Hot Shot

Blake Gopnik at the Daily Beast has pointed out that the cover of this weekend's New York Times Style magazine featured nearly the same composition as a photograph first exhibited in 2003 by Josephine Meckseper.

Is this a coincidence, an homage, a rip off? For legal purposes - is this a copy?

For the artist to sustain some kind of claim for copyright infringement against the newspaper, she would need to show, amongst other things, proof of copying and actual copying.

Gopnik reports Sally Singer, the magazine's editor, as saying that she "had no knowledge of Meckseper's image, nor did Cass [Bird, the photographer]." Is there any proof? Gopnik also reports Meckseper's dealer, Elizabeth Dee, as saying that “the entire art world sees this as a Josephine Meckseper adaptation.”

Whose opinion has more sway in these matters - the players of the art world or the legal world?

Dee uses the term "adaptation", but the law would require "actual copying." Meckseper would need to show that original elements from her work were taken. But how original is a matchstick in the mouth? Singer suggested to Gopnik that both images are probably inspired by a 1960s image taken by photographer Melvin Sokolsky. Amy Stein, photographer and blogger, points out another similar composition featuring Jack Nicholson.

"There’s not much of a copyright issue, here, as Meckseper's dealer admits," Gopnik writes. "Artists have always riffed on each other’s work, but when the borrowing’s very close, these days it is common to give credit – to avoid just this kind of kerfuffle." While it might be a best practice in the industry to acknowledge other artists' work, it certainly wouldn't be conclusive as to any issue of fair use.

This incident demonstrates the disconnect between the legal and artistic worlds when it comes to the issue of "copying." Camera blogger Sarah Francis Kuhn quotes Pablo Picasso on the issue: "good artists borrow, great artists steal." But when do they copy?

Read the article at the Daily Beast

More Legal Issues for Dance Companies

Dance/NYC held it's Mid-Season Symposium today at 3LD Art and Technology Center in downtown New York. Four main panels were presented on fundraising, dance and diplomacy, collaborative efforts, and spaces for dance making. Underpinning all of these topics was the issue of funding.

To help audience members navigate the funding process, U.S. Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand (N.Y.) provided "A Guide to Historic Preservation, Arts & Cultural Institutions, & Tourism Funding Opportunities and Incentives." The panels discussed a number of ideas for creative projects with quantifiable elements that meet grant requirements.

The most serious concern was this month's decision by the House of Representative to cut funding to the arts. The National Endowment for the Arts was nearly cut all together. The dance community was encourage to urge their local representatives to prevent the Senate from going forward with these cuts. 'Advocacy' was a buzzword for the event.

On the panel for cultural diplomacy was a speaker from the U.S. Department of State Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. The Bureau administers projects that help dance cross international borders and provides related services, including helping dance companies to obtain visas and providing information about foreign tax laws. It was suggested that, given current priorities, a dance company might have a better chance of receiving government funding if foreign policy were an element of its project proposal.

The dance community faces a number of legislative challenges, but there was energy and optimism in the air. The event was a wonderful success.

See information about the event at Dance/NYC

Also, check out Battery Dance Company's Cultural Diplomacy Toolkit

Artists Raising Human Rights Concerns

Freedom of expression is supported by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Art. 19), the European Convention on Human Rights (Art. 10), and the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. But when do protected acts of artistic self-expression cross over into unsupportable criminal activity?

Voina, radical art group in Russia, has based its works on blurring this boundary between criminal and artistic. According to the New York Times, one of the group's recent and highly provocative art projects has recently been shortlisted for contemporary art awards by Russia's Ministry of Culture and the National Center for Contemporary Art. But artistic credibility cannot save the group from trouble with the law.

In November 2010, the Russian authorities detained three members of Voina for hooliganism. Two of the artists have not yet been released. This is despite British artist Banksy's efforts to raise money for their bail, as reported by the guardian in December. The Los Angeles Times reports that on February 22nd, one member made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights. The artist's lawyer contests that the authorities have provided insufficient evidence to keep him in pre-trial detention.

"If the artists consider their action a piece of art, if the experts along with the audience agree with it, what it is then? Art or crime? We struggle against the authorities who are criminal indeed," The Independent quotes Alexei Plutser-Sarno, a member of Voina.

Ai Weiwei, a Chinese artist, also raises human rights concerns about the authorities of his home country. Unlike Voina, he himself is more political than his works of art. His works are not violent or obscene, and he recently exhibited work at the Tate Modern in London. Nonetheless, the Chinese authorities have restricted both his political protests and his artistic activities. Weiwei was placed under house arrest in November, as reported by Cardozo Art Law Society.

Melissa Chui, director and vice president of the Asia Society in New York, writes for Art Info, "Ai Weiwei has certainly become an international symbol of issues surrounding human rights in China, and how individuals are able to express themselves, whether through art or through the media, blogs, Twitter, and other ways of communicating."

"Nereid Sweetmeat Stand" Repatriated to Dresden State Art Collection

An investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) has resulted in the return of German art stolen during World War II. One part of a porcelain dinner service, the Nereid Sweetmeat Stand was manufactured in Meissen, Germany, from the famed Swan Service. A forensic investigation by ICE determined that the Nereid Sweetmeat Stand at the Toledo Art Museum, where it has been since 1956, was the same piece taken from what was then called the Museum of Applied Art in Dresden.

The Toledo Art Museum, which commemorated the handover in a ceremony on February 23, 2011, acquired the piece in good faith from a New York dealer. The Swan Service is known for porcelain that is uniquely large and beautiful. Pieces are also rare - only about 200 are currently know to exist. The piece is scheduled to go on display in Dresden later this year.

For more information visit newswire.com.

Creative American Folk Art Museum

Why can I not get my mortgage loan approved? Because some borrow more money than they can pay back. In June 2009, the American Folk Art Museum defaulted on payments for the $32 million loan they borrowed to construct a new building. According to a Bloomberg report, the museum "has missed a total of $3.7 million in payments to a debt service fund for the new premises, a Jan. 5 filing to bondholders said. Total missed payments are up by about $2 million in the past year -- averaging $7,700 each weekday."
 
Still, the museum announced that it would not be selling it collections to pay off the debt. How could they, if deaccessioning for anything but collection development is a taboo in the industry and is sure to make any institution a cultural pariah?

“We are planning our way out of this,” said Executive Director Maria Ann Conelli Conelli. Now, the museum announced that it will stage an off-site exhibition in Italy during the Venice Biennale, starting Jun. 1 2011, which may indeed prove the best alternative. According to New York Times, the museum will display works by African-American artists at the Fondacio dei Tedeschi.
 
Source: ArtInfo; Bloomberg.

