Wednesday, September 20, 2017

No Infringement; Play is Parody of “How the Grinch Stole Christmas!”

On a side-by-side comparison in a Rule 12(c) motion. Opinion here.


Why Is a Law Firm Investigating the Walker’s Handling of the Sam Durant Fiasco?

Does anyone else think it’s odd that the Walker Art Center has hired a law firm to investigate how the Walker’s executive director, Olga Viso, handled the Sam Durant fiasco?

Has anyone even addressed the potential moral rights claims yet?


“Wrapping an Instagram heading around somebody else’s photograph, I don’t see how that is transformative.”

Images in question in the Graham v. Prince copyright infringement case.

Images in question in the Graham v. Prince copyright infringement case.

Another article on Richard Prince and his appropriation practice. Not much new here, except perhaps to those as yet uninitiated (or bored).


Tired of Monkeying Around, Copyright Dispute Settled

The Naruto-Slater circus act has been settled.


“And then I started asking myself, what kind of person wants to have the same identical job for 35 years?”

Judge Richard Posner on his recent retirement. If you’re an art lawyer or interested in art and law, this is one book co-authored by Judge Posner that you must read.


Art & Law Oral Arguments

Image courtesy of Phil Roeder.

Image courtesy of Phil Roeder.

The Art & Law Program cordially invites you to its first Oral Arguments on Saturday, October 28, 2017. Volume I will take place at NYU’s Einstein Auditorium, located at 34 Stuyvesant Street, New York City, and will begin at 4pm.

The Art & Law Oral Arguments consist of presenters who present 7-minute talks on works, projects, and ideas related to art and law. Like Pecha Kuchas, Oral Arguments are presented similarly – each presenter has a timed presentation of 20 images, each shown for 20 seconds. That’s just 6 minutes and 40 seconds to explain their work, project, or idea related to art and law. The Oral Arguments are followed by a Q&A session.

Volume I will consist of eight presenters, all alumni of The Art & Law Program. The presenters are: Thomas Beale, Abram Coetsee, Terike Haapoja, Nicole Belangeil Kaack, Kenneth Pietrobono, Susan Rosenberg, Vered Snear, and Alex Strada.


Space is limited. Registration for this event is on a first come, first serve basis. There is no fee to attend, but donations are welcomed. All proceeds will go to support The Art & Law Program. To register to attend this event, please visit our registration page, here.


Volume I is a collaboration between The Art & Law Program and Damien Davis (’16). Support for this event was provided by The Art & Law Program, The Rema Hort Mann Foundation, The Lower Manhattan Cultural Council and The Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development.


“Richard Prince’s working methods…apparently not an ‘aesthetic alteration’”

Images in question in the Graham v. Prince copyright infringement case.

Images in question in the Graham v. Prince copyright infringement case.

We noted last month that the copyright infringement suit against Richard Prince is moving forward.

Here’s an interesting article co-authored by copyright guru, Bob Clarida (and Robert Bernstein), on the strategic aspect of Prince asking the court to dismiss Donald Graham’s claim because Prince’s use Graham’s copyrighted photograph was outright fair use. The court declined to do so, and Clarida and Bernstein note the court’s 27-page opinion. [Note: article isn't free]

In part, they conclude with this: “But the appropriated nature of the Prince work—the “transformative context” it allegedly occupies by virtue of Prince’s working methods—is apparently not an ‘aesthetic alteration’ that the Graham court was willing to credit at all.”

Apparently, and certainly at this stage of litigation, a few words added to an appropriated image is not enough. This doesn’t bode well for those that argue that change of context–i.e., taking a photo from a magazine and putting it within the walls of an art museum–is, per se, fair use.


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