Warfare of Art & Law Podcast
Warfare of Art and Law Podcast sparks conversation about the intriguing – and sometimes infuriating – stories that arise in the worlds of art and law with artist and attorney Stephanie Drawdy.
Warfare of Art & Law Podcast
Art/Cultural Heritage/IP Law Attorney & Musician Leila Amineddoleh - a 2ND Saturday Conversation
To learn more, please visit Amineddoleh & Associates LLC and view Leila Amineddoleh performing Chopin Polonaise, Op. 26, No. 1 and Liszt Liebestraum No. 3.
Show Notes:
1:00 Amineddoleh’s background and work in music and law
4:00 Patty Gerstenblith
7:00 building Amineddoleh & Assoc.
8:45 Amineddoleh's work with Greece
10:00 perspective as musician aids in work as attorney to other artists
11:00 Amineddoleh's experience with plagiarism
14:20 Amineddoleh’s practice
15:45 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
19:50 artists’ perspectives in hiring an attorney
22:50 Jerry Alonzo: what brings artists to seek out Amineddoleh
26:00 return of golden coffin of Nedjemankh
31:45 use of AI
36:30 AI-assisted Beatles song
37:45 analogy of photography to AI outputs
38:20 Japanese photographer Hiroshi Sugimoto
39:45 suit over copyright of monkey selfie
41:45 Thaler v. USCO
44:30 Rupali Gujral: negotiating on a client’s behalf
48:30 Stefania Salles Bruins: history of art collecting
52:30 Bruins: Amineddoleh's balancing of legal and musical practices
54:00 Amineddoleh’s perspective on sharing her music and performing
56:30 Liszt’s Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2 played by Bugs Bunny
57:20 Amineddoleh’s performance of Chopin Polonaise, Op. 26, No. 1 and Liszt Liebestraum No. 3
59:00 under-appreciated composer Brahms
1:01:20 injustices in art law
1:04:30 Amineddoleh’s definition of justice - access
1:06:00 John Cage’s 4’33”
Please share your comments and/or questions at stephanie@warfareofartandlaw.com
Music by Toulme.
To hear more episodes, please visit Warfare of Art and Law podcast's website.
To leave questions or comments about this or other episodes of the podcast and/or for information about joining the 2ND Saturday discussion on art, culture and justice, please message me at stephanie@warfareofartandlaw.com.
Thanks so much for listening!
© Stephanie Drawdy [2025]
You can, you know, defend people through art and get people to understand you through art, and I feel I feel really honored to do that through my work.
Speaker 2:Welcome to Warfare of Art and Law, the podcast that focuses on how justice does or doesn't play out when art and law overlap. Hi everyone, it's Stephanie, and that was Leila Aminadouli, an art and cultural heritage law attorney and pianist. What follows is a recording of a recent Second Saturday conversation, during which Leila shares about her work in the legal and musical fields and how her perspective as a musician influences her work as an attorney. Leila Aminadelay welcome to Warfare of Art and Law and Second Saturday. Thank you so much for being here.
Speaker 1:Oh, thank you for inviting me.
Speaker 2:You are an attorney and an artist. Would you kind of walk us through how you came to both of those fields?
Speaker 1:Well, I started playing the piano when I was very young I was around four years old. So music's always been a part of my life and it's been an important part of my life, and my first job was actually as a musician. When I was in high school I taught the piano to kids in my town and then eventually, when I went to college, I worked in a restaurant where I played weekly at a restaurant in downtown New York. I had gone to NYU and then during that time I also worked playing some weddings and events and parties, and that continued while I went to law school. So I always knew music was going to be part of my life, but I didn't necessarily want to make music my career.
Speaker 2:What made you gravitate towards the law and how did that progress for you into the career you have now?
Speaker 1:So when I was an undergrad I found so many different areas very interesting and one of the areas that I studied I had a minor in philosophy and so I knew that I was always interested in this type of philosophy logic discourse, and while I was in undergrad I was exploring different areas. And another area that really interested me was in publishing. So I ended up interning at Scholastic and I love books and I love the book industry. So I initially thought that I would go to law school to work in the publishing industry and perhaps work with copyright, and that kind of evolved eventually into working with artists in general, so working with musicians, book publishers, any type of creative individual protecting them with, you know, through their intellectual property rights. And ultimately my first job as a lawyer was as an IP lawyer.
Speaker 1:But during those years in law school I was also introduced to the area of art law and it was this very striking moment, I would say, or the striking hour in my life, where I realized I really wanted to work as an art lawyer Because I had read I should have been studying. Actually I remember it was like a Saturday or Sunday and I was in front of my computer and I should have been studying for one of my law school classes and I happened to be reading the news instead and I was reading about the looting at the National Museum in Iraq that occurred in April of 2003. And that museum was extensively looted during the US invasion of Iraq and kind of went down this rabbit hole, reading about the looting, about other types of looting and about measures that were being done to protect these works and recover works and I realized that day.
Speaker 1:I really want to do this and I had read the work of Patty Gersenblith, who's a really well-known scholar in art law and cultural heritage law scholar, and I had read her work. I found it so inspiring and I thought to myself, wow, I really want to do this one day. And I have to say that I'm incredibly fortunate because I've gotten to know Patti Gerson Blitz so well and I work in this area now. But my work really is a mix of those two things Intellectual property, because I still do work with many artists and writers and I also. The other part of my work is working with either fine art or cultural heritage, and I've been very, very honored to work on some major cultural heritage matters. So I feel very fulfilled and very lucky in my career.
Speaker 2:The progression from that moment, that hour, as you say, into this firm of yours that has blossomed. How did you build it Like? Could you just kind of of like for those who are looking at you and wondering how would they possibly come into this field one day, could you kind of break down like the big moments where you saw the transitions happen in your practice?
