It’s not uncommon for artists to settle disputes out of court to avoid protracted litigation. For instance, in 1980 Robert Rauschenberg settled with photographer Morton Beebe after discovering that his photograph was used in Rauschenberg’s seminal work Pull (1974). The agreement included $3,000 and a copy of the work.
Whether for financial or PR reasons, the tendency to settle stifles much needed paradigm shifts in the court system. It took the Supreme Court some 38 years (from 1956-1994) to hear whether parody has an obvious claim to transformative value in a Fair Use defense. While landmark cases are few, the following list touches on a variety of legal transgressions in the arts.
In 1979, the United States General Services Administration (GSA) selected Richard Serra to create an outdoor sculpture for installation at 26 Federal Plaza in lower Manhattan. The sculpture was commissioned under GSA’s art-in-architecture program which mandated that one half of one percent of the construction cost of federal buildings is reserved for funding artworks by living American artists.
Serra received a fee of $175,000 for building a sculpture on Federal Plaza. The contract he entered provided that “all designs, sketches, models, and the work produced under this Agreement.. . . shall be the property of [the United States].” Furthermore, the agreement contained no provisions restricting the Government’s use of the sculpture after it was purchased.
Tilted Arc was completed and installed at Federal Plaza in 1981. All was not well following the installation of the 120 foot long sculpture. According to the Second Circuit’s factual background,
The pigeons had barely begun to roost on “Tilted Arc” before the sculpture became the object of intense public criticism. GSA received hundreds of letters from community residents and federal employees complaining about the sculpture’s appearance and its obstruction of Federal Plaza’s previously open space.
Because the sculpture created such widespread dissent, the GSA held a public hearing on the matter. Many heralded the sculpture for its artistic merit while others bemoaned the obstruction of Federal Plaza and the sculpture’s “unappealing aesthetic qualities.” In May 1985, it was decided that Tilted Arc would be relocated.
Serra filed a lawsuit in December 1986 alleging that the GSA’s decision to remove Tilted Arc violated his rights under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, federal trademark and copyright laws, and state law. In addition to a declaratory judgment and an injunction against removal of the sculpture, Serra sought damages in excess of $30,000,000. The district court dismissed his suit stating that the decision to relocate Tilted Arc was “a content-neutral determination made to further significant government interests and that the hearing provided all the process that was due.”
On appeal, Serra would challenge the rejection of his free expression claim. Unfortunately, the Second Circuit did not agree with him, holding that while private works are protected under the First Amendment, nothing in that guarantee precludes the Government from controlling its own expression or that of its agents. The court continued, “Tilted Arc is entirely owned by the Government and is displayed on Government property. Serra relinquished his own speech rights in the sculpture when he voluntarily sold it to GSA.”
On March 15, 1989, Richard Serra’s Tilted Arc was removed from 26 Federal Plaza in Lower Manhattan. Just where is the sculpture today? Sold as scrap to a recycler? Chipped into bits and incorporated into a Richard Tuttle show? The answer is: None of the above. Apparently, the sculpture is languishing in a Brooklyn warehouse where it has been for the 20+ years since its removal from Lower Manhattan. According to Serra, Tilted Arc is site-specific and he will not sanction any attempts to relocate the piece.
Above all, the lesson to be learned from Serra v. U.S. General Services Administration is in the power of contract formation. When Serra entered the agreement with the GSA, he effectively relinquished control of the completed sculpture. [Read more...]