A.D.Coleman runs a photography blog and has been diligently covering the decision to sell the Polaroid collection at Sotheby’s this coming Spring. In response to an earlier post on AMM asking why–when so many interested parties were eager to see the collection remain intact, preferably at a public insitution–no buyer had emerged, Coleman suggests the legal status of the collection has prevented a sale.
Coleman says the Whitney Museum, Getty Museum and Museum of Fine Arts in Houston all expressed interest in acquiring the collection but could not consummate a deal (though it should be pointed out that he says that only the Whitney backed off, the Getty and Houston institutions were turned away by Polaroid’s then owners):
This brings me to the logical conclusion that every potential buyer — “individuals, investors and institutions” — has discovered in examining the collection’s documentation that the bulk of it is contractually encumbered in ways that prohibit (or at least problematize) its sale, thus also making perilous its purchase as a whole. If that’s true, then all prospects have had good reason to back off and not bid on the collection.
What does “encumbered” mean? […] Certainly the “non-exclusive” rights to utilize works in the collection, licensed to Polaroid by the photographers represented, and those photographers’ contractual rights “in perpetuity” to borrow their works for exhibition and publication purposes, constitute encumbrances. And encumbrances, in turn, prevent free and clear transfer of ownership; indeed, they undermine any claim to full ownership.Continue Reading