• About
    • Mission
    • Team
    • Boards
    • Mentions & Testimonials
    • Institutional Recognition
    • Annual Reports
    • Current & Past Sponsors
    • Contact Us
  • Resources
    • Article Collection
    • Podcast: Art in Brief
    • AML and the Art Market
    • AI and Art Authentication
    • Newsletter
      • Subscribe
      • Archives
      • In Brief
    • Art Law Library
    • Movies
    • Nazi-looted Art Restitution Database
    • Global Network
      • Courses and Programs
      • Artists’ Assistance
      • Bar Associations
      • Legal Sources
      • Law Firms
      • Student Societies
      • Research Institutions
    • Additional resources
      • The “Interview” Project
  • Events
    • Worldwide Calendar
    • Our Events
      • All Events
      • Annual Conferences
        • 2025 Art Law Conference
        • 2024 Art Law Conference
        • 2023 Art Law Conference
        • 2022 Art Law Conference
        • 2015 Art Law Conference
  • Programs
    • Visual Artists’ Legal Clinics
      • Art & Copyright Law Clinic
      • Artist-Dealer Relationships Clinic
      • Artist Legacy and Estate Planning Clinic
      • Visual Artists’ Immigration Clinic
    • Summer School
      • 2026
      • 2025
    • Internship and Fellowship
    • Judith Bresler Fellowship
  • Case Law Database
  • Log in
  • Become a Member
  • Donate
  • Log in
  • Become a Member
  • Donate
Center for Art Law
  • About
    About
    • Mission
    • Team
    • Boards
    • Mentions & Testimonials
    • Institutional Recognition
    • Annual Reports
    • Current & Past Sponsors
    • Contact Us
  • Resources
    Resources
    • Article Collection
    • Podcast: Art in Brief
    • AML and the Art Market
    • AI and Art Authentication
    • Newsletter
      Newsletter
      • Subscribe
      • Archives
      • In Brief
    • Art Law Library
    • Movies
    • Nazi-looted Art Restitution Database
    • Global Network
      Global Network
      • Courses and Programs
      • Artists’ Assistance
      • Bar Associations
      • Legal Sources
      • Law Firms
      • Student Societies
      • Research Institutions
    • Additional resources
      Additional resources
      • The “Interview” Project
  • Events
    Events
    • Worldwide Calendar
    • Our Events
      Our Events
      • All Events
      • Annual Conferences
        Annual Conferences
        • 2025 Art Law Conference
        • 2024 Art Law Conference
        • 2023 Art Law Conference
        • 2022 Art Law Conference
        • 2015 Art Law Conference
  • Programs
    Programs
    • Visual Artists’ Legal Clinics
      Visual Artists’ Legal Clinics
      • Art & Copyright Law Clinic
      • Artist-Dealer Relationships Clinic
      • Artist Legacy and Estate Planning Clinic
      • Visual Artists’ Immigration Clinic
    • Summer School
      Summer School
      • 2026
      • 2025
    • Internship and Fellowship
    • Judith Bresler Fellowship
  • Case Law Database
Home image/svg+xml 2021 Timothée Giet Art law image/svg+xml 2021 Timothée Giet The Legal, Ethical, and Practical Dimensions of Removing Confederate Monuments
Back

The Legal, Ethical, and Practical Dimensions of Removing Confederate Monuments

October 28, 2023

(Image Credit: The Confederate Memorial Carving, Stone Mountain, Georgia © VOA News)

By Stephanie Nicole Argueta

Introduction

Since the protests surrounding the death of George Floyd and Briana Taylor, many people within our nation have chosen to look inward to evaluate the historical mistreatment of people of color in this country. One such aspect of our country that many have chosen to reevaluate is the display of many Confederate statues across the country. Since 2020, the removal of Confederate monuments from public and private land has become a contentious and highly debated issue in the United States. These monuments, which commemorate figures from the Confederacy, have sparked a nationwide conversation about their historical significance, the discourse surrounding their removal, and the various solutions that can be pursued to address their historically oppressive past. But what does it truly take to remove one of these monuments? Can public backlash be enough to have these monuments removed or must something else be done? Do we lose anything from removing these monuments?

