Make a small share of every resale price of an artwork go to the artist or the artist's family
Steps to make it happen
- The rule covers works by painters and sculptors when galleries or auctions sell them again.
- Sellers pay a small part of the sale price to the artist as the artist's share.
- The share gets smaller as the price gets higher, and a maximum amount is set.
- Sales of cheap works and the first sale directly from the artist are left out.
- Artists' groups collect the money together and pass it on to artists and their families.
- Countries make agreements with one another so the money also reaches artists when works are sold abroad.
- After an artist dies, the family can keep receiving the money for a set number of years.
- It becomes normal for the maker to share in the rising value of the work.
Water so far 💧 0
The proposal in detail
This proposal takes the idea usually called the "resale right" and spreads it as a common rule across the field of art. It covers original works made by the artist's own hand, such as paintings, sculptures, prints, and photographs or crafts that the artist has signed in a limited number of copies. Copies and mass-produced goods are not included. The only deals covered are resales that involve people who sell art as a business, such as galleries, art dealers, auction houses, and online marketplaces. Sales made directly between private individuals are left out, because they are hard to track and would mean reaching into private life. In principle the seller pays, but the dealer who arranged the sale shares the responsibility so that the money is sure to be collected. The share starts at a few percent of the sale price, falls step by step as the price rises, and has a cap for each single sale. It does not apply to very cheap sales, to avoid the burden of paperwork. The right lasts during the artist's life and for a set period after death, and it cannot be given up or sold, so that artists cannot be forced to waive it or sell it to someone else. Collecting and handing out the money is done by a nonprofit management group run by artists, and dealers are required to report their sales records to the group for a set number of years. Money for which no recipient can be found is held for a set period and then used for things such as supporting young artists. To reach resales abroad, countries that have the same system recognize each other's rules.
BenefitsArtists share in the rising value of their work
The biggest benefit is that the artist who created the value of a work is rewarded, bit by bit, when its price rises later. For artists who had to sell cheaply when they were young, or who waited many years to be recognized, it can support their daily life in later years and help them keep making art. It is especially meaningful as a way to correct unfairness for makers in regions far from the art market, and for makers such as Indigenous communities, whose works were bought cheaply by outside dealers and later traded at high prices. Also, when dealers report their sales records to the management group, the art market becomes easier to see than before, and it becomes easier to follow where a work has come from and where it has gone. This can also help reduce the circulation of stolen works and works of doubtful origin. Just as makers of music and literature are rewarded each time their work is used, if the idea spreads that artists can stay connected to their works over the long term, the way people see the job of being an artist may itself change. Because the share is small and capped, some also say the burden on buyers and dealers is limited.
DrawbacksBenefits may go to famous artists and chill the market
The first point opponents raise is that much of this money would gather with artists who are already successful and famous, and with their heirs, and would hardly reach the unknown artists who are truly struggling. Only a handful of works are resold at high prices to begin with, so critics say this would not narrow the gap but only increase the share of people who have already succeeded. Also, since dealers and owners would face more costs and paperwork with each sale, trading could escape to countries without the system or to private sales that leave no record, and the market could become even harder to see. If people expect a burden to arise at resale, there is also a worry that those who buy a work first will try to lower the price by that amount, so young artists' first sale prices would fall. The cost of running the management groups, and the lack of clarity over how money with no recipient is handled, could also become problems. Furthermore, some take the view that it is excessive interference with property rights, because the artist would be having a say later in how a person who bought a work and became its owner may freely dispose of it.
Learn the background
People who make music or books earn income as royalties every time a song is played or a book is printed. Art, however, is usually sold as a one-of-a-kind object, so the artist gets paid only once, when the work first leaves their hands. Many artists sell their work cheaply when they are young and still unknown. Even if their reputation later grows and the work is resold for many times, even dozens of times, the original price, all of that profit goes to the owner and the dealers, and nothing reaches the artist. Scenes of an elderly artist struggling to get by while their work sells for a high price at auction have repeated in many places. Some countries and regions have already adopted systems that return part of such resale profits to the artist, but many countries have not, and even international copyright agreements leave it up to each country. As a result, people point out the problem that trading moves to places without such a system. Now that art sales spread across borders over the internet, it is time for the world to rethink how to treat the link between artists and the value of their works.
Choose them ready to accept their drawbacks too (up to 5)
It helps pay for the server and the AI's planting
This proposal was written in Japanese by AI (claude-opus-5-5, policy version 2026-10-15d) and translated by AI (claude-sonnet-5-5). Nobody has checked the facts. Read the original (日本語) How the AI writes