[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

I think the problem here is that some people presume that just because this sort of (somewhat) subtle altering of pictures done in an attempt to make items look better (which serves to misrepresent the actual item in a material way) has been done regularly in the industry means that the practice will be forever given a pass. It won't be. For an example, the price fixing alleged by the NYS Attorney General against the insurance industry (AIG, Marsh, etc.) simply exposed a practice that had been allegedly going on for years. Eventually criminal charges were brought against the brokers alleged to be involved in this behavior and the firms fined zillions of dollars. There is no way, at least to me, you can pass off the Sotheby's picture in the catalogue compared to what it truly looked like as just a modest improvement. There are material differences designed, solely, to inflate the bidding. This is fraud any way you look at it.

Edited to add: And if anyone thinks Sothebys would let those two pictures be the basis of a very public lawsuit, they are dreaming.