Table Of ContentStudies in Art, Heritage, Law and the Market 7
Anna Bolz
A Regulatory
Framework
for the Art
Market?
Authenticity, Forgeries and the Role
of Art Experts
Studies in Art, Heritage, Law and the Market
Volume 7
SeriesEditors
Rachel Pownall, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University,
Maastricht,TheNetherlands
AnaQuintelaRibeiroNevesRamalho,FacultyofLaw,MaastrichtUniversity,
Maastricht,TheNetherlands
ChristophRausch,FacultyofScienceandEngineering,MaastrichtUniversity,
Maastricht,TheNetherlands
HildegardSchneider,FacultyofLaw,MaastrichtUniversity,Maastricht,The
Netherlands
VivianvanSaaze,FacultyofArtsandSocialSciences,MaastrichtUniversity,
Maastricht,TheNetherlands
RenéevandeVall,FacultyofArtsandSocialSciences,MaastrichtUniversity,
Maastricht,TheNetherlands
LarsvanVliet,FacultyofLaw,MaastrichtUniversity,Maastricht,TheNetherlands
DonnaYates ,FacultyofLaw,MaastrichtUniversity,Maastricht,The
Netherlands
AdvisoryEditors
BertDemarsin,KULeuven,Leuven,Belgium
HesterC.Dibbits,DepartmentofHistory,ErasmusUniversityRotterdam,
Rotterdam,TheNetherlands
PattyGerstenblith,DePaulUniversity,Chicago,IL,USA
SusanLegêne,VUAmsterdam,Amsterdam,TheNetherlands
PeggyLevitt,DepartmentofSociology,WellesleyCollege,Wellesley,MA,USA
SimonMackenzie,FacultyofHumanitiesandSocialSciences,VictoriaUniversity
ofWellington,Wellington,NewZealand
OlavJ.M.Velthuis,FacultyofSocial&BehaviouralSciences,Universityof
Amsterdam,Amsterdam,TheNetherlands
AndreaWallace,LawSchool,UniversityofExeter,Exeter,UK
MatthiasWeller,DepartmentofLaw,UniversityofBonn,Bonn,Germany
ThebookseriesStudiesinArt,Heritage,LawandtheMarketprovidesaninterna-
tionalandinterdisciplinaryforumforvolumesthat
(cid:129) investigatelegal,economic,andpolicydevelopmentsrelatedtoarts,heritage,and
intellectualproperty;
(cid:129) criticallyassesshowandforwhomartandheritagevaluescomeabout;
(cid:129) promote novel forms of user engagement, participatory presentations, and digi-
talizationofartsandheritage;
(cid:129) examine theprocessesthattransformcultural objectsandpracticesintoartsand
heritage;and
(cid:129) highlightnewapproachesinpreservationandconservationscience.
Theseriesaddressesaneedforresearchandpracticeinthefieldsofart,culture,
conservation,andheritageincludingafocusonlegalandeconomicaspects.Itdeals
withcomplexissuessuchasquestionsofauthenticityandprovenance;forgeryand
falsification;theillicittrade,restitution,andreturnofculturalobjects;thechanging
rolesofmuseums;therolesofexpertsandexpertise;andtheethicsoftheartmarket.
Anna Bolz
A Regulatory Framework
for the Art Market?
Authenticity, Forgeries and the Role
of Art Experts
AnnaBolz
FacultyofLaw
MaastrichtUniversity
Maastricht,TheNetherlands
ISSN2524-7425 ISSN2524-7433 (electronic)
StudiesinArt,Heritage,LawandtheMarket
ISBN978-3-031-18742-1 ISBN978-3-031-18743-8 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18743-8
©TheEditor(s)(ifapplicable)andTheAuthor(s),underexclusivelicensetoSpringerNatureSwitzerland
AG2023
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsaresolelyandexclusivelylicensedbythePublisher,whether
thewholeorpartofthematerialisconcerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseof
illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by
similarordissimilarmethodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,servicemarks,etc.inthispublication
doesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfromtherelevant
protectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
The publisher, the authors, and the editorsare safeto assume that the adviceand informationin this
bookarebelievedtobetrueandaccurateatthedateofpublication.Neitherthepublishernortheauthorsor
theeditorsgiveawarranty,expressedorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinorforany
errorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.Thepublisherremainsneutralwithregardtojurisdictional
claimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations.
