Friday, March 24, 2017

“The Artist…doesn’t want to be a corporate soul.”

The NY Times has an interesting story this morning on the increasing institutional battles over artists’ estates.

As we’ve said before, there is a way to keep an artist’s estate viable without losing artists’ rights and artistic wishes.


Mark Bradford’s Venice Biennale Project Includes Prisoners

Mark Bradford will launch a community-based programme during the 57th Venice Biennale this summer for Italian prisoners, enabling both male and female offenders to re-enter society.

Via The Art Newspaper.


Protesting Trump, Christo Cancels Art Project

Will be interesting to see what other artists do, or don’t do, in protest of Trump. Via The Art Newspaper.


Intellectual Property Backgrounds of President Trump’s Potential Supreme Court Nominees


The Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property has put together “a summary of the intellectual property backgrounds of President Trump’s twenty-one potential Supreme Court nominees. The summary addresses judicial, legislative, and legal experience, as well as education and scholarly work. The summary includes data on each nominee’s intellectual property cases, whether decided as a judge or argued in private practice. Where appropriate, the summary also notes legislative bills that were co-sponsored by the nominee.” For judges, the summary also notes how many cases, per IP area, the judge ruled in favor or against the owner and infringer.


75 Arrested in European Crackdown on Art Trafficking

The European police have arrested 75 people and recovered about 3,500 stolen archaeological artifacts and other artworks as part of the dismantling of an international network of art traffickers.

Via the paper of record.


Do We Keep or Jettison the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990?


The United States Copyright Office is undertaking a public study to assess the current state of U.S. law recognizing and protecting moral rights for authors, specifically the rights of attribution and integrity. As part of this study, the Office will review existing law on the moral rights of attribution and integrity, including provisions found in title 17 of the U.S. Code as well as other federal and state laws, and whether any additional protection is advisable in this area. To support this effort and provide thorough assistance to Congress, the Office is seeking public input on a number of questions.

Comments must be received no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on March 9, 2017. Reply comments must be received no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on April 24, 2017. The Office may announce one or more public meetings, to take place after written comments are received, by separate notice in the future.

This is a good opportunity for art lawyers, artists and other entities interested in this weird European tradition to opine on what’s good and what’s not working in the current law, better known as the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (“VARA”). Let’s start with, do we really need it? Does VARA have any teeth?

More information here via The US Copyright Register. Instructions on submitting comments are available here.


Art Dealer Sues Getty Museum for $77 Million

A Swiss art dealer sued the Getty Museum for $77 million, claiming that after it helped rehabilitate the museum’s bad reputation for buying looted art, the Getty iced it out of a deal it brokered to acquire part of a multibillion-dollar collection of ancient Roman statues.

Via Courthouse News.


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