Monday, May 29, 2023

“The Left Has Shanghaied Copyright”

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

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

The Federalist’s Robin Ridless takes some clean power-punches at the “ivy-cloistered radicalism” of the “all-appropriation-is-fair-use” jihadists. Here’s one example,

To read a sampling of current American law review articles on the topic, it is easy to form the impression that copyright and trademark protections comprise this nation’s gravest injustice. The call by legal academics to get rid of almost all intellectual-property protection at first seems like a reversal of the Left’s usual promotion of the nanny state.

And then this zinger,

Legal grants of “monopoly” in artworks suppress the free speech of others. Ownership privileges thwart the “flourishing” of inner-city children.

Right. Because in the end the leftist’s hysteria about the “death of creativity” means nothing other than the death of sexy art law cases to opine and write about. The spectacle, pure and simple. Sans the rockets and red glare, all we’re left with is “aspiring” artists, art students and, oh yes, just plain simple artists. Who the hell wants to write about that?


Tags: , , , , , , , ,


No comments so far.

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