Legality of Removing Confederate Monuments

When looking at the legality surrounding the removal of Confederate monuments, it is a complex issue that is a case by case situation. When evaluating the possibilities one may have for requesting the removal of a Confederate monument, the issues relating to property law, first amendment law, and general personal protections come into play. This is due to the fact that many monuments are built on privately owned land or publicly owned land. This distinction is important to note because of the applicable laws that are relevant to the owner of the land in which the monument is located. This is then further complicated by the fact that some monuments were built not by public funding but rather private investors. This, coupled with each citizen’s first amendment right to free speech, creates the complicated nature of the removal of confederate monuments.

Monuments that are on publicly owned land and are publicly funded fall under the jurisdiction of local and state governments and are also governed by state property and cultural preservation laws. [1] In recent years, several states have enacted laws protecting Confederate monuments, making their removal more challenging. For example, in North Carolina, a 2015 law prohibits the removal or relocation of monuments on public property without the approval of the North Carolina Historical Commission.[2] Such laws have triggered legal battles over the authority of local governments to decide the fate of these monuments. One such legal battle was seen in the state of North Carolina, in Soc’y for the Hist. Pres. of the Twentysixth N.C. Troops, Inc. v. City of Asheville, the city government ordered the removal of the Zebulon Baird Vance Monument but was met by intense opposition by the plaintiff who filed a breach of contract claim, sought out a temporary restraining order, preliminary and permanent injunction, and declaratory judgment.[3] The plaintiffs attempted to use the North Carolina Historical Commission as a form of relief for their case, however the Court of Appeals in North Carolina went in favor of the city because the plaintiff failed to show that they actually suffered some kind of injury since it was unknown who actually owned the monument. [4] As of right now, the plaintiffs have appealed to the North Carolina Supreme Court, and they are waiting to begin oral arguments.[5]

On private property, the legality of removal is generally less clear-cut because of the complexities that arise when discussing the transfer of ownership. Property owners have the right to decide what is displayed on their land, but they may face backlash from the community or preservationists. One such example of a complex relationship of private land and monuments was a sculpture built in Stone Mountain, Georgia on land owned by the U​​nited Daughters of the Confederacy.[6] The mountain on which the monument was carved into was owned by segregationist Marvin Griffin and depicted three confederate leaders, including Robert E. Lee.[7] However, after years of backlash, the state purchased the mountain.[8] However, since this purchase, the monument still remains due to the fact that in Georgia there have been various cultural preservation laws that have passed which allows monuments such as this one to remain intact.[9]

Another such example of the complexities surrounding ownership of land with regards to Confederate monuments is the one outside of Nashville, Tennessee that honors Nathan Bedford Forrest, a confederate soldier and the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.[10] It was a 25-foot statue with Confederate flags around it that was installed in the 1990s by an individual on their property and which could be easily seen from the local highway.[11] Around the 2010s, many politicians and citizens voiced their frustrations with the statue being so visible and thus resulted in a petition to the Department of Transportation to plant foliage to block the statue.[12] The petition was then denied, and not long after, many people took matters into their own hands and began to vandalize the statue.[13] The owner of the statue eventually passed away in 2020, and in 2021, the executor of the estate chose to remove the statue, giving a list of reasons for its removal, including that the statue itself was “ugly”.[14] One major reason as to why the monument had stayed for so long is because the statue is protected under the Visual Artist Rights Act (VARA). VARA, which was enacted in the 90s, protects the moral rights of visual artists by protecting the works of art of these artists from getting destroyed by different entities.[15] The use of VARA makes the situation here in Tennessee different than in Georgia, because VARA is only applicable for works made after 1991.[16] Since the carving in Georgia was finished in the 1970s it is less likely to apply. However, this statue was erected in the 1990s after the implementation of VARA and the original artist had more protections over his work being damaged than others would. It is essential to navigate the delicate balance between property rights and the broader societal impact of maintaining Confederate monuments, especially when they promote values associated with slavery, racism, and oppression.

