Topics: consignment, Cariou v. Prince, Judith A. Bresler, The Importance of Being Transformative, Copyright Fair Use, P.C., Judith Prowda, authentication, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Dean R. Nicyper, Howard N. Spiegler, Authenticity Issues and Recent Developments, Stacy Lefkowitz, Has Transformative Use Gone Too Far?, Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, Google Books, The Law Applicable to Art Consignments, Garcia v. Google, Restitution, Dale Cendali, Pamela Samuelson, Copyright, Cowan Liebowitz & Latman, Visual Arts and the Law, Berkeley Law School, Judge Denny Chin, Sotheby’s Institute, Fair Use, Richard Dannay, Art Repatriation and Restitution

Topics: General Order 5.4(c)(3), YouTube, Innocence of Muslims, Cindy Garcia, Copyright, Ninth Circuit, Sydney Thomas, Google

Topics: Walter Sobchak, Copyright Act, Feist, Prince v. Cariou, Libya, Digital Millennium Copyright Act, DMCA, Youssef, YouTube, Innocence of Muslims, Green Day, Seltzter v. Green Day, Nothing Compares 2 U, prior restraint, 17 U.S.C. § 106, Cindy Garcia, Copyright, Prince, First Amendment, Google, Sinead O’Connor, Benghazi, work for hire

In response to the recent request by the Agudas Chasidei Chabad plaintiffs for an interim judgment on the compounding sanctions judgment for the Russian Federation’s refusal to comply with a 2010 judgment to return the ancestral library of the movement’s leader (Rebbe), the United States has filed a statement of position and asked the U.S. District Court to ignore Russia’s willful defiance of that judgment. The statement of position cites some credible post-judgment remedy law, but it is mostly a re-hashing of the previously statement filed by the U.S. which the court declined to adopt when it sanctioned the Russian defendants last year. The U.S. position also continues to argue that letting diplomatic avenues run their course is the prudent move, even though there is not the slightest indication that Russia is paying U.S. diplomats any mind whatsoever. More worriedly, the U.S. asks that the plaintiffs be required to advise the government before taking any further action. It is hard to avoid the irony that the United States is asking for an order that its citizens be required to advise the government of their intent to vindicate their rights against Russia.

Topics: Yossarian, Immanuel Kant, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Rebbe, Agudas Chasidei Chabad, Catch 22, Categorical Imperative, Russian Federation, FSIA, Restitution, IFSA, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Joseph Heller, Immunity from Seizure Act

There have been occasional references during the Gurlitt affair to the possiblity that some of the paintings seized from Hildebrand Gurlitt's apartment had been exhibited in the United States. Details have been sparse. With a copy of the out-of-print catalogue from that exhibition now in hand, however, we can start to identify the scope of this U.S. contact—and thus the basis for possible claims against Gurlitt and/or the Federal Republic of Germany by those paintings' original owners or heirs. Until the disclosures by the Gurlitt Task Force are complete, it remains to be seen which.

Topics: Schwabinger Kunstfund, Max Beckmann. www.lostart.de, Lempertz, Cornelius Gurlitt, Nolde, Gurlitt Task Force, Art Association for the Rhineland and Westphalia, Gurlitt Collection, Lion Tamer, Hildebrandt Gurlitt, Entartete Kunst, Restitution, Kirchner, Kandinsky, World War II, German Watercolors Drawings and Prints, Löwenbändiger, Kunstverein Düsseldorf, A Loan Exhibition Sponsored by the Federal Republi, Franz Marc, Large Horse, Federal Republic of Germany, Raubkunst, Zandvoordt

Topics: Schwabinger Kunstfund, Complaint, Nazi stolen art, Hannes Hartung, Hildebrand Gurlitt, Gurlitt Info, www.Gurlitt.Info, Augsburg, Germany, Tido Park, Gurlitt Collection, Beschwerde, Entartete Kunst, Gurlitt Facts, Beutekunst, Gurlitt, Restitution, Statute of Limitations, World War II, Derek Setz, degenerate art, Staatsanwalt, Strafprozessordnung (StPO) Paragraph 304, Soviet Union, Raubkunst, Verjährung, Münchner Kunstfund

