Carla Rossi's representative seems unfamiliar with copyright: "we have not taken anything from your site, but [...] these are images obtained from dealers, retrieved via WayBack Method from auctions & sales, as well as from paper catalogues" mssprovenance.blogspot.com/2022/12/nobody… #Receptiogate
"Sotheby's owns [...] all right, title and interest in and to the Digital Platforms [...] including: all the content (including without limitation audio, images, photographs, illustrations, text"
(sothebys.com/en/terms-condi…) Rossi's book does not respect copyright. #Receptiogate
Sotheby's continue: "Any commercial distribution, publishing, use or exploitation of the Digital Platforms or any element thereof [...] is strictly prohibited unless you have received the express prior written permission of Sotheby's or the applicable rights holder" #Receptiogate
Carla Rossi's fabled WayBack Method (aka using Google and the Internet Archive) does *not* mean she can lift images without permission and Rossi's book nowhere acknowledges Sotheby's copyright. #Receptiogate
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Let's take a look at Carla Rossi's claim that she didn't take the colour image of a miniature of St Mark from Peter Kidd's @mssprovenance blog. Kidd had pointed out (mssprovenance.blogspot.com/2022/12/nobody…) that the only possible source of the colour image was from his site. [cont] #Receptiogate
@mssprovenance Rossi responded on Academia.edu that she "obtained a bw image" from the German dealer Hartung and "colourise[d] the black and white pictures using the "Colorize picture" application, as you can see on page 253 of my edition." [cont] #Receptiogate
@mssprovenance Even so, Rossi removed the colour image from her book, replacing it with the black-and-white image that she *claimed* had been supplied by Hartung. [cont] #Receptiogate
@mssprovenance "Andrew Pritchard" published a piece in the journal *Theory & Criticism of Literature and Arts* 5 (2021), edited by *Prof.* Carla Rossi. The article praises the "philological expertise of Professor Carla Rossi"; claims that "only an expert philologist like Professor Rossi" [cont]
@mssprovenance and states that "Professor Rossi informed Consuelo Lollobrigida of the correct reading of the document, receiving a haughty reply." (Tellingly, only Carla Rossi is given the title "Professor".) [cont]
@mssprovenance The article is an attack on Lollobrigida, going on to pronounce: "This is a clear example of how sometimes the hybris [sic] should be put aside for the sake of scientific truth". The article continues: "Lollobrigida's arguments are completely unfounded" [cont]