i wanna see banksy run with this new artistic movement and livestream himself walking into the frick and slashing some 17th century grandmasters

Which would be a wise move imo, as the media attention for such a lawsuit would raise the value of the product even more.

It seems like banksy was triggered at the thought of this selling at auction.

Alleged assailant thought to be working with banksy pictured below.

Really? What crime was committed, and who was the victim?

That one seems pretty easy. Destruction of personal property. In this case there'll be no consequences because everyone involved is thrilled with the outcome. Imagine other artists running around destroying their art after they sold it though. I'm no fake lawyer but it's pretty safe to say that isn't legal.

I'm not a lawyer, but it's hard to believe that a potential buyer can claim that the painting is her personal property before it's actually been paid for and legally transferred to her.

You should go to an auction sometime and see how they work. The moment the gavel fell that painting belongs to the new buyer regardless of whether the money has changed hands yet.

Just imagine what a **** show it'd be if it worked any other way. Clearly the seller would be saying that the painting was still their's since the lol "potential" buyer hadn't actually paid yet.

This is absurd, but I'll play. ... No way it's destruction of private property. Probably more along the lines of fraud, misrepresentation by the auction house of what the item was.

The item did what it was built to do, the guy buying it just didn't know what that happened to be.

But as to whether or not it's a big FU to the art world ... no, not really. Not in a mean way, anyway, and I think that's the distinction here.

Yes, the prank probably does raise its value. And it sure seems designed to leave something intact for a displayable work ... it seems like it would have been even easier to have it burn on command, but then there's nothing left and then someone really is pissed.

Which is why I think it can be both. Banksy can make the point without being an *******, and he can do it with enough wit and ingenuity that everyone is happy. It doesn't have to be a vicious attack that leaves someone poorer or upset, to make the point.

If he'd burned the piece and left nothing but ashes would you agree that it was destruction of personal property?

no because each authenticated piece of ash would be worth tens of thousands of dollars.

No, I don't think that would change. At least, the suit wouldn't be aimed at Banksy.

Though sitting here I just realized that Banksy or someone working for him maybe/likely triggered the activation, so it's a whole other question there ...

My main point was just that the brilliance of the sunt or the point being made (whatever that is) imo isn't undermined by arguments that because the work's value probably rose it invalidated the intent somehow.

It's pretty stupid for us to speculate seriously on the outcome of a lawsuit over this, because unless one of us is a lawyer that works with an auction house we're spectacularly uninformed. My guess is the seller enters into a contract with the auctioneer and something like, "If the auctioneer ****s up the item, here's my recourse," is in that contract. But it's all moot, because everyone stand to make money here.

I think it's a pretty cool piece of performance art.

I concur that the whole thing was well executed and the piece is obviously worth way mor now than it was pre auction.

Theoretically though, had he done something which diminished the value of the piece immediately after the sale (destroy it) it would have almost certainly been a crime. Given that, what he did is likely to have also been a crime but of course no one has any desire to pursue it.

RDH,

The auction house almost certainly has insurance which covers them in case they **** something up.

ligastar,

I'm sure you're being facetious but I'd imagine the reason Banksy didn't shred the whole thing is because it would have caused it 's value to go down due to the difficulty of displaying the piece and decreased aesthetic. Had he shredded the entire piece we'd almost certainly be finding out what if any crime was committed because the seller, buyer and auction house would all be seriously pissed.

If only we had our own resident fake lawyer who could educate us on the subject.

Oh yeah, this is just me finally putting that art law degree to use .... no, it's definitely ridiculous. Acknowledged.

indeed

Sotheby's Condition Report:

Didn't realize it was "acrylic on canvas, mounted on board," which makes me think the shredder just jammed from material instead of being intentional.

I agree that I don't think the half shred was intentional. More likely it was supposed to shred the whole painting and the shredder failed

I want to think about this one. My speculation is that the half-shred was deliberate, if only because that increases the value of the work rather than destroys it.

no way the half shred was an accident. No one is going to federal pound me in the ass prison to make an artistic statement.

Banksy doesn't strike me as a guy who who is intentionally trying to make some rich art investor even richer. Pretty ridiculous to think he was trying to increase the value of the painting.
Way more likely he he was trying to flip everyone the bird and shred the whole thing (which somewhat ironically still probably increases the value anyway, just due to all the publicity. not like you cant display the shreds)

Watched the video, and as the painting was removed from the wall, there was no power cord. So what was the power source for the shredder? Batteries installed in 2006? Would you rely on those? Something fishy there, I'm thinking the auction house knew. How was it initiated? If I were designing it in 2006 I'd consider a vehicle keyfob and receiver.

I personally believe Banksy wanted the entire thing to shred and all the ribbons to drop on the floor in a pile. Which would have been even more outrageous than what happened and would have also garnered a lot more discussion on topics like what are now being discussed in this thread.