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbytheregisteredcompanySpringerNatureSwitzerlandAG
Theregisteredcompanyaddressis:Gewerbestrasse11,6330Cham,Switzerland
Preface
This book addresses several fascinating questions relating to connoisseurship,
authentication, and the legal implications that arise when an artwork’s authenticity
ischallenged.Providinginsightsintoboththepracticalandthephilosophicalaspects
ofauthentication,theaimistoconnecttheseissuestothelegalcomplicationswhich
caninhibittheexpressionofexpertopinionandfurther,toenhancetheunderstand-
ingofhowthechallengesshouldbeweighedinpractice,incourtsoflawandinour
minds.
The notion of authenticity has always commanded the attention of art market
participantsandthegeneralart-mindedpublicalike,andartforgeryisoftenconsid-
ered the world’s most glamourous crime, characterised by true-crime stories. In a
market-driven world, where a No rather than a Yes on authenticity can mean a
differenceofmillionsofdollars,thefocusisontheconnoisseurshipofartexpertsto
provide definitive judgements on authenticity. Yet, standardised processes do not
exist. This will be discussed amidst the fact that the art market has been subject to
fundamentalstructuralchanges.Alongsidecenturies-oldwaysofdoingbusinessand
acontinuedrelianceontrustandreputation,theartmarketwitnessestheemergence
of new consumers, participants, and business models. It will be advocated that by
introducingcommonprotocolsamongmarketparticipantsinmattersofauthentica-
tion,qualityofopinion-makingcanbesafeguarded,andlegaldisputesminimised—
anapproachthatissupportedbycurrentdevelopmentsandinitiatives.
This book includes findings by economists, sociologists, art historians, and
lawyers.However,itisnotonlyofinterestforacademics,butforeveryoneinterested
inquestionsofauthenticity,forgery,andconnoisseurship.Inthesamespirit,itisa
primaryaimofthisbooktoadvocatebestpracticesintheartmarketandtostressthe
importanceofcooperationamongalldisciplineshavingastakeinitsoperation.
Maastricht,TheNetherlands AnnaBolz
v
Acknowledgements
ThisbookistheresultofmyPh.D.ResearchatMaastrichtUniversity.Iwouldliketo
expressmyenormousgratitudetomentors,colleagues,friends,andmyfamilywho
supportedmeduringthistime.
Firstandforemost,IamverymuchindebtedtomyPh.D.supervisorsHildegard
SchneiderandRenédeGroot.Iamverygratefulfortheircontinuousenthusiasmfor
the subject matter of my research, their valuable guidance, and their hospitality
throughoutthisproject.Hildegard,forhercontinuedsupportnotonlyduringmyPh.
D. research, but already during the Bachelor MaRBLe project on Art & Law and
René, for his time and patience with thoroughly proofreading my drafts, while
sharing his passion for flowers and office supplies. I am similarly indebted to the
members of the assessment committee: Marta Partegás, Anne Mie Draye, Bert
Demarsin,JoopdeJong,andLarsvanVliet.
I also wish to thank my friends and family, and especially my parents for their
loveandsupport.ItishardtoexpressthegratitudeIfeelforallthepossibilitiesand
chancesIwasgivenandenabledtopursue.Itwouldhavebeenmuchmoredifficult,
ifnotimpossible,toproducethisworkwithouttheirencouragement.
vii
Contents
1 SettingtheScene:ApproachandMethodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 TheUnregulatedNatureoftheArtMarket. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 TheConceptsofTrustandConfidentialityinArt
Transactions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.2 TheImpactofDigitisationandTechnology. . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1.3 AuthenticationandAttribution:TheUniqueRoleofArt
Experts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2 CurrentDiscussionsAboutRegulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.2.1 RecentInitiativesofSelf-RegulatoryMeasures. . . . . . . . . 14
1.3 TheResearchTaskEmergingfromRecentDevelopments. . . . . . . 15
1.4 MethodologyandDelimitation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.5 StructureoftheAnalysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2 PeculiaritiesoftheArtMarket. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.1 Introduction:TheArtMarket’sStructureandItsParticipants. . . . . 23
2.1.1 FactsandFigures. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.1.2 ANewEraofValuationandPrices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.1.3 ANewPhenomenon:NFTsandtheTokenisationofArt. . 31
2.2 MajorPlayersintheArtMarket. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2.2.1 Collectors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
2.2.2 ArtAdvisorsandWealthManagers. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 47
2.2.3 AuctionHouses:GuaranteesandThird-Party
Arrangements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.2.4 Galleries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2.2.5 Museums. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
2.2.6 PracticesofDealersasIllustratedbyCases. . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.2.7 InterimConclusionfromCaseStudies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
2.3 Valuation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
2.4 Value,MoneyandPriceMechanisms:TheLackofaGeneral
PricingMethodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
ix
x Contents
2.4.1 TheThreatofPriceManipulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
2.4.2 TheRoleofthePanamaPapers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
2.5 ArtasaFinancialAsset. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
2.5.1 RisksandThreats. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
2.5.2 TheRoleofArtIndices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
2.5.3 Art-SecuredLending:WhenArtBecomesCollateral. . . . . 94
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
