Wednesday, November 22, 2017
 


George Lucas and His Legal Stormtroopers


True to courtroom myth, today George “Litigious” Lucas and his legal stormtroopers sued the original designer and creator of the Stormtrooper outfit in a British court for copyright and trademark infringement. Usual to “smart” appropriationists, Lucas claims the Stormtrooper outfit was at least one-year into design before Andrew Ainsworth got involved. According to the Associated Press:

stormtrooper.jpg

Read the rest of this entry »

 

Savas’ Grave, Rothko’s Chapel


rothko.chapel.jpg

Although we now know that Marilyn was a NY resident and where Eliot Spitzer liked to be spanked (District of Consumption), we don’t quite know where the corpse of Mark Rothko will eventually lie. His two children (Dr. and Dr. respectively) have now asked the NY Supreme Court (in NY the lowest court, but don’t ask us why because even though some of us attended law school it doesn’t mean we were paying attention) to allow them to lift him from his current burial site and transfer him to a more convenient and religiously faithful location in Westchester County. Talk about site-specific. More on the new Rothko chapel here.

 

Marilyn Monroe: Yankee or Golddigger?


monroe.jpg

“Now that image, which has earned millions in licensing fees for Marilyn Monroe’s estate, is free for all to use and sell.” So hails Dan Slater from The Wall Street Journal. A Los Angeles Federal District Court Judge has ruled that because Marilyn Monroe was a New York resident at the time of her death, California state laws regarding right of publicity do not apply. Thus, Marilyn is stuck with New York state laws which give a right of publicity to a living person. More interesting analysis on this from the Art Law Blog .

 

“I think I am going to be sick. Something else to thank Cardinal Schönborn for.”


Spain’s EL PAÍS reported today that Vienna sculptor and painter Alfred Hrdlicka has caused great controversy over his exhibition, Religion, Flesh, and Power, which critiques the Catholic Church. Nothing new of course for the Catholic Church and other religious conservatives to take such a position, but perhaps the real blow for them is that the exhibition is taking place at the Dommuseum in Vienna, an art gallery attached to the historic Catholic cathedral of St. Stephen.

Which art works? How’s a painting entitled Leonardo’s Last Supper as Seen by Pier Paolo Pasolini, which exhibits so called “homosexual” and self-gratifying acts by the apostles on top of the historic last supper table. This painting has now been removed after countless conservative German, Austrian and U.S. complaints alleged the painting was “blasphemous” and “profane,” and accusing Vienna Archbishop Christoph Schoenborn of letting this occur on his watch.

More from EL PAÍS here, and more in English here.

 

Donate


Dear Friends,

Thank you for your interest and taking the time to learn more about Clancco. This project was born out of our desire to create a space where the discourses and practices of art, visual culture, and law could be explored. During our existence, many of you have expressed an interest in contributing to our mission. Thus, we have now established a fiscal sponsorship which will allow us to accept tax-deductible donations to fund research regarding art and law issues, compensate independent writers and interviewees for their contributions to Clancco.com, as well as aid in establishing our Art + Law archive.

Read the rest of this entry »

 

Google Hit With Boring Lawsuit


A couple in love with their privacy has sued Google in a Pennsylvania state court and its program for invasion of privacy, claiming “mental suffering and diminished value of their property.” The Boring couple, Aaron and Christine are suing for $25,000.

“The Borings claim that Google drove down Oakridge Lane — a private road owned by residents — and then further trespassed into their driveway to take a photo that includes their pool. ‘If you were sitting in the pool, you’d see a Google vehicle right there close enough to hand them a drink,’ said Moskal. ‘It’s fortuitous that no one was in the pool.’”

A lawyer for the usually anti-Google Electronic Frontier Foundation, Kevin Bankston, thinks this suit may have some merit, but perhaps only if Christine was a little daring and showed us her derrière. He “pointed to a 1964 Alabama case, Daily Times-Democrat v. Graham, 162 So.2d 474, where a newspaper was held liable for printing a photo of a woman whose skirt had been blown over her head, even though the picture was taken in a public place….”

Clancco also plans on suing Google’s Street View for making us endure this cheesy and nerdy goofball with his orange suit. More at Law.com.

 

Texas Judge: Stripping Is Constitutional


Earlier this year, Clancco reported that Texas had just instituted a “pole tax”: a $5 surcharge to be paid by all visitors wishing to gawk at naked women. However, on March 28th, a Texas state district judge ruled that Texas may not collect a $5-per-customer strip-club fee that went into effect in January. Judge Scott Jenkins wrote in an opinion that the fee, ‘while furthering laudable goals, violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is therefore invalid.’

stripper.jpg

More at FirstAmendmentCenter.

 
 
Legal

Clancco, Clancco: The Source for Art & Law, Clancco.com, 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 Clancco.com. They are not the views of any other organization, legal or otherwise. All content contained on or made available through Clancco.com is not intended to and does not constitute legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is formed, nor is anything submitted to Clancco.com treated as confidential.

Website Terms of Use, Privacy, and Applicable Law.
 

Switch to our mobile site