There was some press coverage last week about the lawsuit brought by Takashi Murakami against his former dealer Marianne Boesky. I'm co-counsel to Murakami on the case.
A couple of points are worth clarifying/emphasizing:
The Daily News story says "Murakami is seeking compensation to be proven at trial." That's not what the case is primarily about. It's really about the right of an artist to control the production of his own work. Murakami left Boesky more than six years ago. There's no earthly reason why she should continue to print and distribute his work on her own.
And the Post says Murakami's claim is that Boesky "lent a wallpaper design he created to the Metropolitan Museum of Art without permission." That's not right either. She has every right to lend work she owns to whomever she'd like. The issue in the case, again, is whether she has the right to print additional sheets of the wallpaper on her own.