Speaker 1:So I'd say there were two components that were very important. One was luck. I think there's always a little bit of luck in being in the right place at the right time, and I think being in New York was really, really helpful. So kind of strategic luck and being in New York that allowed me to meet some very important people that helped me and mentored me during my career. And the other part, obviously the other part of the recipe is a lot of work and dedication, not giving up, because it's really difficult to make your way into the field of art law.
Speaker 1:So I started my career at an intellectual property law firm, the law firm of Fitzpatrick Cella. It's a wonderful firm, wonderful people. It's now part of Venable and I was there for three years. But I realized during my time there that I wasn't getting the type of work that I really wanted, because a lot of my work was focused on patent law, because I do have a bit of a background in science as well. So I was working in patent pharmaceutical work, trying to get more of the trademark and copyright work at the firm, realizing that wasn't coming through, and so after three years at the firm, I joined a smaller law firm that was interested in developing an art law group. It was one of the founders of the firm was one of my colleagues at Fitzpatrick Cellist, so we had known each other, we had worked together well and he thought I had a really great idea. He said you know, I see that this is a growing area. We're reading a lot about art law in the news, so I think we should try it. We'll keep on with our IP work because we know there's a lot of work in this area and we both have expertise in this area. But if you'd like to start an art law group and bring in clients, that would be wonderful. So that's what we did, where I just really hit the ground, where I went to every kind of art event events through the New York State Bar Association, the New York County Lawyers Association and the ABA Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts, different copyright lectures and try to meet people, try to meet potential clients as well.
Speaker 1:As I mentioned, as you know, I'm a musician, so I know a lot of musician clients, so I actually started working representing musicians and fashion designers and writers and people I'd met during my time at NYU, during my time living in New York, through my social circles. So really a lot of emerging artists, more like kind of smaller matters, helping with trademark applications and sales agreements for my clients that were being hired and that eventually kind of grew. I started developing more and more business that way until eventually collectors started calling me as well and I guess, going forward, I just developed clients through referrals and I think part of it is, I think I'm just very passionate about this area and I think that a lot of people get that kind of vibe from me, get that energy from me. So some of the things that I did was even I traveled to get clients.
Speaker 1:So at one point my mother and I said you know, you're in discussions with some people in Greece. You have written, I've written some op-eds on sorry, some editorial pieces on the return of the Parthenon marbles. So I had met some individuals in Greece that were also passionate about this cause. So when my mom and I were traveling we said let's go to Greece, we're already in Italy, let's fly over to Greece and meet some of these people and maybe something will come of it. And ultimately it was a great decision.
Speaker 1:I met some people that worked for the government in Greece and a few years after that trip, when Greece was facing a lawsuit in the United States, I was the person that Greece called, so I took some chances, I put myself out there and it took a very long time for it to all come together, but it was something I enjoyed doing and I think maybe that's what made a difference, because even going to those lectures, meeting artists, meeting creative people even though it was part of like developing a potential business, I think I also just really enjoyed it. I never, I never bore, I never tire of going to art lectures and being in the art world.
Speaker 2:I've heard you say, or you've written about the influence that your perspective as a pianist has had on your legal practice. Would you also speak to that?
Speaker 1:I think my background as a musician helps me relate to some of my clients and I understand it's through that that I understand the importance of protecting artists rights and understanding that many artists struggle. Many artists don't have the same type of bargaining power when they're negotiating with either collectors or companies, public institutions or museums. So I think my background as a musician really helps inform a lot of my work and, interestingly you know, besides my role as a musician, I also author a lot of publications. I really enjoy writing. It's something I really enjoy.
Speaker 1:It's one of the aspects of being a lawyer that I really love and I've actually been plagiarized a couple of times and that also has informed my work and I've had to represent myself in taking down works that were plagiarized. So a lot of my personal experiences as a writer and also as a musician, I think, helped me relate to some of my clients and being plagiarized. So a lot of my personal experiences as a writer and also as a musician then helped me relate to some of my clients and being plagiarized is a terrible experience.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I was going to ask did you want to share a little more about that? How did you stumble across this and what were your steps.
Speaker 1:So it was really funny. So I've been plagiarized twice, once by a lawyer who took credit for some of my work, which is really just hurtful. And I ended up just contacting the law firm and saying please take down that information from your website because it's not true. And they were very cooperative. I sent them the information about what I wrote and it was fine. It was over within like 24 hours. The other instance was really interesting.
Speaker 1:A friend of mine had posted a paper on Facebook Like this is a really wonderful paper, give it a read. So I clicked on it Like wow, the title is very intriguing. It's actually about art forgeries and I've written a lot about art forgeries and I've worked in the area of authentication. So I said this is right up my alley. I have to read this paper. So I clicked on it, I read the first paragraph and I thought instantly I realized I wrote this paper, these are my words, I know how I write and these are my words. And so I ended up downloading the entire paper and doing a side-by-side analysis and a few sentences were moved around and it was by a lawyer actually another lawyer, a lawyer, a very junior lawyer in India, and so they used British English. So some of the only changes were changing some of the American English words to the British English spelling, which for me, I thought was really funny that she went through that effort.
Speaker 1:I ended up reaching out to her and she made some excuses that she ran out of time and she had a deadline and she's very sorry. She'd be happy to add my name to the paper and I said that's absolutely unacceptable. You need to actually remove your name. And there was some back and forth and in the meantime I thought it was so funny so I put it on my law firm's blog and the ABA the American Bar Association ended up picking up the story and they ran their own story about a lawyer being plagiarized on a paper about forgeries. So I had this really funny outcome where the story is still up online on a few different legal websites, like the ABA's website. I think there's a blog called the IP Watchdog, so it was on their website as well.
