The often murky role of advisors and clients in the art market is a subject that continues to generate headlines, from the ongoing Bouvier saga to this year’s judgment against Lisa Jacobs.  For those trying to draw useful lines and gain practical guidance, a new Kindle book Managing Relationships in the Art Market by art advisor and Tang Art Advisory Principal Annelien Bruins will be a useful reference. 

Topics: Books, Lisa Jacobs Fine Art, Art Advisors, Annelien Bruins, Tang Art Advisory, Managing Relationships in the Art Market

Readers of the blog will recall our view of Master Thieves: the Boston Gangesters Who Pulled off the World's Greatest Art Heist by Stephen Kurkjian.  Kurkjian's book is the definitive work on the 1990 robbery of several masterpieces from the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston, and explores--and dispels--numerous aspects of the infamous case. 

Topics: Stephen Kurkjian, Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Events, Master Thieves: the Boston Gangsters who Pulled of, Massachusetts Historical Society

The following is from the Kirkus Reviews starred review of A Tragic Fate--Law and Ethics in the Battle Over Nazi-Looted Art (emphasis added)

A comprehensive review of United States court cases involving art that was plundered by Nazis.

Adolf Hitler’s Nazi regime was always keenly attuned to the power of cultural symbolism and eager to find new ways to disenfranchise Jewish people. These two preoccupations converged in their looting of privately owned art between 1933 and 1945. Some treasures were brazenly confiscated, while others were purchased at steep, coerced discounts. In the last few decades, there’s been growing interest in this large-scale larceny, and yet much of the stolen art will likely never be returned to its original owners. Debut author O’Donnell, an attorney, calls this the “central paradox posed by disputes in the last twenty years.” In this book, he diligently catalogs the many moral and judicial reasons for this absurdity, as well as the evolution of laws regarding claims. His study specifically focuses on cases that resulted in litigation in America, providing an exhaustive account of each and arguing that such litigation can be an effective legal strategy, despite complaints to the contrary. O’Donnell also includes discussions of landmark moments in art-restitution law, such as the London Declaration in 1943, the Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets in 1998, and the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016, which was introduced in the U.S. Senate. The United States emerges in O’Donnell’s account as an early, forceful leader in international art restitution, despite the fact that some of its own laws, and even the Fifth Amendment, can complicate victims’ options. His mastery of the relevant law is nothing short of stunning, and his meticulous parsing of legal detail leaves no stones unturned.

Topics: Nazi-looted art, Books, Nicholas M. O'Donnell, A Tragic Fate, Law and Ethics in the Battle Over Nazi-Looted Art, Kirkus Reviews

New book explores the historical, ethical, and legal consequences of stolen art

I am pleased to announce that my book A Tragic Fate—Law and Ethics in the Battle Over Nazi-Looted Art (Ankerwycke/ABA Publishing ) is available for purchase and delivery.  I am proud to have composed the first comprehensive overview of looted art disputes in the United States, grounded in the historical and ethical perspectives that have shaped the debate over time.  This has been a fascinating project that am very excited to share.  As I hope readers of the blog will agree, my effort is always to provide a resource that those of general interest will find engaging but not hypertechincal, and which practioners will find useful as a resource. 

Topics: Catherine Hickley, Nazi-looted art, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, Books, Georgina Adam, Nicholas M. O'Donnell, Art Law Report, ABA Publishing, Ankerwycke, A Tragic Fate, Law and Ethics in the Battle Over Nazi-Looted Art

News Accompanied by Deafening Silence About Ongoing Restitution Policy Failures

The German government announced recently that it had returned an additional work of art found in the Salzburg home of Cornelius Gurlitt in connection with the 2013 revelation of Gurlitt’s trove of art originally in the possession of his late father Hildebrand.  La Seine, vue du Pont-Neuf, au fond le Louvre by Camille Pissarro (1902) has been returned to the heirs of Max Heilbronn, from whom it was taken in 1942 in France.  The accompanying announcement was of a piece with the ongoing fiasco of the Gurlitt affair: a press release touting the personal involvement of Germany’s Minister of Culture Monika Grütters, a self-serving but vague statement about commitments to restitution, and absolutely no explanation or update about what is happening to the hundreds of additional paintings and objects under investigation.  The press release was also sure to mention an upcoming exhibition of Gurlitt collection works later this year.  In sum, the announcement confirms precisely the opposite of its intended effect.

 

Topics: Cornelius Gurlitt, Germany, Nazi-looted art, Washington Conference Principles, Hildebrand Gurlit, Gurlitt, NS Raubkunst, Kunstmuseum Bern, Monika Grütters, Taskforce Schwabinger Kunstfund, Welfenschatz, Minister of Culture, Gurlitt Taskforce

A controversial painting removed from display at the U.S. Capitol will not be returning to display after the U.S. District Court denied a request for an injunction before the exhibition in question came to an end.  While the court acknowledged that St. Louis teenager David Pulphus’s Untitled #1 had been removed based on its viewpoint, it ultimately held that Pulphus was not the one “speaking,” the government was.  As such, it was free to do as it wished.  The court’s opinion carefully considered the factors that determine whether the speaker is the government or a private citizen, but as it acknowledged, the line can be hard to draw.  The opinion has implicationsfor other cases where art in public spaces stirs controversy.