Delaware Officials Return Stolen Artifacts to Iraq

During the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq looting of the Iraqi National Museum received significant media coverage. Last summer, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Delaware recovered 25 Iraqi artifacts from a California antiquities dealer. On Friday, the items were formally repatriated. In a brief ceremony, U.S. Attorney for Delaware Charles M. Oberly III presented them to Iraqi Ambassador to the United States Samir Sumaida'ie. Over 150,000 items were looted from the Iraqi National Museum in 2003. Sumaida'ie said this was one step in the long process of reassembling Iraq's cultural heritage.

For more information see delawareonline.com

The Art World: Business as Usual?

A recent article in the Economist prompts a review of recent changes in the art market.

As the Economist points out, a number of artists have displayed impressive entrepreneurship throughout history. They can change the art market around them by targeting new customers, opening up new channels of distribution, and finding more cost-effective methods of production. For example, Damien Hirst bypassed art dealers and sold his works directly at auction. The effects of his use of an auction house in the primary art market are still being felt.

Artists have also demonstrated a creative ability to respond to technological innovations. The Economist notes that "modern artists adapted to the arrival of photography, a technology that could have made them redundant." Artists have embraced new technologies as new media for creating art, and also as new business tools for marketing art.

An online VIP (Viewing in Private) art fair debuted at the end of January 2011. The fair suffered problems as the technological features could not keep up with the number of visitors and demands. However, the Financial Times considered it an overall success. Griselda Murray Brown declared that "commerce is now more global than ever, and the art world both bigger and – when the technology allows – better connected."

Kinetica Artfair expanded on the usual kinds of art that could be sold via the art fair model. The fair, which took place at the beginning of February 2011, hosted galleries and artists that display "kinetic, electronic, robotic, sound, light, time-based and multi-disciplinary new media art, science and technology." Nicole Campoy-Leffler at the Huffington Post asks if this fair represents "The Future of Art?"

Despite the current economic climate, Christie's reported the highest sales for an auction house, ever, in 2010. Katherine Ryder at the Wall Street Journal reports that Christie's attributes much of its success to these innovations in the art market, "with more auctions, new customers, private sales and growth in online auctioneering. "

ArtInfo reports that investors are starting to play the art market game. It seems more about business and less about art. "Some analysts believe that the increasing readiness of investors — rather than art lovers — to sink money into art are turbo-charging a boom that might lead to new busts."

As the art market changes, the laws that affect each aspect of the market process, from production to transfer of title, may need to be re-examined. For example, what legal duties will be placed on sellers to regulate prices?

Read one examination of the art market at the Economist.

Copyrighting Che

In 1968, shortly after Che Guevara's death, Irish artist Jim Fitzpatrick published an image of Che. Fitzpatrick allowed other revolutionary groups to use the image, free of copyright assertions.

Today, it is not uncommon for American teenagers to have T-Shirts and posters bearing this image. Are these Western teens supporters of Che's communist ideas? Probably not. Do they know that the image has become the symbol for revolutionary groups in Colombia and Mexico? Um, does it matter if they don't? It seems that the image of Che has come to stand for something of its own in our pop culture.

However, the Independent reports that Fitzpatrick has "decided it is time to prevent it being used for 'crass commercial purposes'." In an attempt to take back control, Fitzpatrick has applied for documentation to prove his ownership of the copyright of the image. If he is successful, he plans to transfer copyright to Guevara's relatives.

His probability of success is limited by the fact that the image is actually based on a photograph taken by Alberto Korda. Clancco makes an interesting comparison of Fitzpatrick with Shepard Fairey.

Do such pop-art reproductions of photographs taken for newspapers constitute copyright infringement? Do they involve sufficient transformation to avoid infringement and merit copyright protection? Furthermore, once an artist has allowed his work to be circulated, how can he later attempt to assert copyright?

Read the article at the Independent

"The Desert of Forbidden Art"

It is rather difficult to wrap one's mind around the idea that one of the world's most impressive art collections is in a desert in Uzbekistan. Since yesterday's film screening of "The Desert of Forbidden Art" at the Museum of Modern Art, this is what I have been attempting to do.

Igor Vitalievich Savitsky, a Russian artist, went to Karakalpakstan in 1950 as the artist in the Khorezm Archeological and Ethnographic Expedition. He stayed after the dig and began collecting art and cultural objects from the local people. Shortly thereafter he began collecting works of the Russian avant garde, which the Soviet authorities were then banishing and destroying, and bringing them back to Karakalpakstan. Today, the Savitsky collection remains in the Karakalpak Museum.

The surprising collection was, perhaps, first brought to the attention of the New York art world in 1998 by Stephen Kinzer's article in the Sunday New York Times. There had been an exhibition of a few hundred pieces in a medieval convent in Caen, France. Kinzer says in the documentary that he expected a few New Yorkers choked on their English muffins a little when they saw the piece.

Although the collection no longer faces the threat of destruction from the Soviets, it is now faces a much bigger threat - nature. The Soviets accidentally drained the local water body, the Aral sea, and now the region faces severe extremes of hot and cold. It is difficult for the works to survive in such conditions. And like every other museum, maintaining adequate funds is also a problem. However, even though the majority of works can't even be displayed, the director of the museum wouldn't dream of selling a single piece. Her commitment to keeping items in the collection is interesting in light of the deaccessioning debates in New York.

Do the museum owners have a duty, legal or moral, to use best efforts to share this collection with the public, both national and international? Would such a duty be fulfilled by selling the works to museums with more visitors, by moving the collection to a more accessible location, or by improving the conditions of the museum? The filmmakers expressed the hope that the documentary would bring further attention to the collection and its needs.


The Desert of the Forbidden Art at the MoMA

Conserving Van Gogh's Sunflowers

As scientists make new discoveries about artists' materials, and as art historians make new discoveries about artists' intentions, more efforts can be made to conserve and restore works. Do these efforts create new, derivative works? It is still unclear what the effect of these efforts on authorship and authenticity of works will be.

Through new x-ray technologies, it has been discovered that chrome yellow, a bright yellow pigment often used by Van Gogh, contains chromium atoms that turn brown in the presence of sunlight. "Van Gogh intended to make his paintings more yellow, but nature is making them more brown," says Professor Koen Janssens of Antwerp University in Belgium.

Scientists have suggested that museums should keep paintings in darker, cooler conditions, to prevent or delay the reverse oxidation process that turns the pigment brown. But can any artist foresee how his or her works will change over time? An artist certainly cannot foresee how perceptions about the work will change. Why should later generations attempt to freeze an artist's works and fix them at a moment in time?

Preventing further change is not a very offensive conservation effort. Perhaps the more interesting issue will be whether or not the scientists and historians attempt to recreate the original yellow (but without any finnicky chromium atoms). Ella Kendriks, of the Van Gogh Museum, said: "This type of cutting-edge research is crucial to advance our understanding of how paintings age and should be conserved for future generations."

