[Michael Jacob]

Looks like its all settled... read red copy...

Emma Allen Emma Allen – Fri Feb 4, 4:58 pm ET

There are few legal battles that can literally be described as laughable, so when a lawsuit as chuckle-worthy as Jeff Koons's battle with a gallery over balloon dogs — essentially claiming that the blue-chip artist owned the rights to the staticky carnival giveaway in toto — looked like it was headed to the courthouse, we hoped that it would linger there as long as possible. But Koons has backed down, and now our fun is ruined.

Last December, when Koons and his ferocious legal team threatened Park Life gallery and a Canadian tchotchke manufacturer with a lawsuit if they did not stop selling and producing, respectively, bookends in the shape of balloon dogs by Christmas Eve of 2010, we happily settled down with some popcorn to await round two of the absurd conflict. Then, when Park Life's rapier-witted attorney (who, according to the New York Times, took on the case pro bono) shot back with a sarcasm-laden legal document, calling for a declaratory judgment on the matter, we readjusted the couch cushions and popped open a beer. But yesterday, the attorneys of Jeff Koons LLC. called off their dastardly intellectual property dispute and their attempt to monopolize the balloon dog, leaving us with nothing to watch but the Super Bowl.

Koons, whose towering, shiny metal balloon dogs sell for millions, has agreed not to pursue any claims against Park Life or the Toronto-based bookend manufacturer imm Living. The California gallery's bookstore is free to sell and promote the six-pound pups in perpetuity so long as it doesn't use Koons's name to peddle its goods (which, of course, it wasn't doing in the first place). Park Life's lawyer, Jedediah Wakefield of Fenwick & West will file for a dismissal of his declaratory judgment suit, and imm Living can keep cranking out the pooches.

The upshots of this decision are that magicians and trendy underdog (pardon the pun) galleries everywhere are no doubt breathing a sigh of relief, and Park Life is reporting that the bookeneds — which were not all that popular to begin with — are now flying off the shelves. But we'll be a little sad to see the sun set on this headline field day (the San Francisco Chronicle has reported that the case "ends with a whimper" and according to the Times header Koons was "all bark, no bite"). And rumor had it that Wakefield, Park Life's mischievous lawyer, was stockpiling "expert witnesses" for the trial. But sadly blown away are our visions of over-packed tiny cars rolling up to the courthouse to unload a veritable army of aggrieved clowns.

Heres a good story from ARTINFO. Sorry if its already been posted.

Judge Rejects Banksy's Offer to Post Bail for Russian Activists, Citing the Artist's Anonymity.

ARTINFO Artinfo – Wed Jan 19, 9:29 am ET

ST. PETERSBURG – Banksy's anonymity has been a central aspect of his Robin Hood-like cachet, and the difficulty of accessing his inner circle has conferred an extra veneer of counter-cultural glamor on those who manage to crack its secrecy — just ask Mr. Brainwash. But the street art maestro's clandestine persona has its drawbacks too. Last Friday, a Russian judge rejected Banksy's offer to pay the bail for two members of the Moscow-based Voina art collective, who have been jailed since November as the result of a performance-art action that involved turning over cop cars in the center of St. Petersburg.

According to earlier reports, Banksy had stepped in after hearing about the plight of Voina on the BBC and held a special online fundraiser for the duo, gathering the money required to post their bail, set at $66,000 apiece. But at a January 14 pre-trial hearing, the judge presiding over the case refused to free the two men, Leonid Nikolayev and Oleg Vorotnikov, citing a "lack of information about the person providing the money," the Moscow Times reported.

In other words, it sounds very much like the judge is using Banksy's anonymity against him. He also cited concerns that Nikolayev might pressure witnesses in the case if freed.

A post on the blog "Free Voina" alleges that the day before the hearing, Vorotnikov was threatened by the prison administration, who were angry about his contact with the media, in particular an interview he gave exposing unsanitary and overcrowded conditions at the facilities. "During the talk in the warden's office Oleg was blatantly told that, should he continue talking about prison conditions, the administration would find ways to make it worse for him," the blog states. "As soon as the interview came out, according to Oleg, his cell was searched and his cellmates were harassed."

In an ARTINFO Op-Ed from December, Voina member Yana Plucer-Sarno emphasized the political context of the group's anarchist graffiti work and of their subsequent persecution by the authorities: "Voina struggles against the climate of socio-political obscurantism and right-wing reaction that has overtaken Russia," she wrote.

[Chris Keegan]

Ive been following this story. Its a real eye opener about how protest artists can be treated.

This is an very revealing letter written by one of the artists from a Russian prison here: tumblr.com/x7n16o1q0l
They have an English twitter page: @free_voina_en