Exploring ideas and engaging in conversation

Author: Abigail L. Lynn (Page 1 of 2)

Is It Copyrighted or Not Copyrighted, That Is The Question

Since Valentine’s Day was this past weekend, I thought that a fitting topic for this week would be LOVE. LOVE is a collection of sculptures created by Robert Indiana (born Robert Clark), an artist from New Castle Indiana. The sculpture is of the letters “L,” “O,” “V,” and “E,” all capitalized in an old-fashioned, serif-type font, and are stacked together in a block with a crooked “o.” Indiana created many versions of LOVE for different cities around the world, writing “love” in their respective languages, each with its own tilted letter. The original sculpture that was produced in 1970 is currently housed in the Indianapolis Museum of Art. Though the sculpture itself has become well-known by many, Indiana’s recognition is less renowned, leaving a bitter-sweet history between the artist and his work.

Granite Love Block Advertisement, as seen in the Terruso article.

What does LOVE have to do with museums or museum studies? Well, according to Julia Terruso in her article, “City Still seeking permission for LOVE sculpture design,” hundreds of people showed up to LOVE park (officially named John F. Kennedy plaza) in Philadelphia in 2017, expecting to receive granite blocks painted with a rendering of LOVE that they had purchased from the city for $50.00. Unfortunately, the citizens of Philadelphia left empty handed due to a cease-and-desist letter to the city by Indiana’s representatives. As it turns out, the city did not obtain the proper copyright or trademark agreements before selling such reproductions of LOVE.

How could this have happened? Hasn’t the sculpture been reproduced numerous times before and on everything from t-shirts to coffee mugs? Yes, it has, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the individuals/organizations selling those products had the proper copyrights to the image.

To help individuals better understand the restrictions related to the LOVE case, Griesing Law published an article, “Let’s Talk About LOVE.” The article explains that under current copyright laws copyright of a work belongs to the artist/creator immediately after it is fixed (i.e. drawn, painted, or sculpted) in a tangible form of expression. In order for the artist to have additional protections the artist must register their work which would allow them to “seek statutory damages for copyright infringement.” Any copyright protections obtained by the artist last for as long as the artist is alive plus seventy years after death. Additionally, an artist can sell rights or grant permissions for use of their work. “These exclusive rights include the right to reproduce the work; the right to prepare derivative works based on the original work; the right to distribute copies of the work; and the right to display the work publicly.” However, just because a work is displayed publicly, does not mean that it is free to be used without the artist’s permission. When images are used in a commercial fashion, there is greater incentive for the artist to seek legal action. “In the case of the Philadelphia LOVE Sculpture blocks, it seems that express permission for this project was not sought because it was assumed that general permission from the artist had already been obtained. Provided the work is still subject to copyright protection written permission from the artist should have been confirmed, and if not on file, obtained before creating and selling the commemorative blocks.”

LOVE postage stamp, as seen in the Richman-Abdou article listed below.

This, however, was not the end to the copyright battles around LOVE. In 2018, soon after Indiana’s death, the Morgan Art Foundation filed a suit again Jamie Thomas, the artist’s caretaker, and Michael McKenzie, the founder of American Image Art (a New York publishing company), stating that Thomas and McKenzie sold works that were falsely attributed to Indiana. In return, according to Justin Kamp in his article, “Robert Indiana’s ‘LOVE’ is at the center of a $150-million legal battle,” McKenzie claimed that the Morgan Art Foundation has committed the greater fraud “by copyrighting Indiana’s LOVE design, which […] has been in the public domain since 1964.”  The version of LOVE that McKenzie is referring to is the original design that was created by Indiana in 1964 for a Christmas card produced by the Museum of Modern Art in New York City.  According to the previous version of the Copyright Act, artists did not have automatic copyright to their work. Indiana, not knowing about copyright law at the time, did not seek copyright protections until he produced the sculptures. Therefore, there was a period of time in which LOVE was in the public domain.

Understanding copyright laws can be complicated – and we haven’t even touched on Trademarks. However, if any lesson is to be learned from this story of LOVE, it is that if museums and institutions that wish to use the works in their collections for more than display, it is better to confirm what rights you have than to settle lawsuits later. Additionally, artists should educate themselves on the current copyright laws so that they can be sure they have the proper protections in place for their works.

