Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Copyright Law Blogs -> The Art Law Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Copyright Law
: The Art Law BlogEnter Sandman
By Intellectual Property Law, Esq.
There's a lot to take in, but one quick comment for now. Sergio sends his readers here "for solid pro-deaccessioning reasons," but I wouldn't describe my position as "pro-deaccessioning" any more than you would describe someone who accepts the practice of deaccessioning-to-acquire-more-art as "pro-deaccessioning." The position I've been taking is that the AAMD's black-and-white rule is silly, and that the reasons traditionally given in support of the rule don't stand up to much scrutiny (in part because they fail to explain the disparate treatment of sales to buy more art -- which are considered fine -- and sales to fund other worthwhile things -- which are not). So (pace Christopher Knight) I'm not "campaigning in favor of museums selling art from their collections to pay the light bill." I'm campaigning in favor of not ruling it out.
Full post as published by The Art Law Blog on January 14, 2009 (boomark / email).
NCAA and Ticketmaster
alleging they have a monopoly on college sports events and charge non-refundable fees to enter a lottery for the rights to purchase tickets to the sporting events.

Do Police Need Probable Cause to Enter a Home to Execute an Arrest Warrant
U.S. Denies Writer Permission To Enter Country
encourage students to enter Milani writing competition
"Supreme Court Poised to Enter Pre-Emption Debate"