Speaker 1:So it ended up being a funny story. In the end her name was removed from the article I think my name's on the article where it was taken down I don't remember which and then she ended up inviting me to speak at a conference on plagiarism out in India and I ended up turning down the opportunity because I had other things scheduled and I just thought that the whole thing would be very awkward. Anyway, it was resolved, so there was really no need to speak about it at a conference. Thank you for sharing both of those. Yeah, I don't think there's any use to really copy anyone. When there's a deadline, you just ask for a deadline extension.
Speaker 2:With that, I wonder too if there are any examples from your practice. I know there must be many of some of the highlights from the work you do Sure.
Speaker 1:So one of the things that I'm very grateful for in my career is that I have such a variety of issues that I get to work on. So I represent artists, collectors, dealers, museums, foreign governments, and each one of those stakeholders has different interests. So I've worked on some high-profile matters, probably my favorite one being for the government of Greece because it was such an interesting case. We made new law but the case involved an ancient bronze horse that was being sold at auction at Sotheby's and the Greek government ultimately reached out to Sotheby's, told the auction house to remove the object because of its problematic provenance. And you know there were some facts going back and forth and you know there were some facts going back and forth and ultimately Sotheby's and its consigner sued the Greek government in the US in a New York court to have the Greek government the case under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. It was a really notable case because it was actually the first time that an art seller. So it was a very high profile case for this because we were making a new law where it was really surprising to the art market that an art seller sued a foreign government through its ministry of culture for an antiquities case. Usually it's the other way around. Usually it's a foreign government coming in and suing to stop the sale and in this case it was actually the seller suing Greece, requesting the government through a declaratory action to prove title. So it's a case of first impression and we ended up having the case dismissed under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which was really surprising for me that I'd become an expert in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act something I never anticipated in my career, although it's a really interesting area of the law and I've enjoyed my work in this area. But it was really exciting because we made new law. It was the first case of its type and the court clarified one of the exceptions of the Foreign Sovereign Unities Act stating that if a foreign government is involved in the art market through this type of policing activity by regulating the market for antiquities, that foreign government can't be hauled into court in the US. So it was an exciting case and it was really gratifying, obviously, that we won on behalf of Greece. But that case led to two other cases where there were kind of these copycat cases. The one in which these dealers sued the Swiss government in Switzerland was also dismissed, and then a third case against the government of Italy and I ended up representing Italy in that case, where a dealer sued Italy for Italy's involvement in contacting law enforcement in the United States because an object that was stolen from or went missing I shouldn't say stolen, an object that went missing from an Italian museum ended up for sale in the US. So we represented Italy and obviously Italy was also dismissed from this case in the US. I thought it was a little bit of an absurd case that the country was being sued for calling the police essentially. So those were really high-profile cases that were really gratifying.
Speaker 1:But on a daily basis, I work with, you know, all types of stakeholders, including emerging artists, and that's really also very gratifying. These artists that perhaps aren't well known yet or having these artists might be having their first exhibition or their first show or making their first sale, and that's extremely gratifying to help these artists navigate the art market, because it really is a complicated area and there's so many things to think about besides just the law, but also long-term goals, reputational interests, relationships and developing relationships with dealers, collectors, patrons. So that's also another really gratifying area of my work working with people new to the field and having an opportunity to educate them and also protect them legally. But I love working with all my different types of clients and each one has something really interesting that they offer. Like working with museums. Museums is incredible and having access to some of these collections and getting to know curators and the people responsible for either organizing exhibitions or acquiring objects. So every day is kind of different, which is really nice. It's never boring. The job of an art lawyer is not boring.
Speaker 2:For the emerging artists that you work with? Do you notice reticence to deal with the law or have an attorney? Is there a bridge that has to be crossed to get over that?
Speaker 1:Sometimes there is, I think a lot of people are scared or intimidated by working with lawyers, for, you know, a lot of reasons, so many of the things that we see in popular culture about lawyers being scary or intimidating or too costly. I think it helps that I have a background in music and, as you know, as a performer, so I think it makes some artists feel more comfortable that I can relate to them in that way. So I think that's really helpful in bridging that gap. But I always try with clients, especially new clients and emerging artists I try to make the process very, very approachable and easy to understand. Explaining the benefits of using the law and the advantages because often these artists are negotiating against people with lawyers, and so artists don't want to be at a disadvantage. They need to understand the language being used in these agreements, their long-term goals. Some of these artists are just so eager to have the support of a gallery or a patron that they'll just jump on board and not really critically examine the terms that they're asked to sign. And being able to explain that, I think, is really helpful. Also explaining to the artist and this is what I explain actually to most of my clients that legal decisions are also very closely related to business decisions. So if there's a matter where there's not much value, you might not want to invest a lot of legal costs. On the other hand, if it's really important to you and you see a really wonderful opportunity, then the legal costs are just part of the investment.
Speaker 1:But there's also a way to be smart about those investments. So I will sometimes tell artists it might make sense for you to ask for the first draft of an agreement from the other side. Let the other party do the draft of the initial agreement and then my time will probably be reduced significantly because all I'll have to do is go through the editing. I'm not dealing with putting together more of the standard clauses, but rather just negotiating on your behalf. So instead of spending four or five hours on an agreement, I'll just need one or two hours to negotiate and edit. So I think that a lot of clients are really appreciative of that and it makes the process a little easier and it helps to develop trust with clients as well, knowing that lawyers aren't always trying to maximize their bill and maximize their hours, but rather happy to work in a really collaborative way that makes sense for everyone.
Speaker 3:Ray, can I got a little problem. Let me talk to somebody and a friend mentioned your name.
Speaker 1:So here I am. So what problem caused them to come to me usually, or how did they find me?
Speaker 3:What is the most common area that the let's say, the emerging artist would be seeking assistance?