Want to learn more about the history of LOVE? Check out these links:

Artmaking and Stress Relief

As I have grown older, I have come to value artmaking as not only something fun, but as something that can help me relax or refocus my attention before returning to work. Unfortunately, this kind of stress-relieving activity can easily be dropped when one’s to-do list becomes overwhelming. I found myself falling into this very trap when the fall semester began. I couldn’t help but wonder why. If artmaking can help me reduce stress why haven’t I done it?

After some self-reflection, I found some major culprits. First is simply time. I found that when making my to-do lists for the day, I was only writing down things that I needed to be doing, such as homework or household chores. There was no time reserved for relaxation or stress-relief. Even if I had time, however, I found that I was often favoring activities which required the least amount of effort after working for a number of hours. How could artmaking become not only a habit but an integral part of my day? The final hurdle has been my general perception of what artmaking has to mean. I needed to remind myself that it wasn’t necessary to create a masterpiece with every project. Also, artmaking doesn’t have to mean drawing or painting. It can also mean crafting, making music, or even decorating pastries.

So, what are the possible benefits of artmaking on your mental health and how can museums help us out?

According to Malaka Gharib, a journalist for NPR, she did some self-reflection of her own and found that in between daily tasks she was always doodling. In order to find out why she enjoyed doodling so much and what effects it had upon her brain, Gharib spoke with Girija Kaimal, a professor and researcher in art therapy at Drexel University. Highlights from their conversation are discussed in Gharib’s article, “Feeling Artsy? Here’s How Making Art Helps Your Brain.” According to Gharib, Kaimal and a team of researchers conducted an experiment where they measured the blood flow to the brain of a variety of participants. They found that when making art there was an increased amount of blood flow to the reward center of the brain. This suggests that artmaking can stimulate the reward center of the brain despite one’s concerns regarding what to make, how to make it, or how it will look in the end.

In another experiment, Kaimal and a group of researches looked into the effects of artmaking on stress. In this case, the researches asked a group of healthy adult participants to create art for 45 minutes in a studio with an art therapist. During this time, the cortisol levels – which, according to Gharib, “is a hormone that helps the body respond to stress” – of the participants were measured. The results showed that 45 minutes of artmaking in this setting significantly lowered cortisol levels. Additionally, they found “no differences in health outcomes between people who identify as experienced artists and people who don’t.”

While understanding the benefits of artmaking on one’s mental health may be intriguing, there is still the concern of where to begin. During my undergraduate years I can remember making art all the time. However, I was also taking studio classes where I was given specific projects to complete. Without the list of class projects, I have found myself struggling to decide on what to make and how to go about making it once I have finally decided to get creative. That is where museums can offer some help.

MFA Watercolor Study. Sourced from the MFA Studio Art Courses Webpage.

Since the pandemic, a number of museums have increased their presence online. In some cases, museums have created online versions of activities they would normally offer within their institutions. For example, the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston has started creating instructional videos for their page “Junior Artists at Home.” These videos are about 10 minutes long and offer step-by-step instructions on how to complete their projects. While these videos are designed for individuals between the ages of 5-8 years old, that does not mean others cannot give it a try or use the videos as inspiration for another project. For those who are looking for a more challenging project, the museum also has a “Studio Art Classes: Tutorials at Home” page where individuals can watch artmaking video tutorials which utilize a variety of materials.

The Institute of Contemporary Art has also developed its own page, “ICA at Home,” where they provide a number of links to virtual events. Also included on the page is a list of instructional artmaking videos for at home. Sponsored by the Bank of America, the ICA’s Art Lab has been a space where visitors have the opportunity to make art that relates to contemporary art. During their closure, the ICA committed to generating a new activity for each week. These projects are still accessible on their website.

Artmaking doesn’t have to mean making masterpieces. It doesn’t even have to mean drawing, sculpting, or painting. Artmaking simply means finding a creative outlet that is enjoyable and stress-free. Sometimes it can be hard to know where to begin, especially when to-do lists get longer, and projects come due. Cultural institutions like the MFA or the ICA can offer some help, creating projects for us to try. Hopefully this week we can all find some time to get a little creative, have some fun, and make some art.

Reimagining Museums During the Coronavirus Pandemic

According to Harriet Baskas, in her article “Museums are opening slowly – and differently – but one-third will likely shutter for good,” before COVID-19, “museums, zoos, science centers, and other historic and cultural attractions across the United States welcomed more than 850 million visitors a year, supported more than 726,000 jobs, and contributed more than $50 billion a year to the economy.” This is no longer the case. These same institutions are now having to make hard choices to try and stay afloat. In a national survey posted in July, the American Alliance of Museums (AAM) reported that “one-third (33%) of museum directors surveyed confirmed there was a ‘significant risk’ of closing permanently by next fall, or they ‘didn’t know’ if they would survive.” More specifically, 87% of museums reported to have “twelve months or less of financial operating reserves remaining [and] 56% having less than six months left to cover operations.”