Read Steve Connor's article on "Why Van Gogh is Entering his Brown Period" at the Independent.

Also, this blog recently addressed some of these these issues in an article about the fabrication and conservation techniques used on the work of Donald Judd.

Next Chapter in the Seaport Museum History?

In Feb. 14, 2011, the Seaport Museum New York furloughed* 32 employees (curatorial and development department), reportedly half of its staff. That's not all, the New York Times reported that in January and February, seven of the 21 trustees resigned from the board and all future exhibitions have been put on hold.

On Feb. 17, 2011, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, Kate D. Levin, New York City Cultural Affairs Commissioner,  and Frank J. Sciame, the Seaport Museum’s chairman for the last four years, met at City Hall to look at museums financial records and to speak about the future of the museum. Apparently, Mr. Sciame has lent the museum $3 million since 2010 to cover operating expenses like payroll. Was that a right move for a board member or not?
 Timeline:

• 2004 -- library building closed; collection of 2 million artifacts excavated in Lower Manhattan deaccessioned; budget reduced by $1 million;
• 2005 -- antique ships offered for adoption;
• 2008 -- museum runs a deficit of $1 million, with budget or about $5.2 million;
• 2010 -- Sciame loans museum $1.5 million;
• 2011 -- ?

The future of the museum is unclear but according to one furloughed employee, Mr. Sciame was " doing incalculable harm to the Seaport Museum...  He has refused overtures from the city to help stabilize the museum and has driven away trustees who resent his high-handed and confrontational manner. It’s hard to kill a nonprofit, but Sciame is well on the way to accomplishing just that.”
---------------------------------
Furlough -- temporary layoff; leave without pay.

Jasper Johns received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor, on February 15, 2010. The famous artist was among 14 individuals who President Obama said "reveal the best of who we are and who we aspire to be." Other recipients included former President George H.W. Bush, Yo-Yo Ma, and Maya Angelou.

For a complete list and more information vista artdaily.org.

La Bella Principessa Decision (Not So Pretty)

On Jan. 31, 2011, Judge Koeltl dismissed Jeanne Marchig's case against Christie's alleging five causes of action based on the 1998 sale of a Drawing now attributed to Leonardo da Vinci because they were time barred.

Causes of Action:

1. breach of fiduciary duty;
2. breach of warranty;
3. negligence;
4. negligent misrepresentation;
5. conversion of the frame the Drawing was in when it was delivered to Christie's.

Christie's moved to dismiss on summary judgment, pursuant to FRCP 12 (b)(6).

Facts: In 1997, Marchig consigned a pen-and-ink Drawing in an Italian frame to Christie's for sale. It was examined by Francois Borne, an old master drawings expert who attributed it to a German master drawing "in the taste of the Italian Renaissance." The drawing, cataloged as "German, 19th Century," was sold in 1998 for $21,850 without its frame. In 2009, more than a decade later, the Drawing was attributed to Leonard da Vinci. According to the complaint, now the Drawing is valued at over $100 million.

Reasoning:

1. Under the New York law, a plaintiff seeing to recover monetary damages for a breach of fiduciary duty must file suit w/in 3 yrs from the time the cause of action accrues. N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214 (4). Here, the cause of action was precluded by the statute of limitations that expired in 2000 or 2001. 
2. The limitation period for the breach of warranty claim varies between 4 and 6 yrs and the claim was brought untimely unless Plaintiff could prove grounds for tolling the applicable statute of limitations. N.Y. C.P.L.R. 213 (2)
3. Statute of limitations to file a claim for negligence is 3 years within the time the injury is suffered. N.Y.C.P.L.R. 214 (4). Again, court held that events underlining the negligence claim took place no later than 1998.
4. Cause of action for negligent appraisal or representation accrues on the date of the alleged misrepresentation and the statute of limitations to bring a claim is 6 years. N.Y.C.P.L.R. 213 (1).
5. The New York statute of limitations for conversion and recovery of chattels is three years. N.Y. C.P.L.R. 214(3). And while the person who's property had been converted first needs to make a request for it and the possessor refuse to return it to start the statute of limitation, the true owner cannot unreasonably delay to make the demand.... You can see where this is going.

Complaint: Marchig et al. v. Christie's Inc., No. 10 Civ. 3624 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 13, 2010)
Decision: Marchig et al. v. Christie's Inc., 10 Civ. 3624 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2011)

Painting the Town Red

Melanie Gold came up with an idea for an art project in Greenwood Lake, New York. She wanted to create a mural on a white barn at the entrance to the town.

She overcame the financial obstacles by obtaining a grant from the 2010 County of Orange Arts Grant Program, and seeking additional funding from Kickstarter. She overcame creative obstacles by turning the project into a contest, and seeking submissions from local artists. She thought there would be no legal obstacles. There was never any intention to put up offensive art. Furthermore, Gold was told by local officials that no ordinances would prevent her from putting up a mural on private property.

But when she presented her idea to the community, the Village Board put a halt to her project. As an obstacle, the Board passed Local Law No. 2 of 2010: “The creation and or display within the Village of Greenwood Lake of public art is prohibited.” It will expire, on May 1st. Unfortunately this is the same day that her grant ends.

What to do with public space is always a sensitive issue, and public art presents many challenges. As the New York Times reports, "Board members concluded that a board including professional artists and experts was needed to review artwork in a community not exactly awash in it." Most sensitivities arise over offensive art being placed in the public forum. In 1934, Rockefeller famously destroyed Diego Rivera's mural at the Rockefeller Center for being too political. Last year, the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art censored a street artist's commissioned mural for being offensive. Public Ad Campaign goes so far as to use acts of civil disobedience to 'reclaim' public space by painting over advertising. A local community art project, however, seems unlikely to offend. Indeed, Gold's use of the mural space as a gallery wall was critically "well-received."

Facing fines and the prospect of having the works torn down, Gold has filed suit in federal court, claiming that the town has violated her right to freedom of speech and has placed an unconstitutionally broad prohibition on freedom of expression.

Read the article at the New York Times

Legal Status of Egyptian Mask Under Dispute

Who owns the ancient Egyptian mummy Mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer? The mask, which belonged to a noble woman who lived over 3,000 years ago, was found in 1952. The museum, which bought it in 1998, is seeking to enjoin seizure by U.S. authorities.

The museum, represented by Jeffrey Simon with Husch Blackwell in Kansas City, says it conducted a thorough investigation of the mask’s provenance before purchasing it. Moreover, they assert, the U.S. cannot show probable cause that the mask was stolen, smuggled, or otherwise clandestinely entered the United States. The museum urges that Egyptian law allowed for the personal and private ownership of Egyptian antiquities when the mask was discovered. And, even if it was stolen, they says the five-year statute of limitations under the Tariff Act of 1930 has run.

