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.
Totally correct.
In addition, there is a tenant at law that says that in cases such as this, damages should be limited to losses.
Could the artist who received the $1 mil, have sold that “painting” on the day it was painted over, where it was and as it was, to a willing, informed buyer for $1 mil?
No.
Appeal as decision violates public policy.