Speaker 1:So I see two areas. One is and it's a very positive reason, a really great reason to come to me is that an artist has an opportunity. There's a gallery that would like to have a relationship with the artist, so perhaps the gallery is looking for an exclusivity agreement, so, or there could be a commission. So it's either for relationship or a commission of art, and that's always a really great opportunity. And I think it's really wise when an artist comes to a lawyer before just jumping on board and I'm always happy to be part of that process because it's always really positive and part of my job then is to warn against certain things. So I might tell an artist this is a really great opportunity, but you don't necessarily want to be locked in for five years. Maybe you could try an initial one-year term with a renewal for initial year.
Speaker 1:Or another thing to consider is accounting. You want to ensure that you know what the gallery is selling your art for. You want to have a say. If the gallery wants to lower the price, perhaps the gallery should be allowed, permitted, to lower the price by 10%, but not any more. And if the gallery lowers the 10%, that comes from the gallery's commission, not from you, um, or the gallery's portion, not yours.
Speaker 1:So there, that's one reason that artists will come to me to help with those agreements. The other reason is the unfortunate reason that an artist is not being paid by a gallery, and that, I think, is happens, it's very common, so they'll have. So the problem is with some of these issues is if the value of the art is low and let's say and this is all relative, but let's say a gallery owes an artist $20,000, a gallery is probably very much, very cognizant of the fact that someone won't sue for $20,000 because litigating is very costly. So that's often a problem with these artists that after something goes wrong and they're not paid, they'll come to a lawyer, and I always think it's more cost effective to actually use a lawyer when you enter into these agreements rather than after a problem arises.
Speaker 2:Touching on some of your work that you do with the Manhattan DA's office. The cover image this episode is a representative of a repatriation ceremony of the coffin of Nedjemunk, and I wonder if you might want to speak to that case.
Speaker 1:Sure, so I have never been employed by the district attorney's office, so I just want to make that clear. But I served as an independent cultural heritage law expert for the district attorney's office from about 2015 till about 2020 or 2016,. So about four or five years, and it truly was an honor. So I'll say one thing, going back to one of our earlier discussion points about the looting of the museum in Iraq how that was so inspiring for me to move into this area of the law or to pursue this area of the law. So the head of the Antiquities Trafficking Unit at the Manhattan District Attorney's Office is Matthew Bogdanos, who was responsible for recovering a lot of those works that were removed from the Iraqi Museum. So it was really it's been an honor working with him. It was really it's been an honor working with him, and he has been.
Speaker 1:He and his unit have been responsible for recovering many of the looted objects that have been in New York or have gone through New York, and the golden coffin of Nedremonk is one example, and that was such an interesting case where the outcome was just really unfortunate for the Metropolitan Museum of Art because the Met ended up buying this gorgeous golden piece, for I think it was about $3.9 million and when they purchased the coffin, it had a provenance with it had a provenance that included a certificate from the Egyptian government. However, that provenance was forged and it turned out that that coffin was looted after civil unrest in 2011, during a period of really heavy looting in Egypt, and it went through the smuggling network and it ended up being sold by a dealer in France, and that dealer now is under investigation and it's multinational investigation into his sales, into his looting ring, but at the time it wasn't known that he was involved At the time that the Met had acquired the coffin. The Met didn't know, and the public the collecting public didn't know this either, and the public the collecting public didn't know this either. So what was really unfortunate is that this golden coffin was actually the centerpiece of a display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the DA ended up seizing the coffin and the exhibition shut down, and it was very public. It appeared in the New York Times with a really kind of like sensational headline like exhibition closed, looted object at the Met. So it was just really bad press for the Met. The Met obviously lost money on that, which again is bad press, really bad for donors, really bad for the museum's reputation, although I do have sympathy for the museum because they actually did have the right paperwork. It's just that the paperwork is forged. But it did bring up a lot of these questions as to how much due diligence is needed, especially by an institution like the Metropolitan Museum of Art, one of the leading museums in the world with leading experts. So there were a lot of questions about whether or not the Met could have, or should have done more than rely on documents from the dealer.
Speaker 1:But the object the Golden Coffin ended up being returned to Egypt in a really wonderful display of cooperation and it was really used in a very public way to draw attention to looting networks. And it happened with a little bit like a tone of diplomacy involved, because it was returned during the big week at the UN, where diplomats from around the world like the meeting like the high level meetings at the UN in September of 2019. The meeting like the high-level meetings at the UN in September of 2019. So there was this kind of diplomatic air about the return and it was a very public return with, say, at least 100 people in the room, with many reporters. The DA had a number of representatives there.
Speaker 1:Representatives from the Metropolitan Museum were invited and they had attended, and I was lucky enough to be there because I served as a cultural heritage law expert for Egypt. So looking at Egypt's laws and how they enforce their cultural heritage laws, it was really fun and actually I know it's a little off topic so we won't get into it. But Egypt and so many countries have these fascinating cultural heritage laws that really harken back to a time when European collectors were traveling through countries like Italy and Greece and Egypt and just kind of gobbling up these antiquities to bring home and form these beautiful collections, but really involved in looting and the destruction of sites. So in looking at these laws for the DA and through my work, I get a chance to look into the history of art collecting, which is another wonderful part of my job the more like academic part of my job, but really fun and fascinating.
Speaker 2:Emerging tech has been around for a while. How have you seen it increase during your practice with the different areas that you work in?
Speaker 1:I think it's so wonderful to have emerging technology that could really help with a number of things, including archiving artwork, which could be used for scholars, for artists, foundations, for collectors to, because it's so important. It's something that I had written about maybe over a decade ago, as people were looking at repatriations and tracking art and identifying stolen art. It's really important that we have these inventories and archives so that if there ever is a problem, like if a museum experiences a theft that's just one example. Museum experiences at that. That's just one example that they have an archive. That's clear, that there are images that are useful in recovering works and the case that I mentioned earlier, where I had represented the government of Italy, the Italian authorities were able to contact US law enforcement because that museum in Italy had an archive with images of the artwork that was stolen. So it's really wonderful that we have these archives that can be digitized and actually secured, either using blockchain technology or in a way to create records that people cannot alter, that they can't change. So I think that's one way that it's really helpful.
