in the eye of an article 2 of Act on Museums
This paper aims to analyse challenges and perspectives related to NFTs that Polish museums would need to consider regarding their activities, as described in art. 2 of the Act on Museums of 21 November 1996. These activities include collecting, maintaining, securing, and exhibiting artwork as well as conducting educational and research activities. Therefore, one must con-sider whether NFTs are a long-term opportunity for museums to fulfill their goals and activities or a temporary solution providing financial aid during the post-pandemic crisis. In this paper, the author describes the importance of NFTs for the art world and quotes examples of museums that already collect and exhibit NFTs or organise events about them. The paper also includes the results of a survey conducted among Polish museum professionals to obtain their opinions on this matter.
Olivia Rybak-Karkosz
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 1/2020 (6), 2020, pp. 83 - 96
https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.005.12389The aim of this paper is to present a historic view on artists’ rights in printmaking before the advent of modern copyright protections. Previously, privilege was the main form of legal protection. In this paper, matters such as the aim and procedure of protection are described as well as the subjects entitled to receive and release this protection and its extent. It concerns the main countries in Europe specializing in printmaking during the Old Masters’ period of activity, which was between the 16th and 18th centuries. The last section of the article focuses on The Engraving Copyright Act 1734, an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain which is stated to be a prototype of modern copyright and its applicability to the historical context.
Olivia Rybak-Karkosz
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 1/2022 (8), 2022, pp. 165 - 167
Olivia Rybak-Karkosz
Opuscula Musealia, Volume 28, Volume 28 (2021), pp. 77 - 89
https://doi.org/10.4467/20843852.OM.21.004.15505The study analyses dishonest activities related to the types of copies of artistic prints, which are undertaken by participants of the art market. In the introduction, legal regulations concerning counterfeiting of artistic prints were discussed. Appropriate legal qualification of an act is important in the context of assigning criminal responsibility and the level of threat of punishment. As a rule, if an object is a historical monument within the meaning of the Act on the protection of historical monuments, the provisions of art. 109a are applied, which penalises counterfeiting or falsifying the historical monument in order to use it in the trade of historical monuments. Other cases are governed by art. 286 §1 of the Penal Code, which penalises fraud. However, not all actions undertaken by dishonest bidders and concerning the disposal of a plate or interference with the composition placed on it constitute forgery. Some of them constitute fraud, others, for example, deliberate lowering of the print run in order to artificially increase the demand for a given object. The article then lists the types of copies and briefly describes them. These include: copies made by the printmaker or a printmaking workshop working with the printmaker, copies with an original purpose other than commercial, posthumous copies, and copies from retouched plates, corrected or altered to some extent. The type of the copy is one of the factors determining the collector’s value of artistic prints. The last part of the study was devoted to state alteration, which is one of the ways of counterfeiting artistic prints. Condition alteration may be the effect of interference in the original plate or the copy itself. The final effect of the procedure is the change of the copy or the plate, which results in the adoption of a different state. Final conclusions are included at the end.