VARA and Attribution Checklist: Commissioning, Waivers, Notice, and Removal

By Casey Scott McKay · 2026-03-27

Fifteen phases covering a work of visual art from commissioning to removal, written for whichever chair you occupy. Phase one is a five-question coverage screen that ends most inquiries in twenty minutes, because the statutory definition excludes posters, applied art, books, film, anything in an edition over 200, and every work made for hire. The commissioning phases supply the two documents that cost nothing at installation and everything later - the section 113(d)(1) acknowledgment and a waiver that identifies the work and the uses with the specificity the statute demands. The ownership phases run the removability assessment and the ninety-day registered-mail notice that resolves exposure for the price of a letter. Artist phases cover the registry address, the six contract clauses, and the stature record built over years. A litigation phase covers the willfulness facts that produced the largest award on record.

IP and Technology > Copyright | Checklist | Published 27 March 2026 - Updated 12 May 2026 | Casey Scott McKay - marksy.us

Summary. Fifteen phases covering a work of visual art from commissioning to removal, written for whichever chair you occupy. Phase one is a five-question coverage screen that ends most inquiries in twenty minutes, because the statutory definition excludes posters, applied art, books, film, anything in an edition over 200, and every work made for hire. The commissioning phases supply the two documents that cost nothing at installation and everything later — the section 113(d)(1) acknowledgment and a waiver that identifies the work and the uses with the specificity the statute demands. The ownership phases run the removability assessment and the ninety-day registered-mail notice that resolves exposure for the price of a letter. Artist phases cover the registry address, the six contract clauses, and the stature record built over years. A litigation phase covers the willfulness facts that produced the largest award on record.

Keywords: vara coverage screen · work of visual art · edition of 200 · work made for hire exclusion · section 113(d)(1) instrument · section 106a(e) waiver · work and uses specificity · joint work waiver · ninety-day notice · registered mail · visual arts registry · removability assessment · recognized stature evidence · site-specific removal · mural agreement · conservation safe harbor · statutory damages per work · willfulness · deaccession policy · institutional register

What this checklist is for

This is the working document for anyone commissioning, owning, making, or removing a work of visual art. It does not re-teach the statute. If you cannot say in one sentence why a mural in an edition of 500 is outside VARA, read The Artist's Other Rights first. The reasoning behind each box, with model language, is in Advising on VARA and Moral Rights. This document tells you what to do, in order.

Who should use it. Real estate and construction counsel commissioning art for a building; property owners planning a renovation, sale, or demolition; museums, universities, and public art programs; artists and their representatives; and litigators on either side of a destruction claim.

What you'll need before you start. The commissioning agreement and every amendment; installation drawings and photographs; the artist's identity, medium, edition size, and date of creation; a removability assessment where removal is contemplated; the Copyright Office Visual Arts Registry search result; any copyright registration; and the artist's exhibition and press history if stature is at issue.

The worked matter. Idris Vance, sculptor, commissioned by Harrowgate Partners to build a forty-foot welded steel installation for a new office building atrium. Fee $340,000. A three-page agreement by the developer's real estate counsel: the work "shall be the property of Owner" and "Owner shall own all intellectual property rights." Eight years later the building sells and the new owner wants the atrium reconfigured.

| Phase | What you accomplish | Typical elapsed time | |---|---|---| | 1 | Run the five-question coverage screen | 20 min-2 hours | | 2 | Run the state-law fallback where VARA fails | 1-3 days | | 3 | Draft the § 113(d)(1) acknowledgment | 1 day | | 4 | Draft the § 106A(e) waiver | 2-3 days | | 5 | Draft the commissioning agreement terms | 1-2 weeks | | 6 | Paper the mural or street-art variant | 1 week | | 7 | Commission the removability assessment | 2-4 weeks | | 8 | Run the ninety-day notice procedure | 90 days + prep | | 9 | Handle the site-specific objection | 1-2 weeks | | 10 | Artist setup: registry, registration, clauses | 2 weeks | | 11 | Build and maintain the stature record | ongoing | | 12 | Institutional program: register, policy, training | 6-12 weeks | | 13 | Litigate, if it comes to that | 12-36 months | | 14 | Negotiate the resolution most of these reach | 2-5 months | | 15 | Budget and review | annually |

