..."In the case of T’ang, the three dealers took the unilateral decision to create a stamp. Neither the state neither the auctioneer had asked, suggested or approved its creation by these three dealers. The state and the auctioneer ignored that this stamp was created. Therefore, this stamp has no legal value and is not a “studio stamp”."
"At first glance this stamp could seem to be a “provenance” but it is in fact misleading because the actual operation of stamping the works was not organized in a legal frame. We have no information concerning, for example, a statement written by a notary or a bailiff who would have listed and stamped the works, then written a deed documented with photographs. This notary or bailiff would have normally destroyed the stamp after applying it on the works and mention this fact in his statement. It does not mean that the three dealers are still nowadays applying the stamp. It means that nothing can be checked."