For more information visit Courthouse News Service.

Legal Issues for Dance Companies

On February 12, the Entertainment Arts and Sports Law [EASL] Section Pro Bono Committee of the New York State Bar Association and the New York Foundation for the Arts [NYFA] presented "Legal Issues for Dance Companies" at NYU Law School.

The event was directed toward applicants for NYFA's BUILD [Building Up Infrastructure Levels in Dance] grant program. BUILD grants are available to smaller dance companies in New York.

Five panel discussions were held throughout the day-long session. The panelists discussed practical issues and current developments in the areas of copyrighting dance, collaborations and licensing of Intellectual property, legacy planning, social media, and the advantages and the different business entities available. These discussions were led by illustrious speakers from a variety of law firms and arts organizations, including ASCAP, Lincoln Center, and the Martha Graham Dance Company.

There are a number of legal issues facing smaller dance groups. What are the benefits of incorporating as a 501(c)(3)? When should they acquire synchronization licenses and master recording licenses for their dance pieces? Who owns the copyright in a dance? Further information on these issues can be found on the websites for Dance Heritage Coalition and Dance/NYC. And the host organizations, NYFA and EASL, suggested that similar events may be held in the future - so keep on your toes...!

Museum Wants to Return Objects, How Refreshing

In the late 19th and early 20th century, Minor C. Keith, a railroad magnate and a founder of the United Fruit Company exported thousands of pre-Columbian artifacts out of Costa Rica. The Brooklyn Museum ("Museum") acquired the Keith collection in 1934, five years after Keith’s death. Costa Rica had never claimed these artifacts. However, The New York Times reports that the Museum is preparing to return about 4,500 to Costa Rica.

What? Museums usually fight claims for return before they start packing their collections for restitution. In this instances, the Brooklyn Museum simply decided that "its closets were too full, overstuffed with items acquired during an era when it aimed to become the biggest museum in the world."

The National Museum of Costa Rica accepted the offer and now has to raise about $60,000 to pay packing and shipping costs.

Truth be told, the Brooklyn Museum will keep some "of the most valuable pieces, including gold and jade animals and anthropomorphic figurines and pendants..." as long as the museum does not overextend itself.  According to the Brooklyn Museum’s chief curator the decision comes at the time when museum's budget is strained.

Museum Organizations Act to Prevent Sale of Pollock

The Association of Museum Directors and the American Association of Museums are preemptively calling out the University of Iowa. There have been calls for the sale of Jackson Pollack’s “Mural” in order underwrite University costs. Such a sale would violate a fundamental ethical principal of museum management: that accessioned works of art are held in trust for the public and may not be treated as a disposable financial assets. Iowa University president Sally Mason has previously spoken against such actions. The museum organizations are calling for the help of the art community in preventing the sale.

For more information see artdaily.org.

Confirmed Missing from Egyptian Museum

On Sunday, Feb. 13, 2011, Zahi Hawass, Egypt's antiquities minister, said that looters stole several artifacts from Cairo's Egyptian Museum. V&A News reported that "an inventory of the museum's collection revealed that 18 objects were missing, including a gilded wooden statue of King Tutankhamun being carried by a goddess.  Parts of another gilded wooden statue of Tutankhamun also were missing."

Earlier this month, Hawass admitted to attempts at theft and damage to about 70 objects but he revised his earlier statements that there were no stolen pieces and added that "the Egyptian army and police would question a group of looters already in custody about the missing artifacts." Sadly, Hawass no longer considers Egypt's museums and archaeological treasures to be safe. For the list of stolen artifacts, visit Hawass' blog.

For earlier reports about the Egypt's Museum, read Egypt Does not Lose Head and The State of Egyptian Antiquities Today.

Legislative Proposal to Cut Funding for the Arts Threatens NEA

This week, the U.S. House of Representatives is bringing a Continuing Resolution appropriation proposal which includes cutting millions from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) budget. According to the Alliance for the Arts, the amount will be about $22.5 million. According to the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriation Committee page, the amount is about $6 million.

Arts advocates are concerned that the legislative proposal may be amended to fully eliminate the NEA during floor debates.  To learn more about the campaign to prevent the sever budget cuts and ensure that the NEA survives, click here.  NEA's core programs include: Access to Artistic Excellence, Challenge America: Reaching Every Community, Federal/State Partnerships, and Learning in the Arts. NEA funds dance, design, folk & traditional arts, literature, local arts agencies, media arts, multidisciplinary, museums, music, musical theater, opera, presenting, theater, and visual arts.

* * *

A grant made in partnerhips with the NEA was receved by The International Center of Photography (ICP) this year. The ICP has been awarded a “Save America’s Treasures” grant of $57,425 to support the systematic organization and preservation of negatives, personal papers, and film materials in The Robert Capa and Cornell Capa Archive at ICP.

“. . . The preservation will help future generations understand the social, political, and cultural history in the United States and abroad, as seen through the eyes of these two legendary photographers,” said Willis E. Hartshorn, Ehrenkranz Director, ICP.

The NEA Chairman, Rocco Landesman was quoted by Art Daily as saying “Art and culture are the expression of our shared values as a society and serve as our collective heritage. [The ICP] treasures remind us who we are as a people and often inspire us to be even more—that is, to exercise even greater creativity.” Here is looking at NEA for decades of ongoing support of the arts and cultural treasures.

For Better or Worse: Yale and Peru Committ to the Return of Thousands of Incan Artifacts

On Feb. 11, 2011, Yale University signed an agreement to send back to Peru thousands of Incan artifacts, ceramic pieces, animal and human bones, and metal and stone objects, removed from the Machu Picchu citadel between 1911 and 1913.

The long running dispute as to "whether they would or they would not" was resolved in favor of Peru, when in November 2010, Yale issued a statement that the school was" pleased and proud to have reached an accord with the Government of Peru which is now in the stage of being formalized. Under it, as an expression of good will and in recognition of the unique importance that Machu Picchu has come to play in the identity of the modern Peruvian nation, Yale will return, over the next two years, the archaeological materials excavated by Hiram Bingham III at Machu Picchu . . . by the Yale-Peruvian Scientific Expedition of 1911."

According to Art Daily, "San Antonio Abad University in Cuzco will create a center to house the more than 5,000 objects and fragments. The center, to be located in an Incan palace and operated under joint direction by both universities, will include a museum exhibit for the public and a research area for collaborative investigations by the two institutions and visiting scholars."

The story began in 2008, when Peru authorities filed a federal lawsuit demanding Yale University return the artifacts taken by the Yale scholar Hiram Bingham. Republic of Peru v. Yale University, No. 3:09-CV-01332 (D. Conn. Oct. 9, 2009); transferring No. 1:08-CV-02109 (D. D.C. July 30, 2009. The claim accused Yale of fraudulently holding the relics for decades.

