Last week, the New York Appellate Division, First Department, found that privacy law does not protect individuals in glass-walled apartments from being photographed by an artist in a neighboring building. The artist, Arne Svenson, is a critically acclaimed fine art photographer who used a telephoto camera lens to photograph people in the building across from him, without their consent, and exhibited a series of these photographs, called “The Neighbors,” in galleries in Los Angeles and New York. Two of the neighbors, Matthew and Martha G. Foster, sued Svenson on behalf of themselves and their children in May 2013 seeing damages ...
[caption id="attachment_7991" align="alignnone" width="225"] Havana City, Havanna, 31 March 2009[/caption] Creative Time is staging a performance of Tania Bruguera's Tatlin's Whisper #6 in Times Square on Monday, April 13 from 12:00–2:00 p.m. According to Artnet, The performance is a public act of solidarity with Bruguera and other artists around the world currently facing violence and criminal charges for exercising their freedom of expression. In a Facebook event to publicize the happening, organizers declare: "As citizens of the world with a shared humanity, we urge the government of Cuba to drop all charges against Tania Bruguera, Angel Santiesteban, and Danilo Maldonado “El Sexto," who are either imprisoned or facing ...
[caption id="attachment_7962" align="alignnone" width="180"] Copyright statute during the reign of Anne, Queen of England, Scotland and Ireland from 1702-1707 and Queen of Great Britain and Ireland from 1707-1714.[/caption] Eileen Kinsella reports for artnet News on recent changes in British copyright law affecting artists, museums, art publishers, and curators. The new provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (“CDPA”), which go into effect in 2020, affect copyright protection of mass-manufactured artistic works. This class of works, which would include images of artworks printed in art books or on museum promotional goods, was previously treated differently in UK copyright law than ...
Robert W. Kastenmeier, a Wisconsin Democrat who in 1976 managed the first general revision of copyright law since 1909, died on Friday at his home in Arlington, Va. He was 91. “Copyright and intellectual property is basically not ideological,” Mr. Kastenmeier said in an interview for this obituary in 2012, adding, “If you think the law has to be changed, updated, that doesn’t really have anything to do with being conservative or liberal.” More via The NY Times.
[caption id="attachment_7917" align="alignnone" width="300"] Slide image, The Legal Medium, Sergio Munoz Sarmiento (2015).[/caption] I've been meaning to jot down some thoughts on last weekend's art and law conference at Yale Law School. This morning I read Colby Chamberlain's remarks via Artforum, and I must say he is seriously on-point. The ramblings of lawyers (Hoffman), the aloof super-star panelists (Goldsmith and Balkin), and the branding of the conference are all quite true. I must add though (and if you're interested in art and law you should be paying attention here), that there is much, much more to art and law than copyright and fair ...
Using computers, “Taylor and his colleagues planned to use the unique signatures they found to make a Jackson Pollock fake good enough to dupe art experts. ‘However, we concluded that to generate this work would represent the dawn of a new and unwanted era,’ Taylor told me in an email. ‘So we shelved the plan.’”
Via The Atlantic.
A French court has ruled that a French photographer of furniture for auction house catalogs has a claim for damages against artnet … for violation of copyright with regard to photographs of furniture, owned by third parties, sold at auction and reproduced along with sales results in the artnet price database, the world’s most popular and comprehensive database for art, decorative objects and antique sales.
Via Artnet News.
There will always be conflicts of interest somewhere, just as there will always be those who say that authorship is irrelevant. No system for establishing authenticity can be perfect. But new discoveries are the engine of art history, and if we continue to rely on a diminishing pool of inexpert experts, our subject will soon grind to a halt.
Via The Artnewspaper.
On January 1, 2015, the gift and estate tax exemption increased to $5.43 million per person and to $10.86 for a married couple. Artists who hope to take advantage of the increased exemption face unique challenges when making gifts to family and friends of visual art they have created.
I’ve been meaning to jot down some thoughts on last weekend’s art and law conference at Yale Law School. This morning I read Colby Chamberlain’s remarks via Artforum, and I must say he is seriously on-point. The ramblings of lawyers (Hoffman), the aloof super-star panelists (Goldsmith and Balkin), and the branding of the conference are all quite true.
I must add though (and if you’re interested in art and law you should be paying attention here), that there is much, much more to art and law than copyright and fair use, and there are artists other than Richard Prince and Jeff Koons in need of legal and scholarly support (where were all the pro-appropriationists when Lauren Clay came around?).
Given that the gap between art and law is already wide enough and in need of some serious bridging, the real issue for us art and law folk to address is one of relevancy. What does it mean to be relevant? What topics are and are not relevant? What can we do, collectively, to address pressing and timely issues to not only further cultural production, but to humanize the practice and study of law?
Let me give you one example. The fact that artists and art critics always apologize for “not being lawyers” but the converse is rarely true (legal scholars always feel free to opine on art and art history, albeit usually with the household brands Duchamp, Pollock, and Warhol) says much about the amount of work yet to be done in this nascent field. And when lawyers and legal scholars (Hoffman and Balkin, respectively) drone on about inconsequential issues (strict scrutiny) or impart their knowledge in a patronizing and condescending manner, artists and art scholars are sure to turn a deaf ear–and who would blame them? Balkin, a First Amendment scholar, delivered a pompous diatribe on rights of publicity that could not have come at a worst–or more irrelevant–moment. How out-to-lunch do you have to be, even up in New Haven, to not notice that we’re currently living in a world where media and artistic censorship and self-censorship are at an all-time high?
I’m working on a text piece that will elaborate a bit more on this. For now, let’s just end with this: this conference was good; the next one will be better. Stay tuned!
Switch to our mobile site