Speaker 1:So it would help with restitutions, repatriations and really just more closely monitoring artwork, and one example that kind of just sticks out in my mind, are kind of like the archives themselves libraries, libraries that have experienced looting and thefts, and the fact that some of those libraries are really easy targets, because these books, these editions, these rare prints, they are not archived and tracked, perhaps as well as museum collections.
Speaker 1:So this technology for tracking art should be used across the board. I also do think it can be really helpful with authentication, and I've read about and seen some really interesting ways that computers can, and this technology can kind of track or calculate features of art that may not be visible to the human eye. That being said, though, I think there still is a really, really important place in the art world for connoisseurs, because there is something to be said about that sixth sense, and those connoisseurs that recognize something in a hand of an artist that even computer technology hasn't picked up on yet, because we're the ones programming computers, and so there's going to be that limitation, but I do think it's a really helpful tool to be used in concert with the human eye tool to be used in concert with the human eye?
Speaker 2:And for the artists that you work with, have you had experience where they have been using AI, for example, and blending it in their practice or found that their work was included in training data? I was just curious your experience with that and your opinion about where things stand with that in the US.
Speaker 1:So I haven't had any of my clients come to me telling me that their art had been mined or had been used in training data. I'm not sure if any of them have had their art taken in that way. I had a number of artists really active in the NFT space, which I feel like was the hot art tech issue a couple years ago, and that was a really interesting space. But I do find the AI space to be even more intriguing, especially with its relationship with copyright. I haven't had artist-based problems with AI yet, but I think there's going to be applications of how it's being used, not just with fine art but also with music.
Speaker 1:It's so interesting that there was this AI creation of a new quote, unquote new Beatles song, which wasn't very good actually. So I think it's a testament to AI's weakness, in contrast to these actual creative people making new things and not just basing everything off of old recreations and trying to mix up new things to create something new. But I think we're going to be seeing more and more of it. But what I think is more interesting, right now at least, are the discussions with the copyright office and AI and everyone kind of scrambling to figure out what can be copyrighted with made through the use of AI. So it's just so many interesting questions practically, but also intellectually, academically, looking at the history of the development of intellectual property law and what it means for the future of intellectual property, and how difficult some of these questions are interesting diverging points that I've seen people go into different camps on.
Speaker 2:Talking about that is can you compare photography to AI outputs? Do you have a place yet where you firmly settled, or are you still debating?
Speaker 1:So I think there's so many gray areas. I think it's a really, really good analogy, because decades ago, the court was struggling with this Well, can you copyright a photograph? And there was that struggle of, well, someone's not painting the image, they're just using a machine to click a button. And ultimately, it's so much more than that. And I have to say I have the honor of working working with, I think, one of the world's best known photographers, the artist Hiroshi Sugimoto. He's a long-term client of mine and I see photography. I mean, I've always liked photography, but I see photography in such a different way now, working with someone like him and being exposed to his not exposed is not exposed be exposed to his long exposure prints, and I see photography as such an incredible art form and I think most of the art world does now, today, and I would liken it to our discussions today about AI, it's not just putting something into a computer, and I think there are really creative ways to use AI. And then there are probably just those more mundane ways, like anyone could click a photograph, and it's not a work of art. Anyone could put something into AI. It's not necessarily a work of art. I think there's, I think AI could raise to a level where it is a work of art and where you can actually consider there being a human component, where the human component is just using AI as a resource, as a tool, just the way a photographer uses a camera as a tool.
Speaker 1:And one of the cases I talked about in my law school class because I teach art law at Fordham Law School and I have so many wonderful discussions with my students and we've really dug into this area by looking at some comparisons with AI and photography there was that wonderful case with an animal taking a photo. Someone set up a camera in like a jungle or a forest and a monkey came along and took a photo. Someone set up a camera in like a jungle or a forest and a monkey came along and took a selfie. And there was that question about whether or not someone could get a copyright and PETA came in and tried to say the monkey had a right and the court said no, no, no, it has to be a human component. But it left that question open and there were the arguments about the human component. Well, a photographer or a human, whether or not it was a photographer, let's just say a human a human went into the jungle and set it up set up where the camera would be, gave that animal an access, had this concept, and for me that does seem like there's a strong human component and that he's created this environment for the monkey to just do that final tap on the camera and it was held that that there was no copyright, that that wasn't the human component. So I think there's still that really interesting debate with even photography and the, the necessity to have a human component into getting a copyright, and it'll be really interesting to see how that debate extends into AI and how much do we have to put into AI to give it that human component. But I think we're all waiting for clarification on this and the copyright office has also kind of been scrambling with this a bit, and I think it was in early 2023 that the Copyright Office released a bulletin on its guidelines on copyright and the necessity for a human component.
Speaker 1:But since then there have been a number of cases that have been filed, a number of applications that have been rejected by the Copyright Office and litigations in court with the one that's the most, to me, the most interesting in terms of, or the most clear in terms of the human requirement is Thaler versus Perlmutter.
Speaker 1:Requirement is Thaler versus Perlmutter, and I'm not sure if you're familiar with that case and if you kind of followed it and read the court's opinion, but it's so interesting that it was this artist that had created this machine.
Speaker 1:He created this computer system that he gave a really cute name, the Creativity Machine, and that machine created a work of art that Thaler then tried to copyright and he registered for the copyright and it was rejected. And then he had asked for reconsideration twice, and both times the copyright office rejected it twice, and both times the copyright office rejected it. And so Thaler ended up suing in DC and at the end of the day the DC circuit had affirmed the copyright office's decision, saying that human creativity is this bedrock principle for copyright law and it always has been, and that even as copyright stretches and its applications get broader, as art and creativity changes over time, that there needs to be this guiding human hand. And I think that's just so interesting to decide what you know for us to see as the law evolves and it just keeps developing. What is a guiding human hand? Hey, rupali, how are you doing?