The end of the dispute is a beginning of a new relationship between the Ivy League school faculty and students who plan to visit the center for training, research and field work, and Peruvian faculty and students who would come to Yale on exchanges. The Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History stands to receive a small number of artifacts for display. And they lived happily ever after.

Artist Vending Rules in NYC

The Big Apple is seeking to stifle creativity and artistic expression by limiting and restricting "expressive matter" vending in Central Park, Union Square Park, Battery Park and the High Line. A law to this effect was passed in July 2010. Now, artists are suing to take back their streets and hot spots. There are two federal suits and one state suit pending against the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation. Actions brought by artists/street vendors allege that Parks Department rules, effective as of July 19, 2010 are violating their rights to free expression and equal protection under the New York State Constitution.


The rule reduced maximum number of vendors allowed in each spot:  49 in Central Park, 18 in Union Square, 9 in Battery Park, and 5 on the High Line. According to one of the suit, the artists contend the new rules violate New York State and New York City human rights laws, and contradict New York City Local Laws and the Administrative Code.

A copy of the Appellate Court's Order is available here.
What are other sources saying about this: Central Park Portrait Exchange; A Walk in the Park;
ABC/News.

"A Revolution in Museum Practice"

"What's in a name?" A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, or so we're told, but artists might argue that a work displayed under any other name would not be sweet at all. Attribution, the right of an artist to have his or her name attached to his or her work, is a moral right, and also a legal right under the Visual Artists Rights Act [17 USC 106A(1)(a)].

Over the years, however, it has been customary for museums to display works of Native American art without naming the individual artists. Instead, the works are classified by and attributed to tribes. It seems a logical curatorial practice at first, helping viewers to place works in their social, ethnic, geographic, and historical context. Even contemporary artists belong to tribes, or movements. However, imagine every work by Damien Hirst or Tracey Emin were simply displayed under the name, "Young British Artist." Or every Picasso simply identified as "French Impressionist." It would offend our sensibilities.

Dan Monroe, Director of Peabody Essex Museum acknowledges that most museums "continue the practice of labeling historical Native American in relation only to tribe simply because it has long been 'standard' practice. Few museums have given thought to the meaning and significance of this practice though none would consider labeling Western art in the same manner."

Therefore, The Denver Art Museum has boldly announced that it will begin displaying all of its Native art works with the names of individual artists, where such information can be found. This comes as part of a re-installation of its Native American Indian art galleries. In a New York Times article by Judith Dobrzynski, this announcement is heralded as "a revolution in museum practice."

This announcement may have a ripple effect across the museum industry. “Recognizing that Native American art was made by individuals, not tribes, and labeling it accordingly, is a practice that is long overdue," Monroe told the Times.

The ripple effect may even spread into other areas of the art world. In response to Dobrzynski's article in the New York Times, a dealer who advises Christie's reports, "in the Native American auction at Christie's two weeks ago, we made a conscious effort to identify and write about the individual artists."

It will be interesting to see whether these works will now be viewed more as "Art" rather than as objects of cultural heritage. Such changes in perception may even impact the practices in displaying works by contemporary Native artists. Under the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990, an artist will only be deemed a "Native American" if it is enrolled in a federally or state recognized tribe, or has been certified by such a tribe. But who should set these definitions and how should museums respond? What's in a name, anyway?

Read the New York Times article here.

And read Judith Dobrzynski's follow-up posts at Real Clear Arts here and here.

Image Credits:
Denver Art Museum
*George Walkus, Kwakwaka'wakw, Four-faced Hamat'sa Mask, about 1938. Native arts department acquisition fund.
*Norval Morrisseau, Ojibwa/Anishnaabe, Unititled (Snakes), about 1968–70. Native arts department acquisition fund.

Mardi Gras Costumes: Apparel or Art?

Law professors have much to say about copyrighting Mardi Gras Costumes.  Case on point, Ashlye Keaton, adjunct law professor at Tulane University, is working with Creole Wild West Mardi Gras Indians to help preserve intellectual rights to their costumes. In light of the fact that costumes are not copyrightable, Keaton is defining them as art.

Carnival New Orleans News reported that "Intellectual property law dating back to the nation’s founding dictates that apparel and costumes cannot be copyrighted, but Tulane University adjunct law professor Ashlye Keaton has found a way around that by classifying them as something else- as works of art.

The first test for the Indians who have copyrighted the new costumes they will wear this year will come at Mardi Gras. The Indians revamp or completely remake their suits every year, and the copyright takes effect at the first public showing. . .
Once the costumes are copyrighted, which can be done online for $40, the Indians can either sue people who sell photos of them or try to negotiate licensing fees with photographers either before or after the pictures are taken."

Hours of work and hundreds of dollars go into the making of these vibrant costumes and the artist are hoping to share a part of the revenue through licensing.

Source of the image: Creole Wild West.

Protecting Egypt's Cultural Heritage

The recent political upheaval in Egypt is not without effect on the country’s cultural property. Reports of theft, vandalism, and looting have resulted in calls for international law enforcement to guard against illegally trafficked cultural artifacts. In the States, the agency charged with seizing illegally imported cultural property is the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol. The agency relies on various federal acts when seizing cultural property.

Under the National Stolen Property Act (NSPA), authority for seizure is granted when the item is valued at $5,000 or more, when the item is known to have been stolen, when it is covered under Egypt’s patrimony law 117, or when it is transported over the American border. This poses some significant problems. For example, an artifact may have significant value to archeologists but this may not be reflected in its market value thus preventing seizure.

Authorities using NSPA rely on Title 19, the portion of federal law that contains customs statutes, and Title 18, the criminal code that contains the NSPA. Both are used in conjunction with the McClain/Schultz doctrine, a court defined rule which considers the patrimony laws of foreign nations.

Title 19’s Cultural Property Information Act (CPIA) focuses on whether an artifact was stolen. Unlike the NSPA, the low monetary value of an article does not prevent seizure, but there are other problems. Some artifacts may have been stolen so recently that they are not inventoried or government leaders may not be inclined to report looted artifacts.

Additionally, the Archeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) permits seizure when items are trafficked in foreign commerce in violation of state or local law. However this type of seizure may not survive a legal challenge and is not even listed in the customs’ agent handbook.

Because of the shortcomings in these rules some advocate for the adoption of additional measures. One option is an Emergency Protection of Egyptian Cultural Antiquities Act, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 2603 of the CPIA. The act could focus the attention on Egyptian cultural heritage at risk and meet due process requirements while permitting the seizure of cultural objects under less constrictive circumstances.

Suspected stolen, looted, or trafficked culture artifacts can be reported to the Customs Border Protection over the Internet at https://apps.cbp.gov/eallegations/ or by telephone at1-800-BE-ALERT.

