Maria Elaine Lanza on fri 23 apr 99
To all those who responded to my gallery non-payment post... thank you! I
took to heart all of the advise given and after much thought I took
action... am very pleased to tell you that today I received my payment.
In short... I decided to call the gallery owner one more painful time...
will spare you the details of the conversation... and finally agreed "to be
patient" another two weeks (which would have expired this coming
Saturday)... know that, should payment not have been in my hands by then
there would have been little choice for me but to take firmer action... one
of which was to tell all to you...the Clayart community... as a cautious
warning regarding this particular gallery.
As it turned out... the gallery owner kept his word... not to undermine this
action... however, please know that it was in December when my work was
sold... 4 months ago!
The lesson for me in all of this is the importance of written contracts and
to avoid galleries that I can't get to within a few hours drive.
Thanks again... if it wasn't for the good, experienced advise of yours, I'd
probably would have let this slide... as it was you fortified me with what I
needed to know and just as importantly... made me feel not alone.
Marie Elaine
Ray Carlton on sun 25 apr 99
At 08:35 23/04/99 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
one of which was to tell all to you...the Clayart community... as a cautious
>warning regarding this particular gallery.
>
I think a gallery that had its name published on the internet (vis a vis
this list) as having dificulty in paying their bills may just take offence.
The well meaning potter in an effort to warn friends against using the
offending gallery well may find themselves the subject of civil action. I
have thought of publishing the names of galleries that have given me the
runaround but have been warned by legal counsel that legal action in the
form of a libel suit would be the probable outcome.
be careful and good luck with your prospectives
cheers Ray Carlton
McMahons Creek Victoria Australia
Larry Phillips on mon 26 apr 99
Ray Carlton wrote:
> I have thought of publishing the names of galleries that have given
> me the runaround but have been warned by legal counsel that legal
> action in the form of a libel suit would be the probable outcome.
Is not the truth an absolute defense against a libel suit?
If you have documented proof that something happened, can you not say
so with impunity?
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
I like deadlines. I especially like the whooshing sound of them
as they go flying by.
http://cr347197-a.surrey1.bc.wave.home.com/larry/
Joy Holdread on mon 26 apr 99
> I think a gallery that had its name published on the Internet (vis a vis
> this list) as having difficulty in paying their bills may just take
offence.
> The well meaning potter in an effort to warn friends against using the
> offending gallery well may find themselves the subject of civil action. I
> have thought of publishing the names of galleries that have given me the
> run-around but have been warned by legal counsel that legal action in the
> form of a libel suit would be the probable outcome.
>
> be careful and good luck with your prospective
>
> cheers Ray Carlton
My understanding is that a libel suit depends on untruth. My take on this is
publishing how long a gallery takes to pay is not libel. Speculating on why
they took so long to pay or making personal judgments as to their character
might be libelous.
Joy in Tucson clouds today.
>
tgschs10 on mon 26 apr 99
I am an attorney but do not litigate so I'll disclaim all of the following.
What about listing galleries that you subjectively find unsatisfactory? It
seems to me this would cover a variety of circumstances and might insulate
you from attack. Reasons could vary from personal relations with the owner
or staff, placement of your pieces in the gallery, unsatisfactory effort in
sales effort, payment problems etc. It would seem to me that if one doesn't
get specific, the chances of being sued would be slim. REMEMBER, ADVICE IS
WORTH WHAT YOU PAY FOR IT AND I HAVEN'T BEEN PAID. Seriously, it would be
nice for potters to be alerted to potential trouble galleries. Check with
your local attorney and stick to very generic criticism such as I have been
unsatisfied with my relation to XXXX gallery.
Tom Sawyer
-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Carlton
To: CLAYART@LSV.UKY.EDU
Date: Sunday, April 25, 1999 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: Gallery Consignment Update
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
At 08:35 23/04/99 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
one of which was to tell all to you...the Clayart community... as a cautious
>warning regarding this particular gallery.
>
I think a gallery that had its name published on the internet (vis a vis
this list) as having dificulty in paying their bills may just take offence.
The well meaning potter in an effort to warn friends against using the
offending gallery well may find themselves the subject of civil action. I
have thought of publishing the names of galleries that have given me the
runaround but have been warned by legal counsel that legal action in the
form of a libel suit would be the probable outcome.
be careful and good luck with your prospectives
cheers Ray Carlton
McMahons Creek Victoria Australia
gail sheffield on tue 27 apr 99
ART CALENDAR magazine often reports on galleries which do not pay timely,
etc. Perhaps those of you interested in this, which would help everyone,
could talk to the editor about that. Their number is (800) 597-5988. They
have an e-mail address but I do not have a copy of the magazine at this
location.
Gail Sheffield
Covington, LA
Ray Aldridge on wed 28 apr 99
At 09:51 AM 4/26/99 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>> I think a gallery that had its name published on the Internet (vis a vis
>> this list) as having difficulty in paying their bills may just take
>offence.
>> The well meaning potter in an effort to warn friends against using the
>> offending gallery well may find themselves the subject of civil action. I
>> have thought of publishing the names of galleries that have given me the
>> run-around but have been warned by legal counsel that legal action in the
>> form of a libel suit would be the probable outcome.
>>
>> be careful and good luck with your prospective
>>
>> cheers Ray Carlton
>
>My understanding is that a libel suit depends on untruth. My take on this is
>publishing how long a gallery takes to pay is not libel. Speculating on why
>they took so long to pay or making personal judgments as to their character
>might be libelous.
I'm not a lawyer, so take this for what it's worth. But, I'm a member of
the Science Fiction Writers of America, and they have occasionally
published response times for various fiction markets, which is somewhat the
same thing. For slow pay situations, they have a grievance committe which
attempts to resolve disputes between writers and publishers. However, if
they cannot reach an equitable resolution, they will publish the details of
the dispute, so that other writers can decide if they wish to send stories
to that particular market. SFWA has a lawyer on retainer, who apparently
approves the publishing of this information. SFWA is careful not to
suggest that members boycott predatory publishers, as that would be illegal.
A shame that potters have no equivalent professional organization.
Ray Aldridge on wed 28 apr 99
At 09:54 AM 4/26/99 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>I am an attorney but do not litigate so I'll disclaim all of the following.
>What about listing galleries that you subjectively find unsatisfactory? It
>seems to me this would cover a variety of circumstances and might insulate
>you from attack. Reasons could vary from personal relations with the owner
>or staff, placement of your pieces in the gallery, unsatisfactory effort in
>sales effort, payment problems etc. It would seem to me that if one doesn't
>get specific, the chances of being sued would be slim. REMEMBER, ADVICE IS
>WORTH WHAT YOU PAY FOR IT AND I HAVEN'T BEEN PAID. Seriously, it would be
>nice for potters to be alerted to potential trouble galleries. Check with
>your local attorney and stick to very generic criticism such as I have been
>unsatisfied with my relation to XXXX gallery.
>
One way I've seen something like this implemented online was at a web-based
forum for antique weapons collectors. There are relatively few dealers to
this community, but their reputations vary widely. At any rate, the
proprietor of this forum solicited comments from his readers who had
dealings with the various dealers, asking them to rate each dealer in
several categories, and then ranked them on a web page.
So far as I know, he hasn't been sued.
An automated script would be fairly easy to set up, though precautions,
such as cookie setting, would have to be taken to try to ensure that
neither admirers nor detractors could vote early and often.
| |
|