The Discourse Surrounding Monument Removal

The discourse surrounding the removal of Confederate monuments is multifaceted, reflecting a wide range of perspectives. Proponents of removal argue that these monuments symbolize a dark period in American history and glorify individuals who fought to preserve slavery and white supremacy. They contend that these monuments serve as painful reminders of oppression for African Americans and other marginalized communities. After 2020, the Black Lives Matter movement and heightened awareness of systemic racism have amplified these voices and led to renewed calls for removal. Conversely, opponents of removal often argue that these monuments represent an important part of American history and should be preserved for educational purposes. They contend that removing these monuments erases history and amounts to “canceling culture.” Some argue that it is better to contextualize the monuments with plaques or educational programs to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the Civil War and its implications. Additionally, the discourse includes discussions about the role of symbolism in society. Some argue that symbols like Confederate monuments can perpetuate racist attitudes and behaviors, while others maintain that they are harmless relics of a bygone era. The debate over the interpretation of these symbols further complicates the discourse.

Solutions Surrounding Confederate Monuments

To address the historically oppressive past associated with Confederate monuments, several solutions can be considered:

**Removal and Relocation**

In cases where it is legally possible, the removal and relocation of Confederate monuments to museums, cemeteries, or other appropriate settings can be an effective solution. This approach preserves historical artifacts while removing them from public spaces that may perpetuate hurtful ideologies. One ongoing example of confederate monument removal and relocation is going on in Arlington, Virginia. In this situation the Arlington National Cemetery has a large confederate statue that Congress has required to be removed and relocated to another space that the public has been asked to vote on. [17]

(Image Credit: The Confederate Memorial, Arlington, Virginia © Arlington National Cemetery)
Image Credit: The Confederate Memorial, Arlington, Virginia © Arlington National Cemetery

**Contextualization**

For monuments that remain in place, contextualization is crucial. This involves adding plaques or educational materials that provide a balanced historical perspective, acknowledging the monument’s origins and the context in which it was erected. This is particularly relevant for monuments located in states that have prohibited their removal. Once such state in which this occurred was in Georgia. In 2019, an Atlanta committee began the process of putting up placards on many confederate monuments across the city to contend with the “Lost Cause” narrative that has been prevalent in the south for years with regards to the Civil War.[18]

**Community Dialogue and Education**

Engaging in open and inclusive community dialogues about Confederate monuments can help build consensus on their fate. Educating the public about the historical context of these monuments and their impact on marginalized communities can lead to informed decision-making. The residents of Fairfax, Virginia engaged in this complex conversation during the pandemic in which the City Counsel led a conversation about the issues surrounding the confederacy’s long and hurtful relationship to the Black community.[19]Further the City Counsel has created a virtual space in which residents can engage more with the deeper questions of inequality and racism so that they can understand the reasons why the confederate south was so bad.[20]

**Legal Reform**

Advocates for removal can work to repeal or amend laws that protect Confederate monuments and vice versa. This approach requires political mobilization and legal efforts to change the legal landscape. This has taken on many forms but the most successful example of legal reform took place during the pandemic. In July of 2020, the House of Representatives were presented with the possibility of removing a bust of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney from the Old Supreme Court Chamber in the Capitol Building.[21] The original proposal was to replace not only the bust the bust with one of Justice Thurgood Marshal, but as well any statues or busts of figures who supported the confederacy.[22] It passed in the House and was pending in the Senate for a little bit, but in 2022, President Biden signed the bill to remove the bust.[23] However, through all this, there was still much opposition towards the removal with a total of 113 Republicans voting Nay to the removal of the bust.[24] One member of congress who has voiced his disagreement with the bill was Rep. David McKinley, who took issue with the fact that confederate statues and busts that were sent from individual states, including West Virginia, would be removed.[25] In his eyes this bill was infringing on states rights and thus influenced him to vote against the bill.[26]

