Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Authentication and Provenance Forgery

No description

Melissa DiBerardino

on 30 April 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Authentication and Provenance Forgery

1.Authenticity 2. Valuation 3. Ownership
The Art World's Reaction to Science in Art & the Counter-Reaction
Peter Paul Biro: Forensic Science & Art
The man who keeps finding famous fingerprints on uncelebrated works of art.
By David Grann, The New Yorker 2010
Why is Provenance Important?
Provenance Research and Forgery
Biro v. Conde Nast 2011
Sources to uncovering a provenance include:
library and other institutional archives, journals, newspapers, legal documents, receipts, etc.
Catalogue Raisonné

Museums with established provenance research
Connoisseurs and Experts
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Vol XCIII, No. 311
provenire: 'to originate'
What is Provenance?
Why This Case Is Important to the Future of Provenance
"The provenance of a work of art is a historical record of its ownership..."

-International Foundation for Art Research

"To many connoisseurs, however, the nature of art was antithetical to cold science" : Grann

1.Art experts and connoisseur not ready to buckle under scientific fact, subjection over objection

2.Reputation is everything

3.Without an established provenance, works of art that fail to produce documentation will rarely evade speculation, such as La Principessa Bella

Authentication and Provenance Forgery
Peter Paul Biro's Revolutionary Method and Tarnished Reputation
"Provenance Guide." International Foundation for Art Research (IFAR)-. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Apr. 2014. <http://www.ifar.org/provenance_guide.php>.

Miller, M.H. "Peter Paul Biro, Art Authenticator, Expands His Defamation Lawsuit Far Beyond ‘The New Yorker’ [UPDATE]." Gallerist. N.p., 13 Dec. 2011. Web. 30 Apr. 2014. <http://galleristny.com/2011/12/peter-paul-biro-expands-defamation-lawsuit-12132011/>.

"Peter Paul Biro's Libel Case Against Conde Nast Dismissed." Center for Art Law. N.p., 11 Aug. 2013. Web. 30 Apr. 2014. <http://itsartlaw.com/2013/08/11/peter-paul-biros-libel-case-against-conde-nast-dismissed/>.

Tarsis, Irina. ""What's in a Name?" Peter Paul Biro v. Condé Nast for Defamation." Center for Art Law. N.p., 20 May 2013. Web. 30 Apr. 2014. <http://itsartlaw.com/2013/05/20/whats-in-a-name-peter-paul-biro-v-conde-nast-for-defamation/>.

Grann, David. "The Mark of a Masterpiece: The Man Who Keeps Finding Famous Fingerprints on Uncelebrated Works of Art." The New Yorker. N.p., 12 July 2010. Web. 30 Apr. 2014. <http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/07/12/100712fa_fact_grann>.

United States District Court Southern District of New York. August 1, 2013, J. Paul Oetken, United States District Judge <http://sdnyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/11-Civ.-04442-Biro-v.-Conde-Nast-8-1-12-Opinion.pdf>

The Authorities of Authentication
Forensic Science: Authentication Through Fingerprinting
Peter Paul Biro: One of the world's leading art authenticator using a new form of art authentication
2000: Teri Horton: Beginning of the trail of suspicion with fingerprinting method

2004-05: Alex Matter and Ken Parker
2007: Pat A. Wertheim
2009: Martin Kemp: “La Principessa Bella"
(1) a written defamatory statement of fact concerning the plaintiff;
(2) publication to a third party;
(3) fault (either negligence or actual malice depending on the status of the libeled party);
(4) falsity of the defamatory statement; and
(5) special damages or per se actionability (defamatory on its face).

Oral Defenses made

Lawsuit of $2 million dropped because of “failure to prove actual malice”

Biro’s reputation tarnished and his revolutionary method considered a hack.

May-August 2013
Full transcript