What does it mean to own a work of art? One might think, a painting or a sculpture is mine, and I can do with it what I want. But not really. If the artwork is of “recognized stature,” I cannot destroy it or alter it in some way without fear of being sued by the artist, largely as the result of the federal Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990. If the artwork is damaged in some way or restored poorly, the artist may disavow the piece, effectively draining it of all value so that I would have a difficult, if not impossible, time selling it. In a way, owning a piece of notable art legally means sharing it with the artist. But there’s more. To even purchase the artwork, I may have to accept restrictions on my right to sell it. A purchase agreement might prohibit me from selling the piece for three years or more, forbid me from selling it via an auction house, require me to consign the artwork back to that same dealer or even stipulate that I donate it to a museum, should I ever decide to divest myself of it. On top of all that, some dealers require that buyers agree to what the art trade refers to as BOGO deals—arrangements stipulating that if I want to acquire one work by a sought-after artist, I will need to purchase two: one that I will donate to a museum and one to keep.

Thank you for signing up!

By clicking submit, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge we may use your information to send you emails, product samples, and promotions on this website and other properties. You can opt out anytime.

But I really want the artwork, so I sign the sales agreement. That agreement is, of course, a contract, and I am ostensibly bound by law to abide by its terms. The question is whether these contracts are really enforceable, and there are two answers. First, it depends, and second, there haven’t been many relevant cases that have made it all the way to court and so there isn’t yet a clear precedent governing the ins and outs of art ownership.

In 1992, New York’s highest court sided with the art gallery Wildenstein & Co., after it sued film producer Hal Wallis who had consigned his collection of Impressionist and Modern paintings to Christie’s rather than honor his agreement to offer the art gallery the right of first refusal. That agreement required Wallis to give Wildenstein at least thirty days prior notice of the terms of any proposed sale of a painting and granted Wildenstein the option to purchase it within twenty days on the same terms as the purchase offer. The exclusive consignment right required Wallis, if he wished to sell any painting at auction, to first consign it exclusively to Wildenstein for six months. The court found that the resale restrictions to which Wallis........

© Observer