Conclusion

The removal of Confederate monuments from both public and private land presents complex legal, ethical, and practical challenges. The discourse surrounding these monuments is emblematic of larger conversations about history, symbolism, and racial injustice in the United States. While there is no one-size-fits-all solution, it is crucial to address the historically oppressive past associated with these monuments in a way that respects the rights and sensitivities of all citizens. Whether through removal, contextualization, public art, community dialogue, or legal reform, the ultimate goal should be to promote a more inclusive and just society.

Suggested Readings

Deborah R. Gerhardt, Law in the Shadows of Confederate Monuments,27 Mich. J. Race & L. 1 (2021)

Jessica Owley,Jess Phelps & Sean W. Hughes, Private Confedrate Monuments, 25 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 253 (2021)

Timmerman, Travis (2020). A Case for Removing Confederate Monuments. In Bob Fischer (ed.), Ethics, Left and Right: The Moral Issues that Divide Us. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 513-522.

Jessica Owley & Jess Phelps, The Life and Death of Confederate Monuments,68 Buffalo L. Rev. 1393 (2020)

About the Author:

Stephanie Nicole Argueta is a second year law student at Brooklyn Law School. She received her B.A. in Political Science from CUNY Brooklyn Law School. Growing up as a first generation Latina in New York City she grew a deep passion for issues like cultural preservation in immigrant communities and artistic expression for many minority communities, thus influencing her decision to attend law school.

Sources and Citations:

  1. Understanding the Complicated Landscape of Civil War Monuments, 93 Ind. L.J. Supp. 15, 18 ↑
  2. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143B-62 ↑
  3. Soc’y for the Hist. Pres. of the Twenty Sixth N.C. Troops, Inc. v. City of Asheville, 282 N.C. App. 701, 701 (2022) ↑
  4. Id. at 706-07, ↑
  5. Sarah Honosky, NC Supreme Court will take up lawsuit over removal of downtown Asheville’s Vance Monument, Dec.29, 2022, https://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/local/2022/12/29/nc-supreme-court-takes-up-suit-on-asheville-removal-of-vance-monument/69761539007/ ↑
  6. Legal experts say removal of Confederate monuments a complex, lengthy undertaking, Nov. 2019, https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2019/november-2019/legal-experts-say-removal-of-confederate-monuments-a-complex–le/ ↑
  7. Claire Haley, Stone Mountain: Carving Fact from Fiction, Nov. 18, 2022, https://www.atlantahistorycenter.com/blog/stone-mountain-a-brief-history/#:~:text=The%20original%20idea%20for%20a,side%20of%20the%20 granite%20 mountain. ↑
  8. Legal experts say removal of Confederate monuments a complex, lengthy undertaking, Nov. 2019, https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2019/november-2019/legal-experts-say-removal-of-confederate-monuments-a-complex–le/ ↑
  9. Claire Haley, Stone Mountain: Carving Fact from Fiction, Nov. 18, 2022, https://www.atlantahistorycenter.com/blog/stone-mountain-a-brief-history/#:~:text=The%20original%20idea%20for%20a,side%20of%20the%20granite%20mountain. ↑
  10. ARTICLE: Understanding the Complicated Landscape of Civil War Monuments, 93 Ind. L.J. Supp. 15, 22 ↑
  11. Id. ↑
  12. Id. ↑
  13. Id. ↑
  14. Nick Beres, Nathan Bedford Forrest statue along I-65 removed after more than 2 decades, Dec. 7, 2021, https://www.newschannel5.com/news/nathan-bedford-forrest-statue-along-i-65-being-removed-after-more-than-2-decades ↑
  15. 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(b) ↑
  16. 17 U.S.C. § 106A(d) ↑
  17. Removal of the confederate memorial, Arlington National Cemetery. https://www.arlingtoncemetery.mil/About/Confederate-Memorial-Removal ↑
  18. https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/02/us/atlanta-confederate-monuments-context/index.html ↑
  19. https://patch.com/virginia/fairfaxcity/city-engaged-community-dialogue-over-its-confederate-legacy ↑
  20. id. ↑
  21. Ashley Ahn, Congress votes to remove a bust of the Dred Scott decision’s author from the Capitol, Dec. 15, 2022, https://www.npr.org/2022/12/15/1143113389/capitol-remove-roger-taney-dred-scott-statue#:~:text=Hourly%20News-,Congress%20votes%20to%20remove%20bust%20of%20former%20Justice%20Roger%20Taney,serve%20on%20the%20high%20court. ↑
  22. H. R. 3005, 117th Cong. (2021) ↑
  23. Amy B Wang and Marianna Sotomayor, Biden signs bill to remove bust of Dred Scott decision author from Capitol, Dec. 27, 2022 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/12/14/dred-scott-taney-bust-slavery/ ↑
  24. Bryan Metzger, Congress passed a bill removing a bust from the Capitol of the Supreme Court justice who authored an infamous decision denying citizenship to Black Americans, Dec 14, 2022, https://www.businessinsider.com/congress-passes-bill-removing-bust-dred-scott-roger-taney-slavery-2022-12 ↑
  25. WEST VIRGINIA’S THREE U.S. HOUSE REPS VOTE AGAINST REMOVING CONFEDERATE STATUES FROM CAPITOL, Jun. 30, 2021, https://mooney.house.gov/west-virginias-three-u-s-house-reps-vote-against-removing-confederate-statues-from-capitol/#:~:text=3005%2C%20Kenna’s%20statue%20would%20be,decided%20to%20vote%20against%20H.R. ↑
  26. Id. ↑

Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only and is not meant to provide legal advice. Readers should not construe or rely on any comment or statement in this article as legal advice. For legal advice, readers should seek a consultation with an attorney.

Post navigation

Previous The Krater in Her Cupboard: Shelby White and the Grey Side of Private Antiquities Collections
Next 25 Years of the Washington Principles: The Strides and Stumbles in Reclaiming Nazi-Confiscated Art

Related Art Law Articles

Center for Art Law Susan (Central Park) Legacy Over Licensing Josie Goettel
Art lawcopyrightlicensing

Legacy Over Licensing: How Artist Estates and Museums Are Redefining Control in the Digital Age

February 19, 2026
Center for Art Law M HKA
Art lawLegal Issues in Museum Administration

Flemish Government’s Plan to Dismantle M HKA’s Collection in the Name of Centralization of Art

February 18, 2026
Center for Art law Imitation is Not Flattery Lauren Stein The Supper at Emmaus
Art law

When Imitation is Not Flattery: Art Fakes, Forgeries, and the Market They Fool

January 28, 2026
Center for Art Law
Center for Art Law

Follow us on Instagram for the latest in Art Law!

A recent report by the World Jewish Restitution Or A recent report by the World Jewish Restitution Organization (WRJO) states that most American museums provide inadequate provenance information for potentially Nazi-looted objects held in their collections. This is an ongoing problem, as emphasized by the closure of the Nazi-Era Provenance Internet Portal last year. Established in 2003, the portal was intended to act as a public registry of potentially looted art held in museum collections across the United States. However, over its 21-year lifespan, the portal's practitioners struggled to secure ongoing funding and it ultimately became outdated. 

The WJRO report highlights this failure, noting that museums themselves have done little to make provenance information easily accessible. This lack of transparency is a serious blow to the efforts of Holocaust survivors and their descendants to secure the repatriation of seized artworks. WJRO President Gideon Taylor urged American museums to make more tangible efforts to cooperate with Holocaust survivors and their families in their pursuit of justice.

