Art Law Library: Contracts

Home.png ListofTopics.png ListofCases.png Glossary.png
 
To avoid addressing First Amendment issues, courts will sometimes resolve conflicts over censorship by considering the specific terms of any contractual arrangement governing the situation. Depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the court may find that the artist has waived his or her free speech rights, particularly if the government acts as a purchaser of the artwork. At other times, breach of contract claims, such as lease terms, are utilized by government agencies as a pretext for regulating speech. If they are clearly pretextual, and the real purpose is to stifle a particular viewpoint, such claims are unconstitutional.

Associated Cases:

Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences v. City of New York 
Lilly v. Smith
Redgrave v. Boston Symphony Orchestra
Wildmon v. Berwick Universal Pictures

 

These materials are not intended, and should not be used, as legal advice. They necessarily contain generalizations that are not applicable in all jurisdictions or circumstances. Moreover, court decisions may be superceded by subsequent rulings, and may be subject to alternative interpretations. Corrections, clarification, and additions are welcome. Please send toncac@ncac.org.