JUDGE AWARDS $6.75M TO 5POINTZ ARTISTS WHOSE WORK WAS DESTROYED (NY)

ny1.com ^ | February 12, 2018

[ilovesarah2012]

A judge on Monday awarded a total of $6.75 million to artists whose famous graffiti work was erased by the owner of the former 5Pointz Building in Queens. The award will be dished out to the 21 artists for various amounts, with one artist, Jonathan Cohen, expected to receive more than $1 million.

[ilovesarah2012]

This is insane.

[raiderboy]

I do not care.

[Glad2bnuts]

The building was demolished 10 months after it was painted over.

[Paladin2]

Who wants to exist in Queens?

[BradyLS]

Cra’y-cra’y

[MarvinStinson]

That’s more than Leonardo da Vinci, Michaelangelo, Raphael and Rembrandt ever made combined.

[Paladin2]

The “Judge” needs to pay from his own Sta$h.

[funfan]

Sure that is art just like the Obama portraits unveiled today. Dumbing down everything.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

Time to appeal.

It is just so contrary to normal concepts of property rights. Are they insinuating that the artists take some microscopic slice of the exterior surface of the building by adverse possession? I don’t think so.

Giving them permission to spay paint does not give them ownership. They knew it and had no right to expect any permanency.

Then again, NYC has its preservation statutes, and those have been upheld.

This is flipping crazy.

[MarvinStinson]

The judge is obviously an art lover.

A good candidate for next head of the NEA.

[exit82]

If I was the owner of the building, I would deduct the cost of the “canvas” they painted on, since it was not their property.

Funny thing, the cost of the “canvas” that they painted on is $ 6.75 million.

Now, how about that!

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Plank #1 of the Communist Manifesto: The abolition of private property rights.

[montag813]

Absolutely nuts. And 90% of the “art” could not have been retrieved/artists would have paid what was required to do so.

[MarvinStinson]

You have to admit that this was worth $6.75 million

[neverevergiveup]

This guy was nice enough to allow these people to deface his building, in the name of ‘art’ for many years, but when he decides to destroy the building they sue him? As you say, this is insane. If this is not overturned we are now in a parallel universe where absurdity is the norm. As an analogy, if I go to the Met and spray-paint my ‘art’ on the wall of the first balcony during the first act of La Traviata, they can't destroy it or I can sue them for millions? Beyond ludicrous. Where does this judge live? Maybe his home should be ‘improved’ with some ‘art’.

[clintonh8r]

This judge will get a spanking from the appellate court.

[MarvinStinson]

According to the article the judge does not have a name.

[ElkGroveDan]

agree

[plain talk]

Hopefully this eventually makes it way to the Supreme Court. This is crap.

[Enchante]

“no good deed goes unpunished” — the owner never should have allowed these turds to paint on his property.... now he is screwed unless he can get this over-turned on appeal.