🔗 Click the link in our bio to read more.

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #museumissues #nazilootedart #wwii #artlawyer #legalresearch
Join us for the Second Edition of Center for Art L Join us for the Second Edition of Center for Art Law Summer School! An immersive five-day educational program designed for individuals interested in the dynamic and ever-evolving field of art law. 

Taking place in the vibrant art hub of New York City, the program will provide participants with a foundational understanding of art law, opportunities to explore key issues in the field, and access to a network of professionals and peers with shared interests. Participants will also have the opportunity to see how things work from a hands-on and practical perspective by visiting galleries, artist studios, auction houses and law firms, and speak with professionals dedicated to and passionate about the field. 

Applications are open now through March 1st!

🎟️ APPLY NOW using the link in our bio! 

#centerforartlaw #artlawsummerschool #newyork #artlaw #artlawyer #legal #lawyer #art
Join us for an informative presentation and pro bo Join us for an informative presentation and pro bono consultations to better understand the current art and copyright law landscape. Copyright law is a body of federal law that grants authors exclusive rights over their original works — from paintings and photographs to sculptures, as well as other fixed and tangible creative forms. Once protection attaches, copyright owners have exclusive economic rights that allow them to control how their work is reproduced, modified and distributed, among other uses.

Albeit theoretically simple, in practice copyright law is complex and nuanced: what works acquire such protection? How can creatives better protect their assets or, if they wish, exploit them for their monetary benefit? 

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio! 

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #legal #research #lawyer #artlawyer #bootcamp #copyright #CLE #trainingprogram
In October, the Hispanic Society Museum and Librar In October, the Hispanic Society Museum and Library deaccessioned forty five paintings from its collection through an auction at Christie's. The sale included primarily Old-Master paintings of religious and aristocratic subjects. Notable works in the sale included a painting from the workshop of El Greco, a copy of a work by Titian, as well as a portrait of Isabella of Portugal, and Clemente Del Camino y Parladé’s “El Columpio (The Swing). 

The purpose of the sale was to raise funds to further diversify the museum's collection. In a statement, the institution stated that the works selected for sale are not in line with their core mission as they seek to expand and diversify their collection.

🔗 Click the link in our bio to read more.

#centerforartlaw #artlawnews #artlawresearch #legalresearch #artlawyer #art #lawyer
Check out our new episode where Paris and Andrea s Check out our new episode where Paris and Andrea speak with Ali Nour, who recounts his journey from Khartoum to Cairo amid the ongoing civil war, and describes how he became involved with the Emergency Response Committee - a group of Sudanese heritage officials working to safeguard Sudan’s cultural heritage. 

🎙️ Click the link in our bio to listen anywhere you get your podcasts! 

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #artlawyer #legal #research #podcast #february #legalresearch #newepisode #culturalheritage #sudaneseheritage
When you see ‘February’ what comes to mind? Birthd When you see ‘February’ what comes to mind? Birthdays of friends? Olympic games? Anniversary of war? Democracy dying in darkness? Days getting longer? We could have chosen a better image for the February cover but somehow the 1913 work of Umberto Boccioni (an artist who died during World War 1) “Dynamism of a Soccer Player” seemed to hit the right note. Let’s keep going, individuals and team players.

Center for Art Law is pressing on with events and research. We have over 200 applications to review for the Summer Internship Program, meetings, obligations. Reach out if you have questions or suggestions. We cannot wait to introduce to you our Spring Interns and we encourage you to share and keep channels of communication open. 

📚 Read more using the link in our bio! Make sure to subscribe so you don't miss any upcoming newsletters!

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #artlawyer #legal #research #newsletter #february #legalresearch
Join the Center for Art Law for conversation with Join the Center for Art Law for conversation with Frank Born and Caryn Keppler on legacy and estate planning!