Speaker 4:hello, I'm good. How about you long time?
Speaker 2:good, it's good. Yes, long time no see. Good. Good that you could join us today.
Speaker 1:It's wonderful to see you sorry, rupali, I didn't meet you.
Speaker 4:I saw you on the screen hi hi, how are you? I've been reading your linkedin post for a long time and it's been very effective. Yeah, so I've been wanting to talk to both of you. It's been amazing to connect again. Oh, thank you so much for this opportunity oh well, you know what why I'm so.
Speaker 1:One of the reasons it's like so fresh in my mind the thaler case is I'm going to post that on linkedin where I'm writing a blog post now about that case and it's just so interesting and I really struggle with it myself so um Rupali, uh, just before we move on, did you have any questions?
Speaker 4:yeah, I do have one question, considering I'm very new to the field of art law and I'm also trying to discover how it works. So, when it comes to contractual side of things, how does the negotiation happen? Like, is it all? Like, do you use other techniques, like arbitration and mediation as well when it comes to negotiation, or do you add such clauses to your contracts with artists and galleries?
Speaker 1:So each one of these negotiations is very different. So arbitration and mediation would only arise if there was a dispute, and usually our goal is to resolve the dispute through negotiating between the parties without having to rely on a third party, because arbitration can be costly and also mediation it's time consuming, it involves another party. My goal is usually just to resolve it without the involvement of a third party, to find the best solution for everyone and, obviously, to have my client get the best solution possible. Have my client get the best solution possible. So when we do come up with these contracts, the negotiation's different in almost every case. Sometimes I negotiate against lawyers, sometimes my client wants to speak directly with the gallery. So it really depends on the relationship.
Speaker 1:Sometimes my clients have a really good relationship with a gallery already and they don't want to damage that relationship by kind of raising everyone's temperature by bringing in a lawyer. People get scared when lawyers come in and so sometimes a client will say I really like this gallery, I have a good relationship, I trust them, but I know I need an agreement. What should I do? And I'll say well, have the gallery send you the terms or I can draft something and you can actually just present it to the gallery yourself and I'll be writing the information, I'll be drafting things, but I don't even really need to talk to the gallery. I don't need to get in the middle of your relationship. If you think it's going to damage your relationship in some way or make things awkward, you can have the discussions yourself. Here's the document, but don't sign anything until I like sign off on it. If the gallery changes things on you, don't just sign it, please. You know, confer with me first. So the negotiations happen in different ways. Other times it is just between me and the other lawyer.
Speaker 1:I just finalized a really, really big agreement that has been in the works since 2018. It's a really large public art project that's funded by the government and the budget is very large, obviously, and we began negotiations in 2018. Everything was set and then there were some delays due to COVID and the work has progressed. The designs have progressed, but it's a very, very large work and we just this week, just yesterday signed the agreement for the final fabrication, transportation and installation, for the final fabrication, transportation and installation, and that obviously is very different than negotiating a two or three page contract for an artist in a smaller gallery. This was obviously for a very, very large institution funded by the government, so the contract is massive. So definitely a different process. And it can be a little more contentious when it's just two lawyers, because there are no personal feelings involved, it's just two lawyers advocating for their clients. So you can push a little harder and the vibe is definitely a little different that makes complete sense.
Speaker 4:I don't really get what you're saying. So, yeah, I understand that for the dispute resolution, that the first step is negotiation, that you might be going for, but like considering these huge institutions in, place then definitely you would be. You know, putting up arbitration clauses and mediation clauses just to be on a safer side in case of a dispute.
Speaker 1:Resolution in case of a dispute, sorry of course, yeah, we prefer to go through either arbitration or mediation before going to litigation. Just to avoid all the kind of the nastiness, the contention, all the money spent on procedural issues that you can avoid going through alternative dispute resolution.
Speaker 4:Right, perfect. Thank you so much. That absolutely answers my question.
Speaker 2:And we also have a question from Stefania.
Speaker 5:Yeah, thanks. I actually have two questions. One is you mentioned it briefly and I don't know if you could delve a bit further into it when you mentioned the academic side of the history of collectors and collections. I would love to just hear more about that. And second, just if you'd like to share more on a personal note, how you balance your legal practice and keeping up with your piano skills. I'd love to hear about that too.
Speaker 1:Okay, so the first question I think the history of art collecting is fascinating. So I teach two courses. I teach art law at Fordham in the fall and then I teach art crime and the law to undergraduates at New York University and in that class we do spend a lot of time looking at the history of collecting, because most of the students in my course will not go to law school. Most of them will, I guess. Maybe, I guess most of them probably end up working in the art world and many of them have ended up working at auction houses, galleries, museums, different art institutions, advising collectors. So we spend time talking about collecting and collecting practices and the law to avoid problems, because I think it's important for people in the art world to have some information, some knowledge about the law so that they can avoid problems like acquiring stolen art, and it's important to know how to look into provenance and to do this research and understand how to better collect and more responsibly collect. So the history of collecting, I think, is just fascinating and one of the things that I talk about in my class is the rise of collectors during the Grand Tour in Europe and it was during this time that some really unfortunate things happened in collecting, and one example that I'll give is collectors who went to Egypt. So after the Napoleonic Wars, when countries were going into Egypt and developing these incredible collections, collectors also wanted to buy items and there was this fascination with ancient Egypt and with mummies, and collectors would actually buy mummies and mummy parts on the market in Egypt, in bazaars and in the streets, and they would take these human remains and unwrap the mummies and then have parties where they would unwrap the mummies. Sometimes they would ingest the dust from human remains, which is just absolutely disgusting, totally unhygienic. They would do that and then they would throw away body parts and it's something so unethical and so troubling. And that's why Egypt's law not only protects these antiquities and these objects, but also protect human remains. And it's interesting to see how countries around the world protect different things. So in Mongolia, dinosaur bones, fossils are protected because so many of these bones have been found there and there's a market, a really big market, for fossils. So in Mongolia, one of the things that's in their law is sorry, it addresses fossils. So it's interesting to see how these laws have developed with collecting practices over the centuries, and I think it's fascinating because it's not just looking at the law, but it's looking at the history of collecting and the history of what we value and ultimately that's what the history of collecting is the history of what we find valuable, what we find interesting, the importance of provenance and where you get objects and the history of the collecting and who owned them before you. So that fascinates me. Art collecting, I think, is just such an interesting area to be in and if I was not a lawyer I think I'd be a provenance investigator and writer because I love books.
