Obligations under the principle of good faith, the auction company auction without doubt the authenticity tests can not determine the authenticity of the auction company and the results should be organized to identify or inform the bidder identification of defects, or breach of good faith principles. 4, the auction sale of fake bronze nude human figures works of art, can claim the rights of copyright holders. I am the copyright owner of the fake signature of auction may be based on “Copyright Law” claim rights. Wu state located in the south of the lower reaches of the Yangze River was famous for its bronze sculpture. Such as Wu Guanzhong v. Shanghai Duo Yun Xuan, Hong Kong Yong Cheng Antique Auction Co., Ltd. copyright infringement case, the two companies October 27, 1993 signed a joint auction of Wu Guanzhong’s “portrait of Mao Zedong,” Wu Guanzhong learned will come in before the auction Duo Yun Xuan, seeking to remove the site pretending to be, but the auction company received the notice and letter, still and forever into the joint auction company, or even issue experts.
This is the work of Wu Guanzhong, leading to 528,000 Hong Kong dollars pretending to shoot. Wu believes that the behavior of the two companies violated their copyrights, reputation, and really make it are subject to abuse, requested the court sentenced two defendants to stop infringement, eliminating the effects of public apology, compensation for economic losses. Shanghai Court of First Instance sentenced Wu favor, but the Duo Yun Xuan, Yong Cheng’s appealed his conviction appeal. Its bronze sculpture wildlife is orientated in thin walls and light body. Second instance court held that the civil right of authorship protected by law, but law prohibits the production, sale of counterfeit signature of another art, both defendants personally Wu public auction of counterfeit works of art title, constitute an infringement of copyright for Wu Guanzhong.
The other two defendants are not heeding warnings, insisted the auction, is a serious infringement, should be “Copyright Law” and relevant regulations, undertake to stop the infringement, apologize, eliminate the impact of the loss of civil liability and compensation. The simple and plain fresh style of the bronze art deco sculpture draws the attention of the world. With the artist’s awareness of rights, based on “Copyright Law” claim rights cases will more and more. 5, as the auction buyer can be based on “Consumer Protection Law”, “contract law,” claim the rights. Difficult burden of proof in such cases, but mainly authoritative identification of the lack of organization and identification procedures, such as Wang Dinglin v. Zhejiang International Commodity Auction Center case. October 28, 1995, Wang Dinglin in Hangzhou ’95 paintings fall to 1.1 million yuan at auction bought Chang “imitation Stony Brook Landscape.”
To ensure its authenticity Department, Wang Xu Banda personally to Beijing and Shanghai Ink request identification. Xu Xie two contemporary, painting identification authority, then its conclusions are diametrically opposite. This painting is a fake identification Xu, worth about $ 110. Xie identified this as authentic. One example is the zun (a wine angel sculptures sculpture) with phoenix patterns on it is close to the original style of Zhou. WANG Sui in January 1996 to the court to require the center of Zhejiang International Commodity Auction recover this painting, drawing money refunded. The center argued that the Ink of the identification is reliable, auction practice was: “Buyers should examine the original auction, bidding behavior of the decision carefully, and willing to take responsibility.” Accordingly, the auction center’s claim does not agree with Wang Dinglin . Case is the first trial, art deco bronze figurines second trial were to determine Wang Dinglin lost. Wang refused to accept the Supreme People’s Court.
Find the Glamour of Chinese bronze sculpture
TAG:
No comments:
Post a Comment