In a year that began with the vagaries of Left Shark, we have our most bizarre art law story of 2015—so far. Last year, the United States Copyright Office released a public draft of the Third Edition of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices. Among the new items that leapt out at practitioners was the section of examples of non-copyrightable works, which included “A photograph taken by a monkey.” The Copyright Office was inspired to include this example because of a 2011 photograph taken by British nature photographer David Slater. A crested black macaque picked up Slater’s camera and pressed the shutter button, and the result became known as the “monkey selfie.” While as I said at the time, I thought the point was debatable to the extent that Slater could intentionally have left the camera within reach of the animal the same way that leaving something exposed to nature could still result in a copyrightable work, the question was obviously (I thought) limited to whether or not Slater could restrict reproduction of the work as the author.

Topics: Left Shark, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Blurb, Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Wildlife Personalities., PETA, David Slater, Copyright, United States Copyright Office, Litigation

Topics: Republic of Poland, Alexander Khochinsky, Third Reich, Polish Ministry of Culture and National Heritage, extradition, Book of Acquisitions of the Greater Poland Museum, Moscow, Restitution, "Girl with Dove", World War II, Antoine Pesne, Kaiser Friedrich-Museum, National Museum of Poznan, Litigation, Diplomatic Note No. 35-15-2013, Rakoff

Topics: sexual assault, Jon Kessler, Columbia University, Mattress Performance/Carry That Weight, Performance Art, Title IX, Paul Nungesser, motion to strike, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Litigation, university disciplinary board, First Amendment, U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Right, The Mattress Performance, Emma Sulkowicz

The Appellate Division, First Department, has affirmed the 2013 dismissal of claims in a lawsuit challenging the admissions policy of the Metropolitan Museum in New York.

Topics: Litigation, Museums

Last month it was revealed that the British Museum had loaned a sculpture from the Parthenon, a/k/a Elgin, Marbles to the State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg. Reaction ranged from puzzlement to fury. Lee Rosenbaum pondered whether the loan was in fact a trial balloon to prepare for litigation, specifically, to rebut Greece’s claim that the sculptures are a single unified work that should be returned with an argument that the collection of individual objects is more complicated. My reaction really boiled down to the “law” of unintended consequences: once the UK put any of the objects outside its territorial control—let alone in Russia, which has shown little interest in the niceties of international loans and restitution—the British Museum may find itself in a Portrait of Wally situation. 

Topics: cultural property, Defining Beauty: the Body in ancient Greek Art, Museum of Cycladic Art in Athens, The Art Newspaper, Lee Rosenbaum, Elgin Marbles, Parthenon Marbles, Restitution, British Museum, Events, State Hermitage Museum, Portrait of Wally, The State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg, Litigation

Back in October, we surveyed some developments in lawsuits over public art and protection available under copyright law in graffiti art. There has been some movement, and other developments, in these cases.

Topics: Ahol Sniffs Glue, Zero Theorem, Digital Milennium Copyright Act, David Anasagasti, Zappos.com Inc., Monty Python, Sara Bareilles, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), London, Terry Giliam, the Lanham Act, DMCA, Jason 'Revok' Williams, 17 U.S.C. §1202 et seq., Public Art, Graffiti Art, Romania, Vogue, Nordstrom Inc., Chicago, Amazon.com Inc., unfair competition, Robert Cavalli, Victor 'Reyes' Chapa, Jeffrey 'Steel' Rubin, Copyright, Buenos Aires, Litigation, Ocean Grown, Wal-Mart, New York Magazine, Graffiti, California Business and Professions Code § 17200, Staff USA Inc.

Topics: No. 1:14-cv-3756 (LGS), Art Assure Ltd. LLC, Collections, Asher Edelman, Artmentum GmbH, Sullivan & Worcester LLP, Art and Museum Law Group, Litigation, ArtAssure Ltd. LLC v. Artmentum GmbH et al.

Topics: Financial Guaranty Insurance Corporation, Chapter 9, Syncora Capital, FGIC, Judge Steven Rhodes, Detroit, Detroit Institute of Arts, Bankruptcy, Nathan Bomey, Kevyn Orr, Litigation, Detroit Free Press, Museums, Detroit Bankruptcy, grand bargain

Topics: Legislation, the Middle East, looted property, Forgery, Auctions, VAT, Studio Legale Jacobacci & Associati, authenticity, London, Sam Keller, Julien Anfruns, droite de suite, Froriep, Moral Rights, Europe, North America, Holocaust claims, California, Fondation Beyeler, Howard Kennedy FSI, Thomson Reuters, Asia, Rome, Restitution, International Council of Museums, Massimo Sterpi, United States, World War II, Sabina von Arx, 1970 UNESCO Convention, Morgan Stanley, Art Fairs, Publications, Litigation, due diligence, Immunity from Seizure Act, Museums, Bruno Boesch, 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Ex, Daniel McClean, New York

The Baltimore Sun reports that U.S. District Judge Judge Leonie Brinkema allowed the Baltimore Museum of Art’s motion for summary judgment at today’s hearing in Alexandria, Virginia. That means that the BMA is the owner of the painting, not claimant Martha Fuqua, who argued that she bought the painting at a 2009 flea market in good faith. Barring an appeal (or perhaps even with one), the painting will soon return to Baltimore from where it was stolen in 1951.

Topics: hearsay, Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Potomack Company, flea market Renoir, ancient documents, Der Spiegel, Martha Fuqua, Baltimore Museum of Art, Litigation, business records exception, summary judgment, Museums, Leonie Brinkema, Paysage Bords de Seine, FRCP 56