Speaker 1:In terms of how I balance music and my work, it's really hard and sometimes I'm really ashamed of myself because I'll go a while without practicing. But I'm reminded to practice because I have a seven-year-old and I'm teaching her to play the piano and I force her to practice. So then it forces me to practice. But the way I stay on top of practicing is I perform at least once a year. I commit to doing that early in the year and I don't want to be humiliated by being unprepared. And when I perform I really want my music. I want to be really proud of what I perform. I really treat it as professionally as possible. When I was younger I would do music competitions and I would perform, say, at least every other month I would do a performance. So I really try to hold myself to that standard, not just for myself and like my ego, but also for the music.
Speaker 1:I love music and I feel like it's a really wonderful opportunity to give life to music. And one of my favorite musicians composers to play is Chopin. I'm a pianist. I feel like most pianists love playing Chopin. It's just so beautiful For the piano. He just wrote such beautiful things and so many styles of works and it's just fun enough, like the waltzes. I can just pick one up any day and just kind of play one for fun. But I think it's such an honor, it's such an opportunity to bring him alive again something so beautiful he created, and to share that. And I really don't say that in a hokey way, I really, really mean that.
Speaker 1:When I was in high school I had a teacher who told me that she said stop thinking about making a mistake when you're on stage.
Speaker 1:Stop thinking about this, just think about the fact that it's a gift and you're sharing it.
Speaker 1:If you make a mistake, so you make a mistake, but it's your chance to give life to the music, to express yourself and to share it and to listen to yourself and as a musician, I think most musicians would say that's the most important thing to listen to yourself, to actually like feel the music when you're performing. So I always like to be at that point when I can actually feel the music, rather than think about the notes and the techniques, but actually feel it. And that just means I have to practice, even when I'm tired and I get home from work and I'm just exhausted because in the end it totally pays off. And that's what I keep in mind that, oh my gosh, five months from now I need to play this and I want it to be amazing and I want to share it and I love it. So if you love something, you're going to work hard for it. Thank you, you're welcome, and I have to practice today. Today I'm practicing. I built in my practice time. I know exactly what I'm going to practice Poor birthday cake.
Speaker 2:What's the piece and the performance that you will do this year?
Speaker 1:So last year I was. It was really fun. I'll tell you last year's, because this year I'm still on the fence and I really need to decide, like I really need to. Last year I performed the three Gershwin piano preludes. They're so fun and they're really different Each one. It's so different from one another. And it was really fun because I performed them at the New York City Bar Association, which is two blocks from where Gershwin premiered them about a century earlier, like 97 years earlier. So that was so much fun. I played that. And then I also played Claire de Lune, because, even though I learned that in high school, I had never performed it and I thought I'm like, wow, everyone loves this piece. I never performed it, I just had to play it in front of people. I'm probably going to do a Beethoven sonata. I think it's the fifth, I forget if it's the fifth or the seventh, I can't remember the number. So I think that Beethoven sonata I'm going to do.
Speaker 1:And then there's a piece I've always, always wanted to play, but I really need time. I've always wanted to play Liszt's second Hungarian Rhapsody, which is so grossly difficult to play it well, I mean, it's grossly difficult even to play it poorly, I guess, but there are so many people who play it don't play it well and I really want to play it like Bugs Bunny. I mean he played it really really well, so I want to play it like Bugs Bunny. I'm not sure the person who played it, the actual pianist, was on that recording for the cartoon, but I would really like to play that and it's something I've always wanted to play. So within the next couple of years I think next year, because this year has just been an incredibly busy year for work thinking next year that might be the piece I choose.
Speaker 2:I had the opportunity to hear two pieces online that you have, that you performed a Chopin and a Liszt, both so beautiful, so thank you for sharing it and hopefully you'll post more in the future.
Speaker 1:Ah, thank you. Thanks so much. The Liszt was really nice. I don't so, and that's why I've never done a second Hungarian Rhapsody.
Speaker 1:There are certain composers that suit certain pianists better, and Liszt is also just so difficult. He was known as being one of the best technical pianists. He had these long fingers. He was a prodigy I mean, he was a rock star musician. Like his female audience members would go crazy, but he was just so incredible. So I guess he's difficult for most people.
Speaker 1:But certain composers suit certain hands and Liszt was so difficult for me. But playing Lieberstern, number three, that was a challenge for me and I was really proud at the end that I think I performed it well. I think I played it well and it was really a challenge for me. I'm really suited for like I love Rachmaninoff, and you need big hands for Rachmaninoff, and some, some pianists really don't like playing him. I love him, my hands are suited for Rachmaninoff, and some pianists really don't like playing him. I love him, my hands are suited for Rachmaninoff, but Liszt is difficult. So I am going to take up that challenge in the near future because I really, really want to do it, but right now I think I'm sticking with Beethoven, which is, just you know, standard repertoire. When you study classical music growing up, you have to learn some Beethoven sonatas, so in some ways it's familiar, although Beethoven is difficult as well.
