Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Arbitration in art world disputes

In arbitration, disputes are resolved with binding effect by a person or persons acting in a judicial manner in private, rather than by a national court of law that would have jurisdiction unless the parties have prior agreement to exclude it. It requires a decision by the parties, at the time of making their agreement, to take any dispute outside of the court system and have it settled in private by an arbitrator jointly funded by the parties.

More via Apollo Magazine.


On the Hirshhorn, Wodiczko, and Why We Don’t Need Any More Bad Art

Krzysztof Wodiczko

Krzysztof Wodiczko

The Washington Post’s Phillip Kennicott on why The Hirshhorn Museum’s decision to pull a Krzysztof Wodiczko video projection last week is “an unnecessary concession to the new American troll culture, a vocal demographic that often enjoys taking offense because they live in a virtual world defined by rapid recrimination, bullying and thoughtlessness.”

I agree with Kennicott’s characterization of both self-censoring art institutions and our new troll culture. Where we part ways is his plea that artists deal with our “gun crisis.” First, we would have to address whether “we” (presumably the U.S.) have a gun crisis (see Sam Harris’ The Riddle of the Gun article from 2013), and second, whether art is the best way to address this or any other political crisis.

We must remember that bad art is bad art. Simply calling it “political” does nothing other than appease one’s constituency and friends. It does nothing else. It’s bad art. We have enough of that. What we do need is art that takes us to a place, philosophically and aesthetically, that allows for alternative modes of existence that are not predicated on current modes and current methods of analysis and critique. We’ve had enough of this so-called “critical theory” and dismal state of art it has left us with.

So yes, project Wodiczko’s video, but no, please don’t encourage artists to make bad art.


Is embedding tweets with images a copyright violation?


I have to study this opinion further, but U.S. District Court Judge Katherine Forrest’s answer of “yes” to this question seems like the correct one (and not that controversial).


Why cutting federal funding for the arts would be a good thing

When it comes specifically to the NEA, there is simply no question that federal funding is unnecessary to keep arts groups afloat. But that’s not even the best argument against state-sanctioned culture.

Via Reason.


Judge awards graffiti artists $6.7 million

A federal judge in Brooklyn awarded a judgment of $6.7 million on Monday to 21 graffiti artists whose works were destroyed in 2013 at the 5Pointz complex in Long Island City, Queens.

Given the recent tax-overhaul, it wouldn’t surprise me if this case grabs Congress’s or the Trump Administration’s attention. Otherwise, my bet is that this case is appealed.


Some art world disputes

Interesting article on some art world disputes, and to our pleasant surprise does not include everyone’s little darling…appropriation.


Save the Presidents at Times Square NYC


For the month of Washington’s and Lincoln’s Birthdays, Times Square Arts presents a project by artists Tali Keren and Alex Strada, “day in the life,” which consists of a portrait of 43 monumental busts of former American Presidents. Rescued from the site of a closing sculpture park near Williamsburg, Virginia by the entrepreneur who was hired to demolish them, the statues sit, damaged but steadfast, in the light of the sun and the darkness of night.

From the artists:

“By showing Save the Presidents as the Midnight Moment for February 2018, we are excited to bring a surreal farm and worksite in rural Virginia to the center of commerce, traffic and tourism in New York City. The film is slow and quiet – a stark contrast to the buzz of Times Square. At the same time, both spaces are monumental and fantastical.

Save the Presidents explores the promise and instability of political representation, while questioning mythologies of democracy, power and gender. It functions as a Rorschach test onto which Times Square pedestrians may naturally project their political fantasies and associations. In our current, precarious political moment, the work encourages a reassessment and reimagining of the history and future of the American presidency.”

- Tali Keren and Alex Strada, Artists


Clancco, Clancco: The Source for Art & Law,, and Art & Law are trademarks owned by Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento. The views expressed on this site are those of Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento and of the artists and writers who submit to They are not the views of any other organization, legal or otherwise. All content contained on or made available through is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed, nor is anything submitted to treated as confidential.

Website Terms of Use, Privacy, and Applicable Law.

Switch to our mobile site