{"id":1194,"date":"2009-08-21T18:16:33","date_gmt":"2009-08-21T22:16:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nearbycafe.com\/artandphoto\/photocritic\/?p=1194"},"modified":"2009-08-21T18:16:33","modified_gmt":"2009-08-21T22:16:33","slug":"polaroid-collection-urgent-photographer-alert","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nearbycafe.com\/artandphoto\/photocritic\/2009\/08\/21\/polaroid-collection-urgent-photographer-alert\/","title":{"rendered":"Polaroid Collection: Urgent Photographer Alert"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you have work in either the U.S. or European Polaroid Collections, want to prevent the destruction of this world-famous archive via sale of its individual works at auction, and want to establish your claim to ownership of works you deposited in that collection on long-term loan, the time to act is now.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Join<\/a>

1. Join the campaign.<\/p><\/div>\n

Per my previous posts on this subject of July 16<\/a> and August 13<\/a>, on Thursday, August 27, 2009 the U. S. Bankruptcy Court in the\u00a0District Court of Minnesota will hold a hearing on a motion from the current owners of this collection, PBE Corporation (formerly known as Polaroid Corporation), seeking permission to sell the collection at auction through Sotheby\u2019s in New York. Presiding at the hearing will be the Hon. Judge Gregory F. Kishel,\u00a0Chief U.S. Bankruptcy Judge, District of Minnesota.<\/p>\n

Since publishing those posts, I’ve learned from informed sources that serious questions exists in regard to any claim to outright ownership by the Polaroid Corporation or its successors of much of the material in the Polaroid Collection. These questions have such significance that Judge Kishel of the Bankruptcy Court in the\u00a0District Court of Minnesota should require that they get answered satisfactorily before granting permission to PBE Corporation to market the collection at auction through Sotheby\u2019s.<\/p>\n

\n

\"2.<\/a>

2. Assert your ownership of your work to the bankruptcy court.<\/p><\/div>\n

According to my sources, who were highly placed figures within the Polaroid Corporation specifically involved in the development of the collections, while it may be true that Ansel Adams and some of Polaroid’s early consultants donated their work to the Corporation, the ownership of the work contributed by artists from the late ’70s through the mid-’90s is not so clear.\u00a0“Most of the work added during those years were not acquired at all \u2014\u00a0rather, Polaroid bartered for the exhibition and reproduction rights to those photographs in exchange for film and small fees. Ownership of the prints themselves were retained by the artists,” they explain. My sources indicate that they kept records verifying this, “including copies of the agreements with the photographers and artists.” These records are in their possession and can be made available for verification. Thus many of the prints that PBE Corporation has asked the court to authorize for sale by Sotheby’s are actually owned by the artists and not Polaroid.<\/p>\n

The counter-argument presented by PBE’s bankruptcy counsel, I’m told by these sources, is that the artists had a chance to make a claim of ownership during Polaroid’s prior bankruptcy in 2004 and that, if they didn’t, they lost all legal claims to their own work. This strikes me as entirely specious. My sources “question whether possession on loan or with licensed usage of a work of art can be considered a debt owed to the artist and subject to bankruptcy regulations.” From what I understand, the contention that somehow the artists relinquished any rights to the works in question by not demanding them back at the time of the original bankruptcy proceedings will prove difficult to sustain.<\/p>\n

\n

\"3.<\/a>

3. Prevent the auctioning of your work.<\/p><\/div>\n

Were the artists notified of the situation and given an opportunity to reclaim their works? Were they given clear instructions on who to contact for that purpose? Were they warned that failure to do so would constitute surrender of their rights? It’s standard procedure in bankruptcy proceedings to create a list of creditors, notify all of them of the situation, give them a time frame and deadline for filing a claim, provide a standard format for that claim, and indicate the official address to which to send that claim. Patently, the Polaroid Corp.\/PBE Corp failed to do any of that. How then were the artists to know what to file, and where, and when, and with whom, in order to reclaim their works?<\/p>\n

\n

\"4.<\/a>

4. Make your claim to your work public at this blog.<\/p><\/div>\n

Given this situation, I strongly urge any artists with work in either of the Polaroid Collections (U.S. or European) that was not purchased outright by the Polaroid Corporation to proceed as follows:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Immediately send a letter (certified, return receipt requested) to Judge Gregory F. Kishel of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the District of Minnesota, asserting your claim to ownership of your work(s) in this collection according to your contract with the Polaroid Corporation, and objecting to any sale thereof at auction as a result of dispersal of the collection. if you have ready access to your contract or letter of agreement with Polaroid, include a photocopy thereof.<\/li>\n
  2. Send a copy of the same letter to Denise Bethel, Director of the Photographs Dept. at Sotheby’s (also certified, return receipt requested).<\/li>\n
  3. Then send me an email<\/a> indicating that you’ve done this. I’ll create a page at this blog listing those who’ve taken this course of action.<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n