The American Society of Media Photographers and Picture Archive Council of America have filed a joint amicus brief in support of Patrick Cariou. The brief was written by the firm of Kirkland & Ellis LLP.

Seems like it. And now a custom car maker who goes by the name of Gotham Garage will have to prove that it did not infringe DC Comics’ copyright to the Batmobile. You see, Gotham Garage decided to build and sell replica Batmobiles — without DC Comics’ permission. DC Comics flew out of their bat cave (lower case “b” so as to not run the possibility of infringing DC Comics’ trademark) and sued Gotham Garage claiming copyright infringement, trademark infringement, trademark counterfeiting, unfair competition under the Lanham Act, and common law unfair competition.  Yikes!

Anyhow, Judge Ronald Lew, of the Central District of California, found that Gotham Garage’s claim that the Batmobile was not protected by copyright to be, let’s just say, pure bat guano, meaning it had no teeth. Gotham Garage will now have to answer DC’s allegations that the full-size, drivable Batmobile replicas infringe DC’s rights to the car’s design.

For those of a legal persuasion, the case is DC Comics v. Mark Towle et al (2:11-cv-03934).

Via the Hollywood Reporter and Mr. Pink.

Patrick Cariou’s lawyers filed their appellate brief on Wednesday, January 25, 2012. The case, the Roe v. Wade of the artworld, is Cariou v. Prince.

The brief is available here, via pdf format on Scribd.

On Facebook or Twitter? Have an RSS feed? Don’t have time to check our blog often? Then follow us on our social media sites!

Facebook

Twitter

RSS

Cheers!

It’s back, like a double-edged dagger — an éperon — Nietzsche style.  Back by popular demand, and now going on its third year, Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts‘ legendary, ground-breaking, and no-holds-barred educational series for visual artists.

“Informative, thought-provoking, enlightening, sensical. These things should be taught in art school, but I’m glad I learned them here!” notes one artist. “Pure deliciousness. Challenging, spicy, enlightening,” notes another. Read (and see) what other past participants have said here.

Although fees are now attached, artists can register for individual classes or the entire series. Course starts March 20, 2012

Law School for Visual Artists

Topics that will be covered during the 5-week course:

Tuesday March 20, 2012
Introduction:
• Legal Hypothetical: Analyzing legal issues in your art projects

Tuesday March 27, 2012
• Basic business models (non-profit and for-profit corporations, LLC’s)
• Fiscal Sponsorships
• Employment issues
A. Studio and gallery assistants
B. Working as a preparator for art galleries

Tuesday April 3, 2012
• Free Speech
• Right of Privacy

Tuesday April 10, 2012
Contracts
• Consignment Agreements
• Licensing Agreements
• Commissioning Agreements

Tuesday April 17, 2012
• Intellectual Property (copyright and trademarks)

Click here to register for this course (or just one or two classes).

They probably did, and their customer service response didn’t make things any better. Thanks to our good friend Amanda Sitzer for the heads up.

Artists, tell the U.S. Copyright Office how you would benefit from a court system where you could protect your copyrights and file small copyright claims. Because January 16 is a federal holiday (commemoration of the birthday of Martin Luther King), the deadline for submission of comments has been extended to January 17, 2012.

The Copyright Act protects a wide variety of works of authorship, from individual articles or photographs that may not have a high commercial value to motion pictures worth hundreds of millions of dollars in the marketplace. The copyright owners of all of these works can use copyright law to pursue certain unauthorized uses. Not all of these copyright owners, however, have the same resources to bring a federal lawsuit, which can require substantial time, money, and effort. Moreover, while a copyright owner may want to stop an infringement that caused a relatively small amount of economic damage, that owner may be dissuaded from filing a lawsuit because a potentially small award may not justify the potentially large expense of litigation. While the Act offers the possibility of statutory damages and attorney fees, these benefits are not available in all cases and parties cannot recover them until after the copyright owner has engaged in a potentially long court battle that requires up front costs.

The Copyright Office has been asked by Congress to study the obstacles facing small copyright claims disputes, as well as possible alternatives. Specifically, the Office is to undertake a study to: (1) assess the extent to which authors and other copyright owners are effectively prevented from seeking relief from infringements due to constraints in the current system; and (2) furnish specific recommendations, as appropriate, for changes in administrative, regulatory and statutory authority that will improve the adjudication of small copyright claims and thereby enable all copyright owners to more fully realize the promise of exclusive rights enshrined in our Constitution. The initial notice of inquiry seeks comment on how copyright owners have handled small copyright claims and the obstacles they have encountered, as well as potential alternatives to the current legal system that could better accommodate such claims.

You can submit your comments here.

Artinfo has more thoughts here.

Kevin Smith, Duke University’s Scholarly Communications Officer, has some thoughts on this question, comparing U.S. copyright laws to those of the UK and Brazil.

Midnight, January 2012. Via Artlyst:

The Resale tax allows heirs of artists who died in the past 70 years to get a share in the resale of works of art. Under the legislation, art dealers and auctioneers will have to pay the heirs, or estates up to four per cent of the sale price of artworks over €1,000 (£840). Each time you bid on a lot covered by the ARR, you agree to pay an amount equal to the resale royalty, “if you are the successful bidder. This amount will be added to your invoice”,Our Conditions of Sale have been amended accordingly”; Christie’s have stated. The maximum amount payable is a hefty €12,500 on each lot purchased.

Should every artist be happy about this? Not so, says Artlyst,

This in principle sounds fine, but in real terms, the only ones who stand to profit are the super rich artists like Damien Hirst and Tracey Emin or the elitist estates of Picasso, Lucian Freud and Francis Bacon. …In the bigger scheme of things, questions should be raised as to what this means for younger and mid-career artists.

Are resale rights an analogous to copyright laws?

Follow this link if you’re interested on a European study on the effects of resale rights. And follow this link if you’re interested in the U.S. version of resale rights, and the recent California lawsuits.

Michael G Bennett, Associate Professor of Law at Northeastern University, has a unique analysis on that relationship, in what he calls, The Most Explosive Copyright Case Never To Be Seen.

It is an uncontested fact of the trial that, sometime in 2006, Mehanna translated Muhammad bin Ahmad as-Salim’s book, 39 Ways to Serve and Participate in Jihad, from the original Arabic to English. Though a shadowy figure, various sources strongly suggest that as-Salim is a Saudi citizen. If this is true, then Saudi copyright law and, by virtue of the Berne Conventional, U.S. copyright law could apply to Mehanna’s translation of as-Salim’s book.

Check it out.