SAN FRANCISCO — A California appeals court has upheld a 2006 Arizona court’s decision that the great grandson of French impressionist Pierre-Auguste Renoir and art galleries in Scottsdale, Ariz., cannot sell copies of bronze sculptures Renoir designed in the early 20th century because they are under copyright protection and not in the public domain.

In its ruling, filed on Dec. 9, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agreed with an Arizona district court’s summary judgment of $125,000 in favor of a French trust that 10 sculptures made by Renoir with assistance from Spanish artist Richard Guino are protected by both French and U.S. copyright laws and cannot be reproduced.

The defendants were Beseder, Inc., which trades as Rima Fine Art in Scottsdale, gallery owners Dror Darel and his wife Tracey L. Penwell; CSTPGU, a limited liability corporation trading as House of Renoir in Scottsdale; and Jean Emmanuel Renoir, great-grandson of the artist. Hundreds of reproduced castings are involved, many now privately owned by those who purchased the limited edition works at galleries in Scottsdale and Beverly Hills. Some came with letters of authenticity.

The long struggle by Renoir and Guino heirs to control the artwork spans several decades and involves courts and lawyers on both sides of the Atlantic.

The story begins near the end of Renoir’s life. The renowned impressionist switched to sculpture in 1907 at age 66. By 1913, Renoir, 72, suffered crippling affects of rheumatoid arthritis and the results of a stroke. He wanted to work but his hands would not obey.

He found new hands in Richard Guino, age 23. The artist worked with Renoir from 1913 until 1918. Renoir died in 1919 at age 78. The pair made 37 sculptures. The subsequent years saw these sculptures adorn galleries, museums and private collections in France. They were attributed only to Renoir.

Guino’s son Michel decided to rectify this in 1965. He sued the Renoir estate on grounds that his father co-created the works, owns an interest in all plaster casts that exist, and is entitled to part of the royalties which the Renoir heirs had been receiving and would receive.

In 1971 a French court agreed and an appeals court in 1973 made it official. Then Richard Guino died. He was 83. In 1974, sculptures exhibited in Paris were attributed to Renoir-Guino for the first time.

The Guino and Renoir heirs officially joined forces with an agreement called “The 1982 Convention,” which included “The Societe Civile Succession Richard Guino.” In 1984 all the sculptures were registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.

The agreement gave sole possession of the plasters and control of future production to the Guino estate. The Renoirs would receive royalties. As a further condition of the agreement, the Renoirs delivered all castings, sculptures, plasters and moldings to a French art foundry, the Susse Fonduer.

The agreement was signed by Paul Renoir, a grandson, and his son, Jean-Emmanuel Renoir, one of the plaintiffs in the just-settled suit.

The tidy arrangement did not last long. Court documents show that Paul Renoir “Unlawfully obtained a plaster of the Venus Victrix sculpture and that he wrongfully registered the piece under his own name in the United States Copyright Office on Oct. 29, 1984.”

In October 1991, “Certain plasters were shipped from Switzerland to Jean-Emmanuel’s Redstar Corporation in Canada,” the court stated. Then they went to Seattle, Wash., then California.

“Plaintiff alleges that the plasters next appeared in Beverly Hill, California, at the Rodeo Gallery,” said the court. “Plaintiff further alleges that Jean-Emmanuel and his mother Louis Hernandez a/k/a Madame Renoir, and Redstar worked with the gallery to advertise and sell a limited edition bronze series of 495 of each sculpture in the collection.”

In May 1993, an advertisement for the bronzes appeared in Art Business News. When an article on the statues appeared in a French newspaper in 1994, a suit was filed in Paris in 1995 by the Societe Civile Succession Richard Guino and heirs Alain and Jacques Renoir.

In April 1998 a French court, ruling the plasters “were either counterfeit or illegally retained works,” awarded a judgment of 3,030,000 francs ($488,560) to the Societe and Alain and Jacques Renoir. The statues were found to be in violation of Article 122-4 of the French Literary and Artistic Property Code that prohibits a full or partial reproduction of a work without the authorization of the author or his legal representative.

In 2003 The Rima Gallery and House of Renoir in Scottsdale began advertising their new collection of “22 rarely-seen sculptures” made by Renoir. Court documents show Jean-Emmanuel Renoir and his Redstar Corporation had entered into a sales agreement with the Scottsdale galleries.

The Societe filed suit against the galleries and owners on July 10, 2003, alleging violation of the Federal Copyright Infringement Act and other charges.

The gallery owners stated the sculptures are in the public domain because their forms were made in the 1913-1918 period when Guino assisted Renoir. The court, however, ruled that new copyright protection was afforded in 1983 when the bronzes were for the first time published under the co-names of Renoir-Guino. Because copyright protection extends 70 years after an author’s death, the artwork is covered until 2043, 70 years after Guino died in 1973. U.S. District Court Judge Earl Carroll ruled in the Societe’s favor on Sept. 7, 2005.

The galleries appealed. This time the case was heard in San Francisco on Oct. 20. The result was the same. Circuit Court Judge D.W. Nelson ruled that copyright infringement had occurred.