Sergio Muñoz Sarmiento of the always interesting Clannco: Art & Law blog has chimed in about our yesterday’s post “When Paintings Are Easily Reproduced.” He tackles the legal question around Alfred Steiner’s “Erased Schulnik (Diptych)” (2010):
But is what Steiner did actually copyright infringement? At this late hour (11:00pm EST), I would have to say, not at all.
He clarifies:
To say that Steiner’s white version is a derivative work, and therefore infringing on Schulnik’s painting, would be tantamount to saying that no other artist could paint a clown face impasto-style, white or in color.
But he’s then he poses some other questions that could prove thorny:
… the legal question gets more interesting (and juicier) if we ask how exactly Steiner went about copying Schulnik’s work.
You’ll have to read the post to get the whole story.
