Art Fakes - What Fakes? An Economic View
AbstractAn economic analysis of fakes differs substantially from the legal and the art historic views which both tend to propose repressive policies against imitations. But there are large economic benefits from copying. In particular, the "propagation effect" yields utility to both consumers and creators of the original. In contrast, the harmful effects of fakes are small and are mitigated by emerging institutions (guarantees, sellers with reputation). The paper suggests "art quotations" (similar to academic quotations) as a beneficial solution to creators of originals and consumers. "Art quotations" are applicable to many art forms.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich in its series IEW - Working Papers with number 014.
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Cultural Policy; art markets; art forgery; intellectual property rights; cultural industries;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics
- K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
- L23 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Organization of Production
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Liebowitz, S J, 1985. "Copying and Indirect Appropriability: Photocopying of Journals," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(5), pages 945-57, October.
- Bruno Frey, 1999. "State Support and Creativity in the Arts: Some New Considerations," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 71-85, March.
- Grossman, Gene M & Shapiro, Carl, 1988.
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 59-75, March.
- Andrew E Burke, 1997. "Legal Structure, Strategic Regulation and Dividing the Spoils from R&D in Intellectual Property," CRIEFF Discussion Papers 9715, Centre for Research into Industry, Enterprise, Finance and the Firm.
- Hansmann, Henry & Santilli, Marina, 1997. "Authors' and Artists' Moral Rights: A Comparative Legal and Economic Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(1), pages 95-143, January.
- Victor Ginsburgh, 2003. "Art markets," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/1865, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
- Koboldt, Christian, 1995. "Intellectual Property and Optimal Copyright Protection," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 95-01, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
- Hirshleifer, Jack, 1985. "The Expanding Domain of Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(6), pages 53-68, December.
- Takeyama, Lisa N, 1994. "The Welfare Implications of Unauthorized Reproduction of Intellectual Property in the Presence of Demand Network Externalities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 155-66, June.
- Pesando, James E, 1993. "Art as an Investment: The Market for Modern Prints," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1075-89, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Marita Kieser).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.