Abstract
On September 25, 2007, the Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art (MASS MoCA) won its declaratory judgment case against Swiss artist Christoph Büchel and potentially set additional Visual Artist Rights Act (VARA) precedent. Judge Ponsor agreed that Büchel's unfinished work Training Ground for Democracy was not protected by VARA. Artists cried foul. Journalists excoriated the museum with incendiary comments in the New York Times art section such as “the museum deserves to be scathed.”Smith, “Is it Art Yet? And Who Decides?” Why did an artistic disagreement end up ensnared in a relatively nasty legal “custody” battle?
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