Many museums are eager to reopen; however, they are not going to be able to function as they did before. Of the institutions which are deciding to reopen, they are facing numerous challenges including reduced staff, increased safety protocols, and in some cases the repurposing of spaces. Leading the charge in reopening are the cultural institutions of the sate of New York. Mark Kennedy states, in his article, “Face masks amid the art: New York City’s museums to reopen,” museums that are opening this week include The Museum of Modern Art, opening Thursday, August 27; and The Metropolitan Museum of Art, opening on Saturday, August 29. Kennedy goes on, explaining that in reopening, “city museums will institute a range of precautions, including reduced hours, reserved tickets, mandating masks, limiting attendance to a quarter of capacity, and closing movie theaters, coat rooms, and food courts.” Despite taking these protective measures, museum directors say the next concern is if patrons will actually come back. For museums which rely heavily on revenue from ticket sales, attendance is of great importance.

The Museum of Modern Art, New York City, New York, sourced from “New York’s Iconic Museum of Modern Art Reveals Its $450 Million Makeover,” Architecture and Design, October 2019.

Other institutions which have been greatly impacted by the effects of the pandemic are museums like the New York Hall of Science (also known as The Hall) in Queens, New York. Kennedy describes the museums as “a place where children engage with the exhibits – controlling mock space rovers, exploring digital environments and experimenting with circuits.” The Hall has yet to reopen its doors but plans to do so at some point in the spring of 2021. However, the fact that their doors are closed does not mean they have stopped contributing to their community. According to Kennedy, The Hall has “helped donate thousands of meals, turned a parking lot into a drive-in theater, encouraged research, and hosted a mobile testing site on campus.”

The Children’s Museum of Lowcountry in Charleston, South Carolina is another museum which advertised itself as a place of interactive exploration. In her article, “At SC children’s museums, ‘hands-on learning’ complicated reopening during pandemic,” Emily Williams explains that “the very same things that have made children’s museums unique and valuable are now making it highly complicated for them to reopen.” Williams quotes Laura Huerta Migus, the director of the Association of Children’s Museums, who stated that “175 children’s museums are still closed to any kind of physical visits. […] That means they’ve gone five months without any kind of revenue and have lost their most profitable spring and summer periods.” Therefore, in order to avoid permanent closure, these institutions have had to get creative with their spaces. The children’s museums of South Carolina have done just that. According to Williams, “the children’s museum will be running a ‘Schoolseum,” which will give about 30 local families the option of sending their children to the Ann Street museum to Complete their virtual school work in a small, in-person setting with the help of museum staff.” Other, larger institutions have been able to implement reopening plans which include reworking hands-on exhibitions and prioritizing space for distancing between families.

Brad Nettles, “Children’s Museum of the Lowcountry education specialist Kevin Powers reads a book to the younger campers during snack time,” sourced from “At SC children’s museums, ‘hand-on learning’ complicates reopening during pandemic,” The Post and Courier, August 2020.

Each institution is going to face different hardships as they work to maintain a presence in their communities during the coronavirus pandemic. Even as museums reopen their doors, it does not mean that the fight is over. In order to follow guidelines established by the CDC, many museums must reduce the number of visitors entering their spaces at a given time. In a report by Ken Budd, “What to Know About Visiting Museums During the Coronavirus Era,” museums have reduced their visitor numbers to anywhere from 25-80% of their normal capacity. Additionally, certain museums are requesting that visitors order their tickets ahead of time online and a number of those tickets are for scheduled visits.

Visitor experiences within the museum will be different as well. A number of museums have decided to close their restaurants and cafes. Others have informed visitors of the possibility of exhibition spaces being closed in order to accommodate individual room capacities. An additional hardship facing museums is how to follow both the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and CDC guidelines. For example, the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City is currently not offering audio guides for tours. Related concerns regarding touched surfaces will likely force many museums to reevaluate their exhibitions, like those in the children’s museums discussed above.

If you want to visit a museum, it is important to educate yourself on their changes in regulations beforehand. A visit to their website or a call to the institution can provide interested patrons on their process for purchasing tickets, their regulations regarding masks, and what visitors can expect to see or experience when visiting the museum. For those working within the museum field, the AAM has created a COVID-19 Resources and Information page where guidelines and recommendations for museum practices will be updated in response to the current situation.

Patience and understanding from all sides is necessary during these unprecedented times. We must work together to support not only these cultural institutions but also the communities which they serve. Sharing our stories and experiences can help educate each other about best-practices and innovative programs that have been most successful in maintaining a presence during the pandemic.

Have you had an interesting experience visiting a museum during the pandemic? Do you work for a museum or other cultural institution which has implemented some note-worthy changes? We want to hear from you! Contact us through the Want to Guest Post on the Blog page to share your story!

Discussing the “D-Word” of Museums: Deaccessioning

For many years, issues of the deaccessioning of works in museums’ permanent collections have garnered much attention. Since the pandemic, these concerns have only increased as museums struggle to stay open. In recognition of these struggles, the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) – an organization which offers guidance on museum best-practices to its members – decided to make changes to their regulations regarding museums’ usage of restricted funds. According to Olga Symeonoglou – an attorney in the Washington D.C. office of Cultural Heritage Partners – in her article, “Will AAMD’s New Guidelines on Deaccessioning and the Use of Restricted Funds Change the Way Museums Handle Their Collections?,” these purportedly temporary changes were made in order “to give museums flexibility to withstand the financial distress caused by closures and continuing uncertainty.” Such a decision begs the question: how temporary will this change turn out to be and what precedent will it set for future concerns regarding deaccessioning?

According to Azmina Jasani – a partner in Constantine Cannon’s Art and Cultural Property Law Group – in her article, “The Art of Deaccessioning by Museums,” deaccessioning means “the removal of an object via sale or otherwise, from a museum’s collection.” Jasani goes on, explaining that “it’s a practical way for museums to manage their collections, as it affords them the opportunity to purchase newer or more relevant works and change directions.” One of the concerns regarding deaccessioning is often a question of ethics. In order to help museums conduct themselves appropriately, specific guidelines have been put in place. This includes the AAMD’s Code of Ethics. This code stated, according to Jasani’s article, that “a museum director shall not dispose of accessioned works of art in order to provide funds for purposes other than acquisitions of works of art for the museum’s collection” (1).

Despite such regulations, there have been some instances where museums have had to rely on funds garnered from deaccessioning in order to survive economic hardships. One such case involved the sale of a Norman Rockwell painting by the Berkshire Museum in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. According to an article published for The Boston Globe, “Berkshire Museum sells Norman Rockwell painting to George Lucas’s museum,” the Berkshire Museum was facing closure without an increase in funds. In order to avoid closing, the museum selected forty pieces to sell, including Norman Rockwell’s “Shuffleton’s Barbershop.” The article states that the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art claimed to have purchased the Rockwell piece. It goes on, articulating that the museum announced its goal “to raise $55 million so it could stay open and refocus its mission.”

Norman Rockwell (1894-1978), “Shuffleton’s Barbershop,” 1950. Oil on canvas, 31″ x 33″. Cover illustration for “The Saturday Evening Post,” April 29, 1950. Collection of the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art. Norman Rockwell Museum Digital Collections. ©SEPS: Curtis Publishing, Indianapolis, IN.

The Berkshire Museum succeed in deaccessioning some of its works, however, it also stirred up controversy and concerns regarding the museum’s stewardship of its collection. In fact, the very mention of the word “deaccession” tends to harbor negative connotations. There are those who would argue that this generally negative perspective on deaccessioning needs to be reevaluated in order to allow museums to evolve. For example, Andrew McClellan – a professor of art history at Tufts University – argues that “the selective deaccessioning of objects no longer deemed essential to a museum’s mission, in order to acquire new objects that are, may make good sense,” in his article, “Museums need to move with the times – that’s why deaccessioning isn’t always bad news.” McClellan goes on, arguing that such changes could help increase diversity within museums, making them more reflective of their respective communities (2). However, this usage of funds from deaccessioning which McClellan describes would still function within the original guidelines established by the AAMD.

