One of the longest running art restitution litigations in the United States has been dismissed for a second time, with another appeal likely to follow. The heirs of Lilly Cassirer Neubauer have been pursuing the return of Camille Pissarro’s Rue St. Honoré, après-midi, êffet de pluie from the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection in Madrid for more than ten years, but on June 4, 2015 the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles ruled that the Spanish museum has acquired full title to the painting by adverse possession. The key aspect of the decision is the court’s resolution of the choice of law question, namely, should California law or Spanish law apply to the question of who owns the painting? After a lengthy analysis the court determined that Spanish law applies, and that the museum has possessed the painting long enough to have become the owner regardless of the fact that it was sold under duress. So now a case that has already been to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals twice will almost certainly head back a third time. The court concluded its decision by appealing to the parties to “pause, reflect, and consider whether it would be appropriate to work towards a mutually-agreeable resolution of this action, in light of Spain’s acceptance of the Washington Conference Principles and the Terezin Declaration, and, specifically, its commitment to achieve “just and fair solutions” for victims of Nazi persecution.” But it is hard to see why that would happen. Notwithstanding the dictates of the Washington Principles, the Collection has been quite content to resist the claim. Now that it has won, it is hard to imagine it suddenly taking a different view.

Topics: Lilly Cassirer Neubauer, Terezin Declaration, Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, Rue St. Honoré après-midi êffet de pluie, Jacques Goudstikker, California Code of Civil Procedure § 354.3, Nazi-looted art, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Washington Conference Principles, FSIA, adverse possession, expropriation exception”, Restitution, Marei Von Saher, sovereign immunity, Jakob Schweidwimmer, World War II, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 222, Altmann v. Republic of Austria, Camille Pissarro, foreign affairs doctrine, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Museums, Baron Hans-Heinrich Thyssen- Bornemisza, 28 U.S.C. § 1605, Welfenschatz

Reactions to the Richard Prince Instagram story continue to filter in, and highlight the perpetual confusion between what is publicly available and what is in the public domain. They are not the same thing, with important legal consequences.

Topics: Richard Prince, Missy, Copyright Act, Prince v. Cariou, Canal Zone, Patrick Cariou, Suicide Girls, vulture.com, Yes Rasta, 17 U.S.C. § 107, Jerry Saltz, Instagram, Copyright, transformativeness, Fair Use, ArtNet, New York Magazine, § 107

Few art law cases have received as much attention as that of Richard Prince and his dispute with Patrick Cariou over the latter’s Yes, Rasta photographs that Prince altered, defaced, and otherwise rearranged for his Canal Zone series. Prince has now garnered renewed attention for his appropriation of Instagram images in a set of works he has been selling at a Gagosian Gallery show called “New Portraits" (and in various other venues over the last few months). He escaped liability for infringement of Cariou’s pictures (though the case settled after remand; several infringement claims were still in play when the parties settled). Can he do so again? If this recent effort is not infringement, it certainly begs the question of whether the fair use exception has swallowed the rule. Lastly, Instagram itself may have prohibited the entire exercise in its terms of use, a possible avenue to short-circuit the entire copyright exercise.

Topics: Richard Prince, Copyright Act, DoeDeere, 2LiveCrew, Prince v. Cariou, Roy Orbison, Canal Zone, Patrick Cariou, Internet, Yes Rasta, 17 U.S.C. § 107, Instagram, Copyright, Gagosian Gallery, transformativeness, Fair Use, § 107

Topics: University of Kansas, Megan Fontanella, Jordan Arnold, Klein & Solomon LLP, International Foundation for Art Research, Jo Backer Laird, Amy Adler, Sandra Cobden, Alfred Flechtheim, Betty Little, NYU School of Law, Shawnee State University, Guggenheim Museum, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Amr Al Azm, Christopher Robinson, Marla Diaz, ARIS Title Insurance Corporation, Judd Grossman, John Cahill, Alice Farren-Bradley, Inc., Boston University, Art Recovery Group, David Goldstein, Eleonora Nagy, Schiele, Jane C. H. Jacob, James Martin, Pryor Cashman LLP, Karl Geercken, Judith Pearson, Doreen Bolger, Kevin Ray, Museum of Modern Art, Peter Herdrich, Mel Urbach, ARIS, Chris Marinello, III, Pierre Ciric, Arader Galleries, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, William L Charron, Christie's Inc., On the Shore of the Seine, Spencer Tomkins, W. Graham Arader, K2 Intelligence, MaryKate Cleary, Laurie Rush, Modern Sculpture Conservation LLC, Ciric Law Firm PLLC; Holocaust Art Restitution Pro, lston & Bird LLP, James Butterwick, Auctionata, Restitution, Colleen St Onge, Jonathan Illari, President’s Cultural Property Advisory Committee, Asian Art Research & Appraisals, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, Events, Simon Hornby, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Bonnie Magness-Gardiner, Art Dealers Association of America Jane Levine, Jacob Fine Art, Wesley Fisher, Harry Ettlinger, Herrick Feinstein LLP, Baltimore Museum of Art, Portrait of Wally, Cummer Museum of Art & Gardens, Nicholas O'Donnell, National Stolen Art File and Art Crime Team, Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germa, Francis O'Connor, IFAR, Sotheby's, Bonhams, The Heritas Group, Ken Perenyi, Patricia J. Graham, Emily Kempin Professor of Law, Whitney Museum of American Art, Meridith Savona, Tim Carpenter, Vienna, Megan Noh, Butterwick Gallery LLC, Paysage Bords de Seine, Museum Security Network, Leopold Museum, Crozier Fine Arts Inc., Art Law Report, Mari-Claudia Jiménez, Sharon Flescher, Michael Danti, Holly Keris

Topics: Copyrights on the Street Creating and Preserving G, Newport, Rhode Island, Graffiti Art, Visual Artists Rights Act, Deirdre A. Fox, Copyright Society of the U.S.A., Peter Caruso, VARA, Kernochan Center for Law Media and the Arts, Phillippa Loengard, Events, 17 U.S.C. § 106A, Columbia Law School, Copyright, Christopher J. Robinson

Topics: Petra Willner, Cornelius Gurlitt, Breslau, Wrocław, Zwei Reiter am Strand, Uta Werner, Max Liebermann, Gurlitt Collection, Two Riders on the Beach, Verena Osgyan, Oberlandesgericht, Gurlitt, Restitution, David Toren, World War II, Mittelbayerische Zeitung, Kunstmuseum Bern, Museums, Berner Zeitung, David Friedmann

Topics: Copyright Act, Libya, Digital Millennium Copyright Act, DMCA, Youssef, YouTube, Innocence of Muslims, prior restraint, 17 U.S.C. § 106, Cindy Garcia, Copyright, First Amendment, Google, Benghazi, work for hire

Topics: Deaccession, Graham W. J. Beal, Laura Berman, Pamela Marcil, Van Gogh, Detroit Institute of Arts, Museums, Detroit Bankruptcy

Topics: Gurlitt Task Force, Nazi-looted art, Gurlitt Collection, Two Riders on the Beach, August Mattheis and Christopher Marinello, Munich, Rosenbergs, Gurlitt, Restitution, David Toren, World War II, W Wall Street Journal, Ritter am Strand

Topics: Fred Jones, University of Oklahoma, La bergère rentrent des moutons, Restitution, World War II, Leone Meyer, Camille Pissarro, Paul Wesselhöft, Museums, Jr. Museum, The Oklahoman