Phase 1 — Run the five-question coverage screen

[ ] One: is it an enumerated medium? A painting, drawing, print, or sculpture, or a still photograph produced for exhibition purposes only. 17 U.S.C. § 101.
- Stop here if it is a poster, map, globe, chart, technical drawing, diagram, model, applied art, motion picture or other audiovisual work, book, magazine, newspaper, periodical, database, electronic information service, electronic publication, merchandising item, or advertising, promotional, descriptive, covering, or packaging material.
[ ] Two: single copy, or a limited edition of 200 or fewer, signed and consecutively numbered by the author?
[ ] Three: is it a work made for hire? Excluded categorically.
- Test employment under Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730, 751-53 (1989).
- Test commissioned work-for-hire against the nine enumerated categories in § 101 — paintings, sculptures, and murals are not among them.
- Authority. Carter v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 71 F.3d 77, 85-88 (2d Cir. 1995).
[ ] Four: is it subject to copyright at all? Living, ephemeral, and conceptual works raise authorship and fixation problems. Kelley v. Chicago Park District, 635 F.3d 290, 300-04 (7th Cir. 2011).
[ ] Five: created on or after June 1, 1991, and is the author living? For post-1991 works the rights endure for the life of the author only. 17 U.S.C. § 106A(d). No living author, no claim.
- Trap. Clients arrive convinced they have a moral rights problem. Most do not, and the twenty minutes spent here saves a month of the wrong analysis.

Vance, Phase 1. A sculpture in a single copy; not an employee; sculpture is not among the nine commissioned categories and the agreement does not say "work made for hire"; created after 1991; artist living. VARA applies, notwithstanding that the developer owns the object and, arguably, the copyright.

Phase 2 — Run the state-law fallback where VARA fails

[ ] Remember that 17 U.S.C. § 301(f) preempts equivalent state rights only with respect to works of visual art, so the state statutes have room precisely where VARA does not reach.
[ ] Check Cal. Civ. Code § 987, which defines "fine art" differently and reaches some works VARA excludes.
[ ] Check N.Y. Arts & Cult. Aff. Law § 14.03, which focuses on public display of an altered work in a way that damages reputation.
[ ] Check whether the copyright claim is the real one. An unauthorized reproduction, adaptation, or public display infringes 17 U.S.C. § 106 regardless of VARA, and a modification creating a derivative work is squarely within it.
- Why this matters. This is frequently the strongest claim available and it is overlooked because the client framed the problem as one about respect rather than copying. See Copyright Enforcement Toolkit.
[ ] Do not plead a Lanham Act authorship claim. Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23, 31-38 (2003) forecloses it. Two narrower theories survive: the origin of the tangible goods, and false advertising under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B).

Phase 3 — Draft the § 113(d)(1) acknowledgment

[ ] Determine whether the work will be incorporated in a building such that removal would cause destruction, distortion, mutilation, or modification.
[ ] If so, execute a written instrument signed by both parties.
- Model. Artist and Owner acknowledge and agree that the Work will be incorporated into the Building in such a manner that removing the Work will cause the destruction, distortion, mutilation, or other modification of the Work. Artist consents to installation on that basis. This instrument is executed by both parties pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 113(d)(1)(B).
[ ] Add it to the standard closing set for any project that includes commissioned art.
- Why. One paragraph, signed at installation while everyone is pleased with the project. Its absence is what produced the largest judgment in this area. 17 U.S.C. § 113(d)(1).

