Bogus art on Ebay.

[Not your average framer]

I seem to get a good measure of unfortunate customers who bring in items for me to frame which they bought on Ebay. The usual items sold as prints include:

Illustrations from books and calenders.

Poor quality ink jet prints on either paper or canvas (usually A4 size).

And colour photocopies.

Not only is there little evidence that anything is being done to stop these things from being described and sold as genuine prints, but it is clearly also an activity which is on the increase.

I will always tell a customer when something they bring in, is not what it is claimed to be. Quite often, being so honest will mean that I've lost an order to frame it, but I choose to tell the truth believing that I should regardless of the fact, that doing so may cost me something.

Opinions?

[Roboframer]

Tricky one!

Sometimes I wonder where stuff has come from and how the customer perceives it, but don't ask.

If it comes out in normal design conversation that they think it is valuable/collectible and I know for sure that it's not ...................... I'll offer museum glass

[Moglet]

Sometimes I wonder where stuff has come from and how the customer perceives it, but don't ask.

If a customer wants to get something framed, then who am I to question their decision, and how do I know what it means to them? de gustibus and all that. I've framed pages from home decor magazines on a number of occasions for one particular customer: she just wanted to frame them because they really appealed to her.

Were a customer to specifically ask me for an opinion, I will be as frank as I can, but with a strong bias towards protecting the customer's feelings.

Regarding prints offered on ebay, technically an inkjet print is... a print. As long as they are not advertising serigraphs and supplying photocopies, presumably these ebay vendors are not violating any trade descriptions legislation. A classic case of caveat emptor?

[prospero]

People will always buy carp and not know the difference. Actually, calendars tend to be quite good quality prints. Home-made inkjets are a different matter. Use cheap inks and they fade very quickly. The bad thing is that the blame can be directed against the framer.

[Bill Henry]

It’s a tough question and a tougher answer, I think. Certainly, no one likes to get gypped, but no one want to know that they were, either.

If they are satisfied with their purchase (whether on eBay or at an “auction” on a cruise ship), I don’t usually want to burst their bubble.

Besides, even if they knew they got swindled, there is very little redress with an eBay purchase.

If they ask, I will render an opinion, but otherwise don’t voluntarily chime in with my thoughts. I don’t want to make them feel bad.

But, admittedly, it is a tough call.

[Not your average framer]

To complicate things further, many businesses sell old or antique prints which mostly have been obtained from old books or periodicals. Generally these are sought after by virtue of their age and rarity value. However, a lot of the stuff which is sold on Ebay is not only modern, but is also competing with genuine currently published prints of works by living artists.

So, I guess you will have figured the question I am about to ask. How old does something have to be, in oder to be considered a legitimate and honest item to sell? I would guess, apart from the obvious 70 years after the death of the artist, that this would depend upon who you asked.

My own thoughts on this are as follows:

Copyright law does not permit items not produced to be framed as if they were prints and that to do so while the item is still within it's period of copyright protection is depriving someone of income which is rightfully theirs.

Things which are not or are now no longer subject to copyright and are genuinely sought after as vintage or antique items have been sold throught living memory as antique prints, etc. and are accepted by most reasonable people for what they are and as such are not considered as being sold for dishonest gain.

Modern items where the buyer may be led to believe that they should be, or are getting a genuine published print for the money they are paying, can and may reasonably consider this as unfair or dishonest gain on the part of the vendor.

[Moglet]

Bit of an echo in here tonight?



(Sorry, Mark: just couldn't resist... )


Edit:

Dang! Duplicate post deftly removed now!!!

[Not your average framer]

Besides, even if they knew they got swindled, there is very little redress with an eBay purchase.

Hi Bill,

That's true, but by telling them the truth, they will be wiser next time. Also, they will be aware that you will always do your best to tell the truth and give them sound advice.

Another thought which has just struck me, is that customers who are conned into buying bogus art, may well have been prepared to buy the genuine item at full price and if you sell art, they may have bought it from you!

[Not your average framer]

Dang! Duplicate post deftly removed now!!!

[Moglet]

Shneaky!

[Roboframer]

Copyright law does not permit items not produced to be framed as if they were prints and that to do so while the item is still within it's period of copyright protection is depriving someone of income which is rightfully theirs.

If you want to frame something and sell it then that's an issue, but if someone brings in something to frame that comes under that description, the issue's not yours - (is it?)

I remember once winding my DeMontfort rep up - saying some of the images in their latest catalogue would 'frame up' well. Oooooh no - can't do that - change of usage, copyright. So I said - OK, I send out a load of your catalogues to my customers and one brings in a ripped out page to frame, what then?

She didn't know - I mean, same customer could have bought a readymade from me and slapped the page in it without me knowing - I'd still have made a profit from a page of the catalogue.