When planning for the preservation of their professional legacies and the future custodianship of their oeuvres’, artists are faced with unique concerns and challenges. Frank Born, artist and art dealer, and Caryn Keppler, tax and estate attorney, will share their perspectives on legacy and estate planning. Discussion will focus on which documents to gather, and which professionals to get in touch with throughout the process of legacy planning.

This event is affiliated with the Artist Legacy and Estate Planning Clinic which seeks to connect artists, estate administrators, attorneys, tax advisors, and other experts to create meaningful and lasting solutions for expanding the art canon and art legacy planning. 

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio! 

#centerforartlaw #artlaw #clinic #artlawyer #estateplanning #artistlegacy #legal #research #lawclinic
Authentication is an inherently uncertain practice Authentication is an inherently uncertain practice, one that the art market must depend upon. Although, auction houses don't have to guarantee  authenticity, they have legal duties related to contract law, tort law, and industry customs. The impact of the Old Master cases, sparked change in the industry including Sotheby's acquisition of Orion Analytical. 

📚 To read more about the liabilities of auction houses and the change in forensic tools, read Vivianne Diaz's published article using the link in our bio!
Join us for an informative guest lecture and pro b Join us for an informative guest lecture and pro bono consultations on legacy and estate planning for visual artists.

Calling all visual artists: join the Center for Art Law's Artist Legacy and Estate Planning Clinic for an evening of low-cost consultations with attorneys, tax experts, and other arts professionals with experience in estate and legacy planning.

After a short lecture on a legacy and estate planning topic, attendees with consultation tickets artist will be paired with one of the Center's volunteer professionals (attorneys, appraisers and financial advisors) for a confidential 20-minute consultation. Limited slots are available for the consultation sessions.

Please be sure to read the entire event description using the LinkedIn event below.

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio!
On May 24, 2024 the UK enacted the Digital Markets On May 24, 2024 the UK enacted the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCC). This law increases transparency requirements and consumer rights, including reforming subscription contracts. It grants consumers cancellation periods during cooling-off times. 

Charitable organizations, including museums and other cultural institutions, have concerns regarding consumer abuse of this option. 

🔗 Read more about this new law and it's implications in Lauren Stein's published article, including a discussion on how other jurisdictions have approached the issue, using the link in our bio!
Don't miss our on our upcoming Bootcamp on Februar Don't miss our on our upcoming Bootcamp on February 4th! Check out the full event description below:

Join the Center for Art Law for an in-person, full-day training aimed at preparing lawyers for working with art market participants and understanding their unique copyright law needs. The bootcamp will be led by veteran art law attorneys, Louise Carron, Barry Werbin, Carol J. Steinberg, Esq., Scott Sholder, Marc Misthal, specialists in copyright law.

This Bootcamp provides participants -- attorneys, law students, law graduates and legal professionals -- with foundational legal knowledge related to copyright law for art market clients. Through a combination of instructional presentations and mock consultations, participants will gain a solid foundation in copyright law and its specificities as applied to works of visual arts, such as the fair use doctrine and the use of generative artificial intelligence tools.

🎟️ Grab tickets using the link in our bio!
The expansion of the use of collaborations between The expansion of the use of collaborations between artists and major consumer corporations brings along a myriad of IP legal considerations. What was once seen in advertisement initiatives  has developed into the creation of "art objects," something that lives within a consumer object while retaining some portion of an artists work. 

🔗 Read more about this interesting interplay in Natalie Kawam Yang's published article, including a discussion on how the LOEWE x Ghibli Museum fits into this context, using the link in our bio.
  • About the Center
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
  • Upcoming Events
  • Internship
  • Case Law Database
  • Log in
  • Become a Member
  • Donate
DISCLAIMER

Center for Art Law is a New York State non-profit fully qualified under provision 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code.

The Center does not provide legal representation. Information available on this website is
purely for educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice.

TERMS OF USE AND PRIVACY POLICY

Your use of the Site (as defined below) constitutes your consent to this Agreement. Please
read our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy carefully.

© 2026 Center for Art Law
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.