Phase 4 — Draft the § 106A(e) waiver

[ ] Confirm the rights are waived, not transferred. 17 U.S.C. § 106A(e) makes them non-transferable, so an "all intellectual property rights" assignment does nothing.
[ ] Use a written instrument signed by the author that specifically identifies the work and the uses.
[ ] Enumerate the uses: removal; relocation; modification reasonably necessary for removal, transport, or installation; conservation and restoration by a qualified conservator; modification of lighting, placement, and public presentation; and destruction following a stated notice procedure.
[ ] Attach the work as an identified exhibit with photographs and dimensions.
[ ] Do not use a general waiver.
- Trap. "Artist waives all moral rights in all works" is ineffective, because it identifies neither the work nor the uses. Execute at or near delivery and update when intended uses change.
[ ] For a joint work, note that a waiver by one author waives for all authors.
- For commissioning parties. Efficient — one signature suffices.
- For artists. Address it expressly in the collaborators' agreement, deciding among yourselves who may sign what.

Phase 5 — Draft the commissioning agreement terms

[ ] Attribution and a plaque, with the wording agreed.
[ ] Approval rights over relocation and modification.
[ ] Conservation standards, who performs the work, and who pays.
[ ] A notice obligation before removal or destruction, with a defined period.
[ ] The artist's right of first refusal to reacquire, at a stated price or the cost of removal.
[ ] Documentation rights: professional photography, and 3D scanning for dimensional work.
[ ] The reproduction license in both directions — including whether the owner may use images in leasing and marketing materials, which arises the first time the building appears in a brochure.
[ ] The artist's obligation to keep a current address on file.
[ ] Assignment to successors in title, so the next owner inherits an arrangement rather than a problem.
[ ] For materials with a known service life, an agreed treatment of degradation under § 106A(c)(1).
[ ] Where continued attribution or preservation should outlive the artist, name a successor by contract.
- Why. § 106A(d)(1) ends the rights at death for post-1991 works, and an estate has no VARA claim. Ask the question at commissioning, when it is a clause.

Phase 6 — Paper the mural or street-art variant

[ ] Get something in writing at the moment permission is given, on one page signed by both.
[ ] Record: scope, location, and dimensions; duration, permanent or a stated term; removal treatment — the § 113(d)(1) acknowledgment or a § 106A(e) waiver; the artist's legal name and current address with an obligation to update it; whether the owner may photograph and reproduce the work; whether the artist may reproduce it and whether the owner is credited; maintenance and repainting rights; and assignment to successors.
[ ] Do not build an owner's position on the artist's lack of permission.
- Why. VARA protects works "subject to copyright protection," and unauthorized placement does not by itself defeat copyright in the painting. The point is unsettled. Run the notice procedure anyway; it costs a letter and ninety days.
[ ] For advertisers and film crews: a mural is a pictorial work and photographing it is a reproduction. The architectural-works exception at 17 U.S.C. § 120(a) covers pictorial representations of a building, not a painting on it. The analysis is license, fair use, or de minimis use. See Fair Use Risk Assessment Checklist; Running a Fair Use Analysis.

Phase 7 — Commission the removability assessment

[ ] Engage a rigger, structural engineer, or art handler to determine whether the work can be detached and relocated intact.
[ ] Get it in writing, with methodology and risks.
[ ] Do it before sending any notice.
- Why. The answer decides which subsection governs, and an owner who sends the wrong notice has documented its own understanding of the facts in a way that will be quoted back.
[ ] If removal would destroy or modify the work — § 113(d)(1) governs, and absent the Phase 3 instrument the rights are intact. The route is negotiation or waiver.
[ ] If removal is feasible intact — § 113(d)(2) governs, and there is a path. Go to Phase 8.