One thing that gets my gander (old bean) are prints with stickers on the back saying 'hand coloured engraving - guaranteed to be over 100 years old' Sure they're over 100 yrs old - the magazine, like 'Punch' that they were ripped out of is dated so. But it was hand coloured last week and it's not an engraving - it's a repro of one.

Sometimes you can even see the typeset showing through from the back. When I see how much they have paid I have to bite my tongue as I know it is about 10 times more than the magazine would cost!

[Moglet]

...same customer could have bought a readymade from me and slapped the page in it without me knowing - I'd still have made a profit from a page of the catalogue.

I don't see how you could be pulled for that from a copyright perspective, John, as in the strictest sense you only made money from selling a readymade that the customer happened to buy from you. It's beyond your control what the customer chooses to display in it.

[Jonny2morsos]

I alerted an artist I buy some prints from when I saw his "prints" offered on ebay. It was obvious that they were photo copies being offered by some scalliwag who bought one genuine print and then ran them off on demand from his home scanner/printer.

Apparently ebay withdrew the items and to my knowledge they have not been seen again. So it would appear ebay will act if informed.

In return the artist gave me a print of my choice.

john.

[Roboframer]

I don't see how you could be pulled for that from a copyright perspective, John, as in the strictest sense you only made money from selling a readymade that the customer happened to buy from you. It's beyond your control what the customer chooses to display in it.

That's my point - or more to it - could I be held responsible if I fitted same page in to the frame and charged for that fitting above the cost of the ready-made? Or could I held responsible if the customer just brought the page in and I made a custom frame and mounted the page in it?

I don't think so!

In fact I'd do it in a heartbeat - the page is not my property - even if it was before I posted it to the customer.

Even if I hoped that that was what the customer would do with it!

it would appear ebay will act if informed.

Ebay know exactly what goes on - last time I looked - and that was a long time ago, their policy was no fake goods - you say 'Rolex' it has to be a jenwin Rolex.

But hey - the site is so huge, how can they keep track?

They don't care - but if you pull them up, they have to - if you have some spare time the watch pages are the best - look for Rolex and Pateke Phillipe for the best ones - look for 'No box or certificate' to read 'This is a fake'

Ebay knows that.

In my Ebay salad days I bidded on a 'Rolex' it had a high start bid - £800 or so and I bid over. Then I read between the lines and asked the seller (publicly) the question "Is this a genuine Rolex?"

The seller replied "Read the description and bid accordingly"

(Me) Please just answer my question - is this a genuine Rolex?

(Seller) There are no boxes or certificates, so please bid accordingly.

(Me) please just say the words - is this a real Rolex, you described it as a Rolex; not an imitation Rolex - if you believe it is but it's not I'll find out when i get it appraised - have you had it appraised? Surely you have, otherwise you could not describe it as a 'Rolex'??

Ebay pulled it - not the seller - Ebay. So they do monitor; they do know fake stuff is being sold under their name but they have this disclaimer - the deal is basically nothing to do with them - it all happens between buyer and seller.

That's bollox! The buck stops at them - it's your statutory rights and no matter what their small print may say it's a fact.

I had a similar issue over a Seiko - it was a real noduff jenwin seiko, but the RRP was slightly creative and then reduced to about 100% over RRP.

I emailed Seiko for the RRP - the model was not available in Uk - I passed the info on to the seller and I'm wearing that Seiko right now, bought at SLIGHTLY below RRP and VASTLY below the ********'s reseve!

Anyway - after that and a bit more, I sacked the Ebay idea - they don't give a stuff and are happy to take on sellers who give approximately one million percent less of a stuff as long as they get their cut. I'm not celver enough to sort out the chaff - they are. Anyone getting stiffed by an ebay seller, in my book is a sucker and I have bugger all sympathy - I was quite serious about the museum glass above and if their fake watch makes them a month overdue they can pay for the phone calls too - stuff 'em - let's keep it simple - punters bring in stuff and as long as it don't make you puke - just frame it!

If it does - just don't puke ON it - but frame it anyway!

Sell bogus art? Take the consequences - Turn away bogus art? MUG!

[prospero]

It's the old saying, "If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is". There's another old saying, "There's one born every minute". 'Nuff said.

EBay is great for some things, others are liable to be dodgy. I've had some really good bargains. Box of 225 sanding pads for £15. £2.50+ each at the DIY sheds. I never buy DVD's from the high street. Had loads off EBay fo a couple of quid each. I've only ever bought one thing over £20. Graphics card for £50. £300+ new. Took a bit of a risk but it's been working fine for over a year. I'm using it now.

