Basquiat
Estate v. Christie’s, via the Trademark Blog. Plaintiffs allege ownership of the mark
BASQUIAT and copyrights in Jean-Michel Basquiat’s artwork. The Estate formed an Authentication Committee
to opine on the authenticity of works attributed to him. A collector who claimed to have shared an
apartment with Basquiat put up 50 works attributed to him. Only 7 had been submitted to the
Authentication Committee, 6 of which were authenticated. Christie’s listed the 50 works in a catalog, Jean-Michel Basquiat: Works from the Collection
of Alexis Adler. Though the estate
denied permission to reproduce some of Basquiat’s works in the catalog,
Christie’s put a notice in the catalog: “All artwork by Jean-Michel Basquiat:
(c) 2014 the Estate of Jean-Michel Basquiat/ADAGP, Paris/ARS, New York.” The Estate alleged that Christie’s had reason
to doubt the authenticity of the remaining items, though it doesn’t
affirmatively allege inauthenticity.
I bet you’re expecting a copyright infringement complaint
based on the use of authenticated Basquiat images (though not the 44
unauthenticated ones, of course!), but the Estate to its credit (no pun
intended) did not bring a copyright infringement claim. However, and with some potential Dastar difficulty given that this is the
district of Antidote Films, the Estate alleged false
endorsement/false advertising under the Lanham Act, violation of NY GBL § 349,
and unfair competition. The theory is
that the copyright notice falsely implies that the works are authentic and that
the Estate sanctioned the sale.
Were this litigated out, I’d expect, along with the Dastar issues (which would seem to me to
preclude outright the false endorsement theory), questions about falsity: the
Estate does not allege the inauthenticity of the 43 unevaluated pieces, and
“reason to doubt” is not itself inauthenticity, so I can’t see how the
complaint pleads falsity. There is that
one piece the Estate’s Authentication Committee did not authenticate … but even
there is wriggle room that the complaint might be carefully pleading around: if
the Committee just said it couldn’t authenticate that piece, that too is not
inauthenticity. As I understand it, at
least some artists’ authenticating bodies have become hesitant about not authenticating in decisive language,
worried about false advertising/slander of title issues of their own. (See this
story about the Andy Warhol Art Authentication Board.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment