To the Reader:

Readers are invited to submit questions about the Visual Artists Rights Act. Please send them to VARAQA@studiolo.org. The editor will choose those questions and answers to be posted. Right is reserved to edit both questions and answers.

If you do not indicate that you wish your questions signed with your name and return address they will be posted anonymously. Please indicate by number (i.e. Q-021) which question you are answering. Identify your submission minimally with name, institution or vocation (if applicable) and email address.

Disclaimer: Answers are provided by readers. This column makes no representation as to their correctness or utility. Answers provided are to be understood as the non-legal opinions of our readership. Opinions expressed represent neither the policy nor opinion of Robert Baron, the editor of this page, of the College Art Association, or the CAA Committee on Intellectual Property, the sponsors of the VARA session. For legal advice, consult your attorney.

Top | Participants | Topics | Biographies | Statements | Resources | Reader Q&A

Return to VARA Home Page

Q-001: On disintegrating and self-destructing works
An artist makes a work that is supposed to disintegrate as it weathers. The owner keeps on repairing it. Can the artist sue for an injunction to keep the owner from repairing and restoring it under the presumption that the lack of decay is harmful to his reputation? Same with a work that is supposed to auto-destruct. If a gallery owner refused to flip the self-destruct switch is he in potential violation of VARA? (anon)

Q-001a:
I thought I'd just pass along this anecdote, to throw in another (cultural) dimension.  When I worked in a well-known anthropology museum, the staff "discovered" in the storage areas, Zuni war gods, sculpted wooden pole-like objects which, under Zuni cultural beliefs, are to be left out in the open to disintegrate.  The process of disintegration releases their power according to  Zuni spiritual beliefs.  As a result (and in compliance with the spirit of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act), the museum returned the war gods to the Zuni, who have, in all likelihood, placed them back into the open environment so they may accomplish their designated purpose.

Now the Zuni do not consider these works "art" in the Western historical sense; rather they are powerful spiritual beings. However, I am sure museums in the US and abroad have them in their collections and treat them as "art", and many of these institutions might hesitate to return them to what they see as their "destructive" end.  This puts museums in a conundrum of sorts:  protectors and preservers of cultural and artistic traditions versus respect for the original creators intentions.

Which leads me to my question (finally):  are cultural objects of this type interpreted as "art" under VARA and other moral rights legislation?  And if so, are museums who conserve/repair these works violating this legislation? (anon)

A-001:
My sense is that there is no loss of honor or reputation for an anonymous artist, nor is there any issue with respect to attribution, by definition.  VARA, as a cousin of copyright, recognizes individual (or joint) or corporate authorship, not group (or ethnic) authorship.  I don't think a tribe or other group would have standing under VARA, but it's untested, of course. (anon)

Q-002: On disclaiming attribution and scholarship
If a work is harmed to the point that an artist disclaims attribution to the work, can the artist prevent an art historian compiling a catalogue raisonné from listing the work as his? (anon)
 

Return to VARA Home Page

Go to Robert Baron's Home Page