Where Is My Cut? Justifying Resale Rights

ABSTRACT It strikes many people as unfair when artists whose works generate large profits for galleries or art dealers do not themselves benefit from the rise in value of their art. A policy called the Artist's Resale Right (ARR), whereby the creator of an artwork receives a percentage of any subsequent resale transaction, is supposed to address this. I examine whether this policy is well‐grounded normatively. I do so by focusing on two types of arguments justifying the ARR: the argument from property rights and the argument from exploitation. The first claims that an ARR can be motivated by appeal to existing property rights or to their underlying justifications. The second relies on claims about the vulnerability of the creator, the fair distribution of benefits in a transaction, and the nature of the buyer's duties towards the artist. I will argue that neither strategy is successful in convincingly justifying an ARR.