A/HRC/23/34 vast advertising budgets at their disposal, enormous sales forces, and an extremely efficient network of press contacts”, is worrisome. Financial and marketing strategies often drive the decision to publish a specific book or not.49 76. A current tendency is for States to co-fund with corporate sponsors. While some artists and arts organizations call for legislation enabling private (and corporate) sponsorship of the arts, others fear a reduced scope for contemporary, experimental and provocative artistic expressions. States should ensure that, in the process, the arts and artists do not become mere advertisers of corporate interests. 50 77. Artists’ autonomy can only be guaranteed through diversity of funding and a good balance between public and private sponsorship, both of which may open space for artistic creation. States should not monopolize funding of the arts but cannot leave sponsorship entirely to corporations. Corporations tend to show little interest in funding alternative cultural spaces or institutions and prioritize funding high-profile programmes such as blockbuster exhibitions.51 78. These issues are complex and need to be urgently addressed. While it is important to ensure producers and distributors are free to select what to support or promote, strategies are needed to ensure that artists not fitting market strategies may still make their voices heard. This underscores the importance of the 2005 UNESCO Convention, which affirmed the right of Parties to introduce cultural policies and measures to support the creation, production and distribution of local cultural goods and services. Some stress, however, that support provided to local productions sometimes does not enable a clear added value, and that what is actually subsidized does not really differ from what the private market may offer. (c) The protection of the moral and material interests of artists and authors 79. One way of silencing artists is to impede their livelihood options as professionals in a career devoted to artistic creations. According to article 27 of the UDHR and 15 of ICESCR, all individuals have the right to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which s/he is the author. As stressed by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its General Comment 17, the protection of these interests is not to be equated with legal entitlements recognized in intellectual property systems. 80. While the Special Rapporteur understands the concern that piracy and file sharing may threaten the potential of artists to earn their living, she also stresses the need to acknowledge the percentage of royalties that go to publishing houses/copyright holders rather than to the artists themselves. Concern has been expressed about coercive contracts that authors and artists identify as a primary obstacle to fair remuneration. Under such contracts, which are frequent, creators sign away all their rights to their creation in order to gain a commission for creating a work. Consequently, they lose control over their creation, which can be used in contradiction to their own vision. 49 50 51 Robert Atkins, “Money talks…”, pp. 3–9; and André Schiffrin, “Market censorship”, pp. 67–79, in Censoring Culture, op. cit. On these issues, see also submission from Argentina. On these issues, see submissions from Denmark, Monaco, Austrian Ombudsman Board, Jordi Baltà Prof. Shugurov, OSAAEE. Hans Haacke, “Revisiting Free Exchange: The art world after the culture wars”, pp. 51-57, and Robert Atkins, “Money talks: The economic foundations of censorship”, pp. 3-9, in Censoring culture, op. cit. See also submission from Equity. 17