3 Fraud,ForgeryandAuthentication. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 107
3.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.2 LessonsfromthePast:AnOverviewofSomeoftheMost
ImportantForgeryCasesinArtHistory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
3.2.1 HanvanMeegeren. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 110
3.2.2 TomKeating. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
3.2.3 EricHebborn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
3.2.4 ElmyrdeHory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
3.2.5 GeertJanJansen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
3.2.6 ElySakhai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
3.2.7 JohnMyatt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
3.2.8 InterimConclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
3.3 NoEndinSight:TheMostRecentForgeryCases. . . .. . . . . . . .. 123
3.3.1 WolfgangBeltracchi:TheWorld’sMostFamousArt
Forger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
3.3.2 TheClosureofKnoedlerGallery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
3.3.3 Sotheby’sandtheOldMastersScandal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
3.3.4 TheRussianAvant-GardeasaParticularVictim
ofFraud. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
3.3.5 InterimConclusion:RedFlagsandConsequences
oftheScandals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
3.4 Authentication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
3.4.1 TheImportanceofAuthenticityfortheArtMarket. . . . . . 156
3.4.2 TheGeneralConceptsofAuthenticityandForgery. . . . . . 157
3.4.3 AuthenticityandForgery:ABriefOverview
ofHistoricalDevelopments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
3.4.4 MethodsofAuthentication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
3.5 TheCentralRoleofArtExperts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
3.5.1 ShortcomingsofExpertOpinion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
3.5.2 ErroneousAuthenticationandAttribution:Threatsof
Liability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
3.5.3 SafeguardingAgainsttheRiskofLitigation:Possible
DefencesandRemedies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
3.5.4 InterimConclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216
3.6 AuthenticationBoards.. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. 219
3.6.1 CaseStudies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
3.6.2 InterimConclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
Contents xi
3.6.3 FutureFrameworks:ApplyingAntitrustAspectsof
CertificationandStandardsSettingtoAuthentication. . . . . 230
3.6.4 MayorGalleryv.TheAgnesMartinCatalogueRaisonné
LLC:ASighofReliefforAuthenticationCommittees?. . . 231
3.7 TheCatalogueRaisonné. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
3.7.1 LiabilityintheContextofCataloguesRaisonnés. . . . . . . . 235
3.8 CanAuthenticityBeEstablishedinCourtrooms?. . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
3.9 TowardsIncreasedTransparencyandRegulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
4 Remedies:RegulationandNewInitiatives. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . 255
4.1 FuturePerspectives:ReformandIncreasedRegulation. . . . . . . . . 255
4.2 TheStatusQuooftheArtMarket:InefficiencyasPrevalent
BusinessCulture.. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. 257
4.2.1 PricesandValuation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
4.2.2 AuthenticationandtheLaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
4.2.3 WhyDoesInefficiencyPersist?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
4.3 Regulation:AnAdequateRemedy?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
4.3.1 CurrentRegulatorySchemesintheUSArtMarket. . . . . . 267
4.3.2 RegulationoftheAustralianAboriginalArtMarket. . . . . . 269
4.3.3 Self-RegulatoryMeasuresInsteadofExternal
Regulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
4.4 AssessmentofRecentInitiatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
4.4.1 TheBaselArtTradeGuidelines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
4.4.2 TheResponsibleArtMarketInitiative:ArtTransaction
DueDiligenceToolkit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
4.4.3 AuthenticationinArt:RecommendationsforValid
WrittenExpertOpinion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
4.5 TheChangingRoleofScienceandTechnology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
4.5.1 NewTechniquesandApproaches. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
4.6 OtherRemediesI:ArtTitleInsurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
4.7 OtherRemediesII:ContractualConsiderations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
4.7.1 RegulatingDealers’Position. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
4.8 FinalRemedy:AlternativeDisputeSettlement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
4.8.1 Mediation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
4.8.2 Arbitration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
4.8.3 AiA/NAICourtofArbitrationforArt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
4.8.4 ExpertDetermination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
4.8.5 InterimConclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
5 ConclusionsandRecommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
5.1 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
5.1.1 MainFindingsfromthePreviousChapters. . . . . . . . . . . . 299
5.2 ProposalsforReform. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
5.2.1 ExpertsandAuthenticationBoards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
5.2.2 UmbrellaOrganisations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