[WelshFramer]

Anyway - after that and a bit more, I sacked the Ebay idea - they don't give a stuff and are happy to take on sellers who give approximately one million percent less of a stuff as long as they get their cut.

A while ago I emailed eBay to suggest that one of their sellers was in all probability selling stolen goods. He was advertising a whole load of cameras and mobile phones - none of them had manuals or chargers. eBay replied to say that it wasn't their concern but I should go to the police if I had been sold stolen goods.

[ross]

Interesting ideas posted

I operate a custom framing business, and once a person enters the front doors, I know they have come for the specific reason to have whatever they have in their hands framed

I work with them, I discuss the options to frame each item and we settle on what they want for each piece - personally I see my roll as to advise the best options for framing and hence I don't get too involved in discussing the origins of the items - if information is forthcoming and it impacts on how something should be framed, I will consider it. Otherwise, the piece brought in for framing is the customers and I don't really want to know much more about it - they have already made a conscious decision to have the item framed before arriving at our premises and we take it from there to get the best result we can in consultation with the customer

I once told a customer that the canvas painting by a french artist was not a geniune article - she did not appreciate that advice and ever since I have refrained from offering such advice

Ross

[griff buch]

The major print publishers are usually pretty hot on conterfeit reproductions and in an article in the latest edition of Picture Business Rosenstiels have just caught a trader selling counterfeit Munnings and other artists work. When I was a rep for Rosenstiels 25 years ago I had to call on a tapestry supplier who was using one of their images without permission. Once they knew there was copyright on the image the manufacturer was happy to pay royalties. Salvador Dali used to sell blank sheets of paper which he had signed so how much are they worth?

These thoughts can also apply to canvases that are sold door-to-door where the buyer is usually told that the paintings have been done by a group of impoverished artists. As we all know they are sent over by the container load from the Far East and probably not worth the prices that are being asked which is, of course, a lot less than the true local artist can get for his original work. I have nothing against the selling method- it is the impression given that they were created in London, Paris or Benidorm that is misrepresentation.

Whether you tell your customer of the picture's true origins is debateable as I, too, do not want to lose a framing order but I don't believe that I am a miscreant if I frame an article of this nature.

[kev@frames]

Its best to keep your opinions to yourself as far as the customer is concerned. I think we have been here before.
If the customer enjoys the picture, you want to be thinking twice before you spoil it for them. Thats what being a decent human being is about.
They like it and they think it is worth framing, so frame it for them, and make it look nice, and let them enjoy it.

Some people are all to quick to show off to customers by rubbishing what they bring in. Its not the antique roadshow or an episode of Lovejoy Let them enjoy it, dont send them away feeling small and humiliated because they have bought something (or received something as a gift) that isn't up to your individual standards as "art".

If they ask your opinion on it, then thats a different matter. Tell them straight, and tell them tactfully.
Thats my take on it, anyway.

And yes, I agree wholeheartedly with Mark . There is some real carp on ebay and people are being deceived in many cases. But they were buying the same type of carp from shops and "galleries" long before ebay existed.

[Not your average framer]

If you want to frame something and sell it then that's an issue, but if someone brings in something to frame that comes under that description, the issue's not yours - (is it?)

Hi John,

Yes I agree, but I was careful how I worded that because I still sell antique prints, but as you probably realise, I don't sell pages out of modern books, or photocopies as prints and I don't like it when I see people being conned our of their money for something which is not only not what it is sold as, but is totally worthless.

I will frame these things if a customer asks me to do so, but I do like to make sure that they are properly informed before they spend a lot more than the value of the item before they commit themselves to spending their money with me. In spite of telling them the true nature of what they've bought, many still go ahead with having it framed.

One thing that gets my gander (old bean) are prints with stickers on the back saying 'hand coloured engraving - guaranteed to be over 100 years old' Sure they're over 100 yrs old - the magazine, like 'Punch' that they were ripped out of is dated so. But it was hand coloured last week and it's not an engraving - it's a repro of one.

Sometimes you can even see the typeset showing through from the back. When I see how much they have paid I have to bite my tongue as I know it is about 10 times more than the magazine would cost!

I sell old Punch cartoons, (which are woodcuts printed from block of wood), but I don't think anyone has ever been conned by this as they are all told where they come from and my prices are very reasonable as well. Typically a small cartoon in a double mount will only cost about eight pounds. Some are so politically incorrect, which is often why people love to buy them. Most of my stock is from the 1870's.

BTW, copies of Punch known to contain the classic sought after cartoons, ain't as cheap to buy at auction as you might think and the cartoons from Punch are valued by many as items of social history and for their character resulting from originating from a bygone age. They also pull customers through the door!

I knew this would stir things up a little, but I also thought it would be quite thought provoking and an interesting subject for discussion.