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.
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.
As arts communities around the world experience a time of challenge and change, accessible, independent reporting on these developments is more important than ever.
Please consider supporting our journalism, and help keep our independent reporting free and accessible to all.