For a more in-depth explanation visit Rick St. Hilaire's blog.

The Return of a 900 year old Benevento text will not open the floodgates

The British Library recently returned a 900 year old manuscript to its place of origin Benevento, Italy. The manuscript was believed to have been taken after Nazi troops fled the area from allied forces. The 12th century manuscript is the first item to be returned by Britain under The Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act.

Mr. Scott, a lawyer for the for the archdiocese of Benevento, said "It's not going to be an Elgin Marbles-style test case because it was restored under an act which pertains only to items lost during the Nazi era."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/8309078/British-Library-returns-900-year-old-religious-manuscript-to-Italy.html

Russia on Loan(s) again

On Feb. 2, 2011, The New York Times reported that Gauguin exhibit at the  National Gallery of Art will not have all the canvas expected. The Metropolitan Museum of Art organizing an exhibition of Cézanne’s famous card player paintings, too might be missing at least one table of players. The shows are suffering from a condition known as "a full-scale diplomatic feud between the United States and Russia." Supposedly, the Russian State-run museums are canceling long-scheduled loans to American institutions in response to a decision by an American judge in a case involving Jewish religious documents held by Russia.

"The legal dispute centers on the so-called Schneerson Library, a collection of 12,000 books and 50,000 religious documents assembled by the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic movement over two centuries prior to World War II, and kept since in Russia. The Chabad organization, which is based in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, has been trying to regain possession of the library, saying that it was illegally held by the Soviet authorities after the war. . . .

In 1991 a court in Moscow ordered the library turned over to the Chabad organization; the Soviet Union then collapsed, and the judgment was set aside by the Russian authorities. The Russian government now says it wants to preserve the library for Russian Jews and scholars. . . .

In recent years the organization has taken its case to court in the United States, and on July 30, 2010, Royce C. Lamberth, a federal judge of the United States District Court in Washington, ruled in favor of the Chabad organization, ordering Russia to turn over all Schneerson documents held at the Russian State Library, the Russian State Military Archive and elsewhere. Russian officials, saying that an American court had no jurisdiction, had refused to participate in the proceedings. Judge Lamberth handed down an ex parte decision in favor of the Chabad organisation on [date] which the Russian Foreign Ministry denounced it as a violation of international law. . .

Whether or not "an American court had [a] right to get involved in a case concerning Russian assets on Russian soil" remains to be seen, in the mean time, artworks may become hostages. According to one attorney for the Chabad organization it might ask a court to "confiscate art from Russia as a kind of legal hostage." The threat is hardly serious because the Federal law, 22 U.S.C. 2459, Immunity from Seizure Act, protects works of cultural significance vetted by the State Department from seizure.

VARA Claim for the Right of Paternity

David Ascalon, an Israeli-born sculptor living in Cherry Hill, N.J., create a Holocaust memorial in Harrisburg, Pa. after the Jewish Federation of Greater Harrisburg selected his design for the memorial in 1993.

In 2010, Ascalon sued the federation and the Harrisburg Department of Parks and Recreation in federal court in July under the Visual Artists' Rights Act (VARA), 17 USC 106A, alleging that the federation hired a contractor to refurbish the monument and that the contractor removed Ascalon's name off the sculpture. VARA allows creators of public display art to protect their works from alterations.

VARA provides:

(a) Rights of Attribution and Integrity.— . . . the author of a work of visual art— (1) shall have the right—

(A) to claim authorship of that work, and

(B) to prevent the use of his or her name as the author of any work of visual art which he or she did not create;

On February 7, 2011, the federation and Ascalon issued a joint statement saying that the federation will allow Ascalon to replace the stainless steel wire with rusty steel wire and put his name back on his sculpture.

Parts of the Joint Statement read:

SETTLEMENT REACHED IN CASE UNDER THE VISUAL ARTISTS RIGHTS ACT OF 1990 (VARA), ASCALON v. DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, et al.

HARRISBURG, PA –In July 2010, the New Jersey artist David Ascalon filed an action in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania asserting that his rights under the federal Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA) had been violated with respect to a sculpture he created for the Jewish Federation of Greater Harrisburg: a Holocaust Memorial on the banks of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania’s state capital, which was installed in 1994.  The complaint alleged that Ascalon’s rights under VARA, which limits how an artwork may be altered or disposed of, were violated by restoration of a decaying element of the original sculpture in which a rust-colored “barbed wire” serpentine element was replaced with stainless steel.

...

The substance of the settlement provides the sculpture will be retrofitted in a manner that upholds the artist’s original intent at minimal costs to the defendants.  The original artist shall be provided access to the sculpture to remake the “barbed wire” serpentine element in a highly durable rust-colored steel, and the original artist’s name shall be restored to the sculpture.  The parties are pleased that future generations will be able to view the restored Memorial and remember and pay proper respect to the 12 million souls that perished at the hands of agents of intolerance, the Nazi Regime.

The attorney for David Ascalon is Jason B. Schaeffer, Esq. of J.B. Schaeffer Law, LLC of Cherry Hill, New Jersey.  The attorney for the Federation is Harvey Freedenberg of McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC of Harrisburg.

Read more: Harrisburg Holocaust memorial to be restored to artist's vision - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review; When Creator and Owner Clash, WSJ.

Simon C. Dickinson Ltd v. Luxembourg Art Ltd: Are Dealers Wolfs in Lamb's Skin?

The Art Newspaper (February 2011) reports that two of London’s most powerful dealers are about to be locked in a legal battle. The dispute centres around Leonardo Da Vinci’s drawing of the Madonna and Child with St Anne and a Lamb, sold via Simon C. Dickinson Ltd and Luxembourg Art Ltd. for $7M to US buyer Nasser Kazeminy (The Art Newspaper, January 2011).  When Kazeminy returned the drawing to Dickinson, the original owner learned of the price Kazeminy paid and sued Dickinson for breach of fiduciary duty and commission fees. London's High Court ruled for Accidia against Dickinson in November 2010.

According to Dickinson’s spokesman: “Following the Accidia judgment, our lawyers have been instructed to issue proceedings against Ms Luxem­bourg and her associated companies for full indemnity for the company’s loss.”  Luxembourg’s legal representative told The Art News­paper: “Luxembourg Art Ltd trusted Simon C. Dickinson when it agreed in writing that it was acting for the buyer.”

The loss is unspecified yet, but it could exceed £1.5m.

Westfield, et al. v. Federal Republic of Germany -- FSIA schields Germany from defending the case on the merits

The heirs of Walter Westfield, a prominent German art dealer in the 1930s, sought to recover the value of Westfeld’s art collection from the Federal Republic of Germany.  On Feb. 2, 2011, 6th Cir. Court of Appeals dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. Westfield v. Fed. Republic of Germany, 2011 FED App. 0026P (6th Cir.)

