Richard Prince

Earlier this year Richard Prince lost in court to Patrick Cariou, whose images Prince appropriated for several collages and paintings. The debate is still raging, especially as the court’s ruling would bar artists from appropriating images unless they are commenting on the original work–something Prince’s work fails to do, and a difficult test to use in the digital media world where images are so easily accessible and useful to artists for any and all purposes. Randy Kennedy has written an excellent analysis of the case and its potential impact on artists, collectors and museums in today’s New York Times. The implications of this case are far-reaching and controversial but might not have much effect today, according to Kennedy, who reminds us that the proverbial horse has long ago fled the barn. MoMA and the Metropolitan Museum

a Richard Prince collage using Patrick Cariou's photos

have weighed in on Prince’s side to support freedom of expression for artists, but so much appropriation is happening today in so many places, the courts would have a difficult time pursuing perpetrators and if the law stands it would be nearly impossible to enforce.

From Richard Prince's Canal Zone series

The New York Times reports today that a federal judge in Manhattan ruled against Richard Prince in the closely watched copyright infringement case filed by Patrick Cariou, a French photographer. Prince used more than 41 of Cariou’s images in a body of work he called “Canal Zone.” The works were shown in 2008 at

Cariou’s Photo Left, Richard Prince Canal Zone, Right

Gagosian Gallery in New York, and in St. Barts.  Cariou claims that Prince used his photos without permission, and that an exhibition of his work was cancelled when the gallery learned of the works by Prince. Prince has said that he has no interest in the subject of the photos, he finds them boring and was using time-honored artistic license that falls under the “fair use” law to make them into more compelling works of art. Judge Deborah Batts found in favor of Cariou, saying that Prince and Gagosian Gallery violated Cariou’s copyright. The paintings have now been impounded until the parties return to court in May. Read the New York Times story HERE. The Art Newspaper has also reported the story with a Cariou interview. Read their take on it HERE.

Spiral Jetty photo taken by Jason Edward Kaufman in 2005

If you’ve ever been to Spiral Jetty along Utah’s Great Salt Lake, you know it demands a photograph or two. In fact, the jetty has been photographed thousands of times by professionals and amateurs alike. But now DIA is threatening a law suit against a beer company that is using a photo of the jetty on its cans. Read the full story here. Tyler Green has an excellent post on Modern Art Notes as well.

In last week’s auctions in Hong Kong, Russian money was flowing back into the market, reports Georgina Adam for The Financial Times. She also reports that Art Basel and Art Hong Kong are in conversation about AB buying AHK.

And in the same article Adam reports on several lawsuits of interest to collectors and market watchers including the lawsuit over “La Bella Principessa.”

La Bella Principessa, a Leonardo or Not?

David LaChapelle sues Rihanna over copyright infringement

Though he describes himself as a good friend of hers, the fashion and art photographer David LaChapelle has decided to settle his differences with the pop star Rihanna in a place where friends don’t usually end up: court. Mr. LaChappelle, known for his candy-colored, sexually over-the-top images, claims in a suit filed Monday in federal court in Manhattan that Rihanna helped herself to too many of the images in the recently released video for her sexually over-the-top song “S & M.”

Read this transcript from a recent NPR news report

Learn more about international art law in new ONLINE classes at Sotheby’s Institute of Art.