The recent change in the AAMD’s guidelines which allows museums to utilize funds garnered from deaccessioning for operational costs seems to have punctured a hole in the ethical standards which previously shadowed cases such as that of the Berkshire Museum. Not only will this change in code make it difficult, if not impossible, to pass judgement on museums’ actions against future threats, it also raises questions as to what other uses such funds may be applied. Mark Gold – a partner in the law firm of Smith, Green, and Gold – and Stefanie Jandl – a former curator – discuss these concerns in their article, “Why the Association of Art Museum Directors’s move on deaccessioning matters so much.” They explain that “according to the AAMD’s statement, the new resolutions ‘were proposed in recognition of the extensive negative effects of the current crisis on the operations and balance sheets of many art museums.” Afterwards, the authors cannot help but refer to the case of the Berkshire Museum, described above, and recall that the situation described by the AAMD is exactly what occurred at the Berkshire Museum. In response, they ask the question: “Should it matter what is causing the existential threat? [..] Should it matter if the cause of the crisis is a pandemic or the loss of major employers in the region, a declining demographic and donor base, or a series of unfortunate decision by staff or board?”

Deeper into the article, the answer to the above question begins to unfold as the authors return to the question of ethics. Gold and Jandl state that “ethics inform behavior not just when it’s easy or convenient, but when it’s hard. And if it’s ethical to use income from the proceeds of deaccessioning for operating expenses, why not the proceeds themselves?” They go on, arguing that museum professionals should seize this moment as an opportunity to reevaluate previous sentiments regarding best-practices. They also add that these professionals “can be more openminded about what can be removed from the collection without affecting a museum’s mission and be advocates for converting those objects into resources to keep the museum open and to support and advance the mission by treating museum employees and programmes as assets worthy of investment-pandemic or not.” Doing so could reshape individuals’ perceptions of collections and how they can function in a reciprocal relationship of support with their museums.


  1. Jasani, Azmina. “The Art of Deaccessioning by Museums.” Wealth Management (February 23, 2018). https://global-factiva-com.ezproxy.library.tufts.edu/ha/default.aspx#./!?&_suid=159761333945104543291629816466
  2. McClellan, Andrew. “Museums need to move with the times — That’s why deaccessioning isn’t always bad news.” Apollo (March, 14, 2019).

Celebrating the 30th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act

July 26th, 2020 marked the thirty-year anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) which made it illegal to discriminate against people based on a disability in areas including, but not limited to, employment, transportation, and public services. In an article, called “A Brief History of The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),” Jillian Abel provides some historical context about the passing of the law and how it has been influential in recent years. According to Abel, active support for those with disabilities had began as early as the 1960s and resulted in the passing of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act which banned discrimination based on disabilities for those receiving federal funding. Over the years, activism continued and would eventually lead to the passing of the ADA. Since then the ADA has continued to make updates to their regulations with the intent of providing as much participation and access of equal quality to all individuals.

Museums have gradually made changes to become more ADA compliant. In an article by NEA Director of Accessibility, Beth Bienvenu, “Museums and the Americans with Disabilities Act at 25: Progress and Looking Ahead,” some of the accommodations made by museums are discussed such as audio guides, tactile tours, captioned video, sign-language interpreted tours, and wheelchair access to all physical spaces. Despite these efforts, however, Bienvenu also explains that a 2012 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts found that “21 percent of all adults visited an art museum or gallery, but only 11 percent of adults with disabilities made such a visit.” She goes on, explaining that there is still more work to be done in order to provide more involvement for those with disabilities.

Last year, Claire Voon wrote an article, “Museums Are Finally Taking Accessibility for Visitors with Disabilities Seriously,” in which she discussed changes made by the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in order to better serve visitors with disabilities. One of the actions taken by MoMA was to invite ten individuals with different impairments to walk through their spaces. Voon discusses the MoMA’s decision in more detail, articulating that while museums attempt to be more accessible, they often fail to consider the various kinds of accommodations visitors might need. In many cases, it takes someone with a disability walking through a space to indicate that there is a problem with access or inclusion.

In many cases, museums have taken steps in the right direction to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and create more accessibility to their events and spaces. However, as many of the articles have stated above, there is still much work to be done. In my own experience, interactions I have had with individuals with different impairments has greatly increased my awareness of potential barriers within museum spaces. While my awareness has been increased, I do not always have ideas on how to solve the problem. This is where knowing what resources are available to you come in handy. Below are a few links which provide information on the Americans with Disabilities Act itself and ideas on how to create a more accessible institution.

Are there experiences you have from a visit to a museum you would like to share? Consider creating a guest post on our blog to further the discussion of accessibility and inclusivity. 

Do you know of other useful resources that both current and future museum professionals could utilize to create more accessible environments? Please leave a comment below or send us a message through the “contact us” option located in the sidebar at right.

« Older posts

Spam prevention powered by Akismet