Speaker 2:And just, I mean such a genius, maybe the greatest genius I'm not sure if it's Mozart or Beethoven, but it's always amazing working on Beethoven. Is there a composer that you've come?
Speaker 1:across that you think maybe is underappreciated and that you have really been moved by. So I do love Brahms, where I feel like not enough people love Brahms. I love Brahms. I feel like not enough people love Brahms. I love Brahms and actually I really like playing his piano music.
Speaker 1:There are so many interesting like so many levels to Brahms.
Speaker 1:He does such amazing things with voicing and I feel like he's often overshadowed by the other German Bs, bach and Beethoven, and Brahms is just so amazing where you can get really lost in his music, like sometimes I feel like the music is like a flood that comes over you and it's just very sweeping and big with lots of voices, and so I really love Brahms and I think as a player of piano I like Brahms, but also as a listener, I love being in a Brahms performance, not just listening to a recording, but if you have a chance to actually listen to Brahms being performed by a quartet or by an orchestra, you're just surrounded by voices and I feel like it's easy to get lost in.
Speaker 1:Whenever I listen to Brahms, I get lost in finding the voices, which is so enjoyable. So I love Brahms. He's not my favorite, but I do think he's underappreciated, with, kind of, the general public Like, everyone talks about Beethoven and Mozart and Bach, but I think Brahms is absolutely wonderful, and then there's so many other, like more obscure musicians, who are wonderful too. But we can go on. We can go on forever about that.
Speaker 2:Well, as we close out the interview, I was curious. I often ask guests how they have viewed and if their definition of justice has evolved over the course of their careers, and I'm curious what you think, and also if there are any certain injustices currently percolating. I think we might have already touched on some, but if you have any closing thoughts on that, so there is injustice even in the law.
Speaker 1:Because there's injustice to, there's not equity. It's not equitable how some people have access to the law in different ways than others. So I've been honored to work with artists and emerging artists, but there's some artists who never really have access to a lawyer, don't have, they might not have a network to support them. So within the art world there's injustice in that area. There's also injustice in repatriations and how art is returned. Not all institutions, not all countries have the same bargaining power in terms of having art returned. So Italy, historically, has been very successful in demanding the restitution of works. Italy has been involved in major restitution and has had thousands of works returned from museums, from private collectors, and that in part is due to the really strong bargaining power that Italy has in terms of art its ability to withhold loans from museums, not cooperate with archaeologists, with countries who are involved in art tourism, Whereas there are countries in South America that don't have that same ability to recover looted art, that don't have those same resources. So even in the field of cultural heritage, with repatriations and restitutions, there's inequity.
Speaker 1:I like to think that it's improving and I think there is a major role for the public to play in demanding that justice.
Speaker 1:And I think we really saw that in the past few years with the Black Lives Matter movement and how that has affected restitutions and the debate about works that were taken under very violent circumstances in Africa, the fact that institutions are now returning works. The Smithsonian Institution, I believe, has returned I think it was 23 objects to Africa and these were objects that were taken during the partition of Africa when colonial countries went in and stole art from the kingdom of Benin. So these Benin bronzes that are very valuable, very coveted, some of them have been returned by the Smithsonian. There have been a couple that have been returned by the Met and institutions around the world, including university collections. So I think the public played a really big role in drawing attention to those issues and demanding the rightful and the just handling of those objects. So my hope is that with more with public awareness and the voices of the public, that we treat some of these works more equitably.
Speaker 2:And is there a personal definition of justice that you have come to?
Speaker 1:I think that's a very, very difficult question, but perhaps it's that everyone has equitable, everyone has access to justice. I think part of justice is that everyone has access to it and that everyone's rights are protected, whether you're an emerging artist or a very wealthy collector or a well-known institution or a new institution, a newly founded artist collective, that you still have rights, that they're protected by the law and that you have access to that law in a fair way.
Speaker 2:Leila, is there anything else that I have not asked you that you would like to share?
Speaker 1:No, you asked some really good questions because I loved what we spoke about. I love is it Stefania? I love a question about, like art collecting, because I collecting history is so interesting. I love talking about music. I can talk about music forever.
Speaker 5:Yeah, I have many more questions, so if you'd like to join us in other sessions, I would love to pick your brain on a few other.
Speaker 1:Oh, I'd be happy to. It was really fun actually, stephanie, I asked you. I'm like, oh, I saw that you did something on like art, lawyers and musicians. I'd love to talk to you. So this was like really fun. Um, it was and this is totally off topic, but it's about music.
Speaker 1:The other day a friend called me and we're talking about music. He mentioned something about you know, he's going through some troubles in his life and and he's like I was listening to some really good music to help. And he's like get, get Cassie, my daughter, to listen to. He said his daughter wanted him to listen to something. I forget the name of it. Is it 43-3?
Speaker 1:Like John Cage piece? And I couldn't remember the name of it and I don't know if you're really into John Cage, but one of his famous pieces. It's basically everyone just sitting there, the orchestra just sits on stage and it's silence. And so my friend sent me. He's like, oh, you got to get Cassie to listen to it. I'm like this sounds familiar, what is it again? And I clicked on it and I had the opportunity to talk to my daughter about this. I was like, well, it's music, but it's performance, it's like an artwork and people use music and art in different ways to express things and to draw, and I get to, and that was just like one example of thinking of like music as a type of artwork, not musical art, but kind of like also visual art. You see these people just sitting on stage, all the musicians are just sitting there, and my daughter was so confused about it. It was really fun to talk to her about it.
Speaker 2:There will be links in the show notes to learn more about Layla's work. If you were intrigued by this podcast, it would be much appreciated if you could leave a rating or review and tag Warfare of Art and Law podcast. Until next time, this is Stephanie Drotty bringing you Warfare of Art and Law. Thank you so much for listening and remember injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere you.