The heirs alleged that Westfield attempted to flee Germany with his art collection but his passport had expired and he was unable to get a visa from the United States. He was arrested in 1938 and sentenced to prison for three and a half years and fined Reichmarks 300,000 for some alleged currency violations. Around the same time, the District Attorney's Office in Dusseldorf ordered that Westfield's art and tapestry collection be sold to satisfy the fine.  The collection was sold by Lempertz, the German auction house on December 12 and 13, 1939. Westfield was killed in 1943. His heir discovered that  the Boston Museum of Fine Arts was seeking information about Walter Westfield, in relation to a painting in its collection of Dutch Masters in 2004. Through the Museum, the heir learned how his uncle's art collection was confiscated and sold at auction.


After the heirs filed a lawsuit in Tennessee state court against the German government, Germany removed it to federal court and filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. 1602 et seq. (2006).  2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65133 (M.D. Tenn., July 28, 2009).

The district court granted Germany’s motion to dismiss, holding that the heirs’ claims were barred by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act [FSIA], and do not fall within the exception for acts in connection with commercial activity.  On appeal, the court found that the heirs' argument denying a sovereign act was not persuasive finding that "sovereigns were historically entitled to absolute immunity and the [FSIA] was intended to codify the "restrictive theory" of sovereign immunity, waiving immunity only in certain limited situations."

The Court of Appeals agreed that Westfield's treatment and demise "constituted an abuse of police and prosecutor powers by the German government at the time, were nonetheless the acts of a sovereign..." Even though the court agreed that it "should not recognize Westfield's fine and imprisonment," it felt compelled to respect acts of a sovereign.  The court based its regrettably decision on its jurisdictional limitations imposed by "Article III of the Constitution and the statutes Congress enacts."

The full opinion is available here.

Archaelogical Business Models to Grow Economic Development

According to Miliken Institute Report, Israel needs to explore archaeological business models to increase its economic development. On Feb. 2, 2011, the economic think tank issued its recommendation with the following preamble: "Two-thirds of Israel's 64 developed archaeological sites are operating in the red, creating an unsustainable future for the country's incredibly rich and potentially economically rewarding cultural heritage reserves."

Miliken Institute is a 501 (c)(3) independent think tan that aims to  promote and "create a more democratic and efficient global economy."

The report suggests that applying business start-up financing models, such as the community microfinance, venture capital or development bonds, could help preserve and protect the Israel's thousands of archaeological sites and provide local and national economic growth.

It proposed a number of financial solutions, including:

• Community microfinance, building on the example of Lawrence Coben's Sustainable Preservation Initiative, could help local communities leverage loans, philanthropic donations and direct equity to finance targeted development.
• Israel's tremendously successful venture capital market is a valuable source of potential funding for culture heritage cluster development, linking archaeological preservation with the tourism, small business, retail and even technology sectors.
• Relatively low-risk archaeological development bonds provide long-term project financing for preservation and can be funded by a variety of revenue streams, including antiquity leasing, media content and intellectual property and even artisan craft and replica merchandise.

According to the institute's website, the report is a result of a Financial Innovations Lab^TM that "pulled together a diverse group of researchers, policymakers, and business, financial and professional practitioners."

Celebrate Canada and Canadian Heritage (and learn)

The story begins: "Thanks to a generous contribution from the Department of Canadian Heritage's Movable Cultural Property Program, the National Gallery of Canada has acquired a unique and highly-significant vase for its international art collection. The Ptarmigan Vase, made of copper, silver and gold, was designed by the exceptionally-talented American Tiffany & Co. designer George Paulding Farnham." STOP.

Since when does our neighbor to the north has a Department of Canadian Heritage's Movable Cultural Property Program? and, more importantly what is it?

Apparently, Canadian Heritage is a government sponsored entity responsible for "national policies and programs that promote Canadian content, foster cultural participation, active citizenship and participation in Canada's civic life, and strengthen connections among Canadians." It is occupied with conservation and preservation of heritage, work of museums and galleries, cultural spaces, traveling exhibitions, import and export of cultural artifacts and provides funding opportunities to museums unable to acquire important cultural treasures without the public support.

Under the Canadian Cultural Property Export and Import Act, which regulations the export of certain classes of cultural property, the Minister of Canadian Heritage may dispense funds to assist certain national institutions to purchase objects deemed of cultural importance for  which export permits have been refused, or which are located outside Canada and are related to the national heritage. Excerpts of the Act are available here.

If anybody asks how you found out about this, say that a little bird told you. To find out more about the scope and the breadth of the Programs under the Canadian Heritage rubric, visit their website.

For more information about the Vase, please see ArtDaily.
Image: Ptarmigan Vase. Photo: © Sotheby’s New York.

Must See Exhibit: Balenciaga-Spanish Master

Located at the Queen Sophia Spanish Institute until February 19, 2011

Gallery Hours: Mon. - Tues.: 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. ; Wed.-Fri.: 10 a.m. - 8 p.m. ; Sat.: 10 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Admission: $15 for adults; $10 for students, seniors, and Institute members

"BALENCIAGA: Spanish Master considers the influences on his designs of the country's great artists, from Zurbarán and Goya to Picasso, Sorolla and Miró, and of Spain's religious dress and ceremony, its royal history, its rich regional costume, its dance traditions, and the power and splendor of the bullfight."

http://www.spanishinstitute.org/

Ask the (virtual) Art Lawyer

The Matisse Foundation has made a $20,000 donation to Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts [VLA], for its new art law website, Ask the Lawyer.

The Matisse Foundation was created by the widow of Pierre Matisse, a successful New York art dealer and the son of painter Henri. Since its inception in 1995, the Foundation has focused its donations in the art community and has aimed "to foster excellence in all aspects of art appreciation." An on-line legal resource seems to be an unlikely donee. However, lawyer's services are integral to the art market, and the accessibility of these services is a major issue for artists.

Art is rarely perceived as being 'tainted' by law, except in sexy areas like copyright infringement and restitution of cultural property. However, real artists do need help with more mundane issues, such as filing for non-profit status, leasing studio space, negotiating contracts, consigning works to galleries, and licensing media. Ask the Lawyer provides information on a variety of these practical topics. The site "grows out of VLA’s experience in speaking with, and helping, thousands and thousands of arts community members over the past 40 years and is an extension of VLA’s call center, the Artlaw Line."

On the one hand, an online service gives artists access to vital information. On the other hand, delivery of legal information in this manner raises concerns, and the site is prefaced by a hefty set of terms and conditions. Should artists who use the site feel confident in independently making fair use assessments or in negotiating contracts with parties that might have an unfair advantage? Of course artists should not be foolishly emboldened, but such democratic platforms do equip them with powerful tools.