Topics: Wm. Lacy Clay (D-MO), First Amendment, Ferguson Missouri, St. Louis, Dave Reichert, Duncan Hunter, David Pulphus, public forum, government speech, Thomas P. (“Tip”) O’Neill, Jr.

I will not be able to attend, but there is an event in the United Kingdom on June 9, 2017 in Canterbury well worth attending for anyone interested.  Entitled “Cultural Heritage in Danger: Illicit Trafficking, Armed Conflicts and Cultural Diplomacy,” the conference organizers describe it as follows.  Registration is available here.

Topics: UNESCO, University of Kent, Brexit, Canterbury, Janet Ulph, University of Leicester, Kathryn Walker Tubb, David Gill, University of Suffolk, Karl Goodwin, London School of Economics and Political Science, Maria Dimitriou, Kristin Hausler, Tasoula Hadjitofi, 1954 Hague Convention, Artemis Papathanassiou, Dr Sophia Labadi, Dr Tatiana Flessas, Mark Harrison, Sophie Hayes, Dr Sophie Vigneron, Kent Law School, Dr. Carla Figueira

I am looking forward to being in Vienna next week for the start of the conference to be held at the University of Vienna Library beginning Tuesday evening, May 2, 2017.  The conference goes until May 4.  Entitled “Accepting and Holding Objects in Trust—an International and Interdisciplinary Perspective,” the conference will explore a variety of restitution-related topics.  From the program, the schedule is below (papers will be given in part in English, but it appears mostly in German).  Registration is available until April 30, hope to see you there.

Topics: Russian State Library, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Austria, Jewish Museum Prague, University of Vienna, Dr. Regina Hitzenberger, Hannah M. Lessing, Victims of National Socialism, Olivia Kaiser, Christina Köstner - Pemsel, Markus Stumpf, Oliver Rathkolb, Institut für Rechts-und Verfassungsgeschichte, Leonhard Weidinger, Michael Wladika, Anneliese Schallmeiner, Alexandra Caruso, Bundesdenkmalamt (BDA), Thomas Rudert, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Jana Kocourek, SLUB Dresden, Petra Winter, Zentralarchiv der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, Reinhard Buchberger, Michal Bušek, Tomáš Foltýn, Marcela Strouhalova, Czech National Library, Prague, Michael Nosek, Johana Prouzová, Bertrand Perz, Monika Mayer, Monika Löscher, Christian Mertens, Philipp Mettauer, Wienbibliothek im Rathaus, INJOEST, Pia Schölnberger, Johannes Gramlich, Stephan Kellner, Murray Hall, Institut für Germanistik, Kamil Zeidler, Julia Stepnowska, Nawojka Cieslinska-Lobkowicz, Lara Lempertienė, Ekaterina Oleshkevich, Anna Kawałko, Hebrew University, Jörn Kreuzer, National Fund, Dr. James Bindenagel, Institut für Zeitgeschichte, Sebastian Spitra, Christian George, UB Mainz, Sammlung Pollák in Prager Museen, Kommission für Provenienzforschung, Albertina Wien, Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen München, Judaica Center National Library, Vilnius, Institut Geschichte der Juden

McDonald’s recently prevailed on personal jurisdiction grounds in a closely-watched case in California about the use of street art as décor for restaurants in the United Kingdom, but the issue has quickly arisen again.  As part of what the fast-food giant has clearly decided is a winning branding strategy, the chain’s use of graffiti from New York has now brought the threat of litigation from the so-called Bushwick Collective.  Where any such lawsuit gets filed will have a great deal to do with what happens next.

Topics: Joseph Tierney, Netherlands, Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Rime, California, specific jurisdiction, 17 U.S.C. § 1202, general jurisdiction, Moschino, personal jurisdiction, Graffiti, New York, Dashiell Snow, McDonald's, Street Art, Daimler AG v. Bauman, Virus, NDA, Don Rimx, Beau Stanton, Himbad, United Kingdom, Atomik, Bushwick Collective

After a recent discussion about whether the new Fearless Girl sculpture by Kristen Visbal in Lower Manhattan might implicate the copyright of the earlier Charging Bull sculpture that has been there for nearly three decades, the sculptor who created Charging Bull has stepped to the foreground to complain that the recent installation infringes his rights.  In addition to copyright arguments, that artist (Arturo di Modica) suggests that he has a moral rights claim under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (17 U.S.C. § 106A).  But since Charging Bull predates VARA it is probably ineligible for any protection.  Even if it were eligible, the elements of VARA rights are not implicated by the installation of The Fearless Girl because nothing has actually happened to Charging Bull.  Artistic confrontation is not “distortion, mutilation or other modification” under VARA.  In short, none of the arguments he advances would bestow on him the kind of right to be asked first that he proposes.

Topics: Copyright Act, Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990, VARA, The Fearless Girl, Charging Bull, Arturo Di Modica, Kristen Visbal, State Street Global Advisors, Christina Cauterucci, Slate, Carter v. Helmsley Spear, Inc., 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c), Derivative Works, Trademark dilution