Topics: Smithsonian Institution, Brendan Connell Jr., India Pinkney, The Frick Collection, Jiyun Cameron Lee, The Barnes Foundation, Dallas Museum of Art, Marianna Horton Mermin, Lawrence H. Berger, Robert W. Clarida, Alison Lonshein, James B. Pritchard Professor of Archaeology, Philadelphia Museum of Art, University of Miami School of Law, American Alliance of Museums, Stephen W. Clark, Library of Congress, Stephen K. Urice, Yayoi Shionoiri, Michael J. Cooney, Lauryn H. Guttenplan, Karen Coe, Julie Hart, Roger I. Ideishi, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Marsha Shaines, Cristina Del Valle, Judith E. Leonard, Eryn Starun, Penn Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Nicholas S. Holmes, Temple University, Sara Geelan, The J. Paul Getty Trust, John R. Cahill, Events, Jonathan A. Segal, Rachelle Browne, University of Pennsylvania, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, The Franklin Institute, Adine Varah, Eric J. Snyder, City and County of San Francisco, C. Brian Rose, National Endowment for the Arts, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Maxwell L. Anderson, Whitney Museum of American Art, Larry Dubinski, Leslie Johnston, Farleigh Earhart

As we suspected, the "Dumb Starbucks" store in Los Angeles claiming a right to copy Starbucks's logo and store design by relying on fair use turned out to be a prank after all (bolstered, as I did not realize yesterday by the fact that despite what the store said about selling coffee, they were actually just giving it away). It turns out that Nathan Fielder of Comedy Central was behind the whole thing, for use on his show "Nathan for You." Less funny for him was that yesterday the Los Angeles Board of Health closed the store for distributing food products without the proper licence.

Topics: Nathan for You, art gallery, Nathan Fielder, Dumb Starbucks, Copyright, Starbucks, Fair Use

News that a coffee shop had opened in Los Angeles entitled "Dumb Starbucks" has again raised the proper interpretation of fair use under U.S. intellectual property law into the realm of popular culture and commerce. Whereas last year’s Beastie Boys/GoldieBlox dustup (still ongoing) revolved primarily around copyright law, here the potential issue is one of trademark infringement. To stave off accusations of liability, the new enterprise has preemptively labeled itself an "art gallery." Will this hold up? Even Starbucks seems puzzled.

Topics: 505 U.S. 763, parody, Landham Act, Weird Al Yankovic, @dumbstarbucks, Green Day, Bad Starbucks, 17 U.S.C. § 107, 15 U.S.C. § 1115(b)(4), GoldieBlox, Copyright, Dr. Evil, Starbucks, Number Two, Twitter, Two Pesos Inc. v. Taco Cabana Inc., Beastie Boys, Fair Use, Merriam-Webster, Austin Powers

Just days after attorneys for Cornelius Gurlitt floated the idea of discussions with survivors and heirs for a possible resolution to the questions about the artworks found in his apartment two years ago that are suspected of having been stolen or sold under duress during the Nazi era (and after the prosecutor was ordered to make a full list available to journalists), the prosecutor in charge of the investigation categorically rejected the possibility of any deal with Gurlitt.

Topics: Erhard Göpel, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Stuttgart, Wiesbaden, FAZ, Focus, Hildebrand Gurlitt, Cornelius Gurlitt, Augsburg, Amsterdam, Willi Korte, Schwabinger Kunstfund. Kunstfund München, Marvin Fishman, Reinhard Nemetz, Gurlitt Task Force, Germany, Fall Gurlitt, The Art Newspaper, Gurlitt Collection, Max Beckmann, Karl Buchholz, Robert Looker, Entartete Kunst, Bar Braun, Beutekunst, Schwabing, Magdeburg, LACMA, Ersessene Kunst, Harvard, Gurlitt, Bavaria, Busch-Reisinger, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, degenerate art, the Central Collecting Point, Augsburger Staatsanwalt, www.lostart.de, Nazi art, Sotheby's, Roman Norbert Ketterer, Raubkunst, Verjährung, Mayen Beckmann, National Gallery Berlin, verschollene Kunst, De-Nazification, Selbstbildnis, Self Portrait