"They are serving a community that is very anxious to get these services," says Robert H. Horowitz, president of the Matisse Foundation. Easier access to these services provides more time and flexibility for the important stuff, the art itself. It will be interesting to see how the artistic community will be empowered and how the art market will be changed by these new mechanisms that are being developed by lawyers and artists together.

Read the article at the Wall Street Journal

Term of Art: Art for Tax Purposes (Part 1)

This story appeared in The Cardozo Jurist (February 2011): When you look at a Flavin creation, do you see a “light installation” or light fixtures and fluorescent bulbs? Dan Flavin is a famous American minimalist artist and pioneer of using fluorescent light fixtures to create sculpture. In 2006, contemporary art gallery Haunch of Venison contested the United Kingdom’s Revenue & Customs classification that Flavin’s installations, such as Six Alternating Cool White/Warm White Fluorescent Lights Vertical and Centered (1973) were little more than projectors and light fittings. Why? For the love of art and for a reduced customs duty and import tariffs. The math is simple: the rate for importing art into the United Kingdom is five percent, while the rate for importing light fittings is 17.5 percent plus 3.7 percent customs duty. Perhaps most shockingly, the duty would be assessed against the market value of the art works, not the fair market value of their hardware components.

This recalls the famed Brancusi embarrassment, when, in 1928, Constantin Brancusi successfully defended his now-iconic Bird in Space (1919) against a U.S. Customs duty on the sculpture because the assessors considered his bird a propeller blade. Brancusi v. United States, 54 Treas. Dec. 428 (Cust. Ct. 1928). For Flavin, the Value Added Tax (VAT) Tribunal in London heard the dispute in December 2008 and held that Flavin’s works of art were indeed sculptures, subject to discount import rates. However, the victory of the art mavens was short lived.

More than a century ago, Justice Holmes opined, “[i]t would be a dangerous undertaking for persons trained only to the law to constitute themselves final judges of the worth of pictorial illustrations, outside of the narrowest and most obvious limits.” Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co., 188 US 239, 251 (1903). Bleistein concerned lithographic posters advertising circuses, and Holmes’ aphorism should hold true for post-modern art as well. In 2010, the European Commission’s Customs Code Committee in Brussels (“the EU commission”) issued regulation No. 731/2010, holding that disassembled lighting fixtures, such as Flavin’s, may not be classified as sculpture because they are “not the installation that constitutes a ‘work of art’ but the result of the operations (the light effect) carried out by it.”

Another artist similarly affected is Bill Viola, who works with video installations and sound environments. According to his own website, “Viola’s video installations—total environments that envelop the viewer in image and sound—employ state-of-the-art technologies and are distinguished by their precision and direct simplicity.” Viola, too, is renowned for his contributions to the contemporary art world.

To reduce shipping costs and prevent damage, works of Viola and Flavin, as well as many other contemporary artists, have to be turned off and boxed before they are shipped from gallery to gallery and from a collector to an auction house. The EU commission, however, reasoned that while “the individual components or the whole installation, when assembled, can be considered as a sculpture…[they] have been slightly modified by the artist, but these modifications do not alter their preliminary function of goods.” In May 2010, Sotheby’s sold Flavin’s Monument for V. Tatlin (1969) for $1.4 million. Assuming Flavin did not modify the florescent bulbs enough to alter their “preliminary function,” the price alone indicates that the fixtures are not used for lighting offices. However, the logic of the regulation suggests that people are buying florescent bulbs that, standing alone, are worth the price paid at auctions. This would make for very expensive replacement bulbs.

The regulation is binding on all the EU member states. With the art market up in arms, where dealers and collectors stand to lose hundreds of thousands of pounds and euros to customs fees, the regulation is likely to be challenged in national courts or before the European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg. No such claims have been filed yet; the Regulation has been in force since September 3, 2010.

The State of Egyptian Antiquities Today: An Update

Yesterday, Dr. Zahi Hawass was appointed as the Minister of Antiquities, a newly created department that will be charged with the care and protection of all Egyptian monuments and museums. This department will absorb the Supreme Council of Antiquities, and Dr. Zahi will continue excavating, writing books, and representing his country.

The following statement was made by Dr. Hawass this morning: "I would like to tell the people, all over the world, the good news: the storage magazine that was looted in Qantara, in the Sinai, has had 288 objects returned! I cannot say exactly how many objects were lost, but it seems that the majority of what was stolen has been returned.I would like to say that we were afraid that sites around Alexandria were robbed, but the military is now protecting them all. Also, the site of San el-Hagar in the Delta, where important 21st and 22nd Dynasty tombs are located, is being protected by the local Egyptians. More good news comes from Saqqara, where a committee reported that, although outlaws did open the padlocks of tombs there, they did not enter the tombs or cause any damage; everything is safe.

The Egyptian Museum, Cairo, is fine, too. A total of seventy objects have been broken, but the museum was dark and the nine robbers did not recognise the value of what was in the vitrines. They opened thirteen cases, threw the seventy objects on the ground and broke them, including one Tutankhamun case, from which they broke the statue of the king on a panther. However, the broken objects can all be restored, and we will begin the restoration process this week.

The commanders of the army are now protecting the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, and all of the major sites of Egypt (Luxor, Aswan, Saqqara, and the pyramids of Giza) are safe. The twenty-four museums in Egypt, including the Coptic and Islamic museums in Cairo, are all safe, as well. I would like to say that I am very happy to see that the Egyptian people, young and old, stood as one person against the escaped prisoners to protect monuments all over the country. The monuments are safe because of both the army and the ordinary people.

Some foreigners think Egypt is not interested in protecting our monuments and museums, but that is not true, at all. Egypt has 5,000 years of civilisation, and we love our heritage. I want to send a message to the people of Egypt: all of you are responsible, to ultimately be judged by your own history, to protect your monuments, and should not permit ignorance or outlaws to damage our history – it is the most important thing we own. I am sure the bells from the churches are ringing now, and the voices from the minarets of mosques are calling, to say that Egypt is a safe place to live.  We all believe Egypt will be safe."

Google Art Project

Its official. According to Michael Humphrey, blogging for Forbes, Google is the coolest company on earth because it just rolled out an amazing resource -- Google Art Project.
The new portal powered by Google allows you to "explore museums from around the world, discover and view hundreds of artworks at incredible zoom levels, and even create and share your own collection of masterpieces." More accurately, you may explore 17 museums in 9 countries, including the Uffizi Gallery (Florence), the State Tretyakov Gallery (Moscow), the Freer Gallery of Art (DC), Van Gogh Museum (Amsterdam), and Alte Nationalgalerie (Berlin).

To see how the "Behind Scenes" of the project, watch and wonder. With the wintry mix fluttering over New York, why bother leaving home at all? The world's greatest art is at your eye-tips.