Phase 8 — Run the ninety-day notice procedure

[ ] Search the Copyright Office Visual Arts Registry for the author's recorded address and print the result with the date. 37 C.F.R. § 201.25.
[ ] Search other reasonable sources — the artist's website, gallery representation, prior correspondence — and document each search.
[ ] Send the notice by registered mail to the registry address, and to any other address you have.
- Why registered mail to the registry address. An attempt is presumed diligent if made that way. 17 U.S.C. § 113(d)(2).
[ ] Keep the mailing receipt, the return receipt, and a copy of the notice.
[ ] Calendar ninety days from receipt, not from mailing.
[ ] Do nothing to the work during those ninety days.
- Trap. The 5Pointz exposure was created by acting while the question was live. Waiting is free and it is the entire defense. Cohen v. G&M Realty L.P., 320 F. Supp. 3d 421 (E.D.N.Y. 2018).
[ ] If the artist elects to remove or pay, cooperate and document.
[ ] If ninety days pass with no removal and no payment, document that and proceed.
[ ] Model notice. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 113(d)(2), you are notified that [Owner] intends to [remove/relocate] the work titled "[Title]," installed at [address], on or after [date at least ninety days out]. The work can be removed without destruction, distortion, mutilation, or other modification, as described in the enclosed assessment. If you wish to remove the work or pay for its removal, you must do so within ninety (90) days of receipt of this notice. If you do not, the rights conferred by 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(2) and (3) will not apply to the removal.

Phase 9 — Handle the site-specific objection

[ ] Identify whether the objection is that moving the work will damage it, or that moving it destroys its meaning. They are different claims.
[ ] For the second, note the leading authority: VARA does not protect site-specific art from removal from its site. Phillips v. Pembroke Real Estate, Inc., 459 F.3d 128, 140-43 (1st Cir. 2006).
[ ] Do not treat Phillips as universal; other courts have not uniformly adopted it and the reasoning has been criticized.
[ ] For artists: if the site matters, put it in the contract — notice, consultation, and consent before relocation, or a right to deinstall and reacquire.
[ ] Consider a negotiated deaccession protocol: agreed criteria for relocation, an obligation to consult, a documentation obligation, and a payment where relocation is inconsistent with the work's conception.

Phase 10 — Artist setup

[ ] Record the address with the Visual Arts Registry and keep it current. 37 C.F.R. § 201.25.
- Why. It is the mechanism through which the ninety-day notice reaches you. An artist who cannot be found has functionally been notified.
[ ] Register the copyright. 17 U.S.C. § 408. It is inexpensive, it secures the ordinary copyright remedies that travel alongside, and it forecloses arguments under § 411(a) and § 412 that a defendant will otherwise raise. See Registering a Copyright.
[ ] Negotiate the six clauses at commissioning: attribution and a plaque; notice before removal, relocation, or destruction; a right of first refusal; documentation rights; conservation standards and consultation; and a duration.
[ ] Never sign a blanket waiver. Narrow it: identify the work, identify the uses, exclude destruction, require notice.
[ ] In a collaboration, address the joint-work rule expressly, because one co-author's signature waives for everyone.

Phase 11 — Build and maintain the stature record

[ ] Keep, contemporaneously: exhibition history; press and critical coverage; inclusion in tours, guides, and scholarship; collection placements; awards; and public and social media attention.
[ ] Note that temporary works can be of recognized stature. Castillo v. G&M Realty L.P., 950 F.3d 155 (2d Cir. 2020).
[ ] Identify potential expert witnesses — curators, critics, scholars — while relationships are current.
- Why maintain it now. Assembling a stature record after a work has been destroyed is far harder than keeping one as you go, and stature is the element on which a destruction claim turns.

Phase 12 — Institutional program

[ ] Build a VARA register covering every work in the collection or on the property: artist, contact and registry address, date of creation, medium, edition size, work-made-for-hire status, whether a § 113(d)(1) instrument or § 106A(e) waiver exists, installation method, and a removability note.
- Trap. Most institutions cannot answer half of these fields for half their works, which is precisely the problem.
[ ] Write a deaccession and relocation policy including the VARA steps: coverage screen, removability assessment, notice where applicable, consultation, documentation, and approval authority.
[ ] Use qualified conservators and document treatment plans.
- Why. § 106A(c)(2) excludes modification resulting from conservation or public presentation unless caused by gross negligence. A facilities crew repainting a sculpture is outside the safe harbor.
[ ] Record the artist's intent about materials at acquisition where a work incorporates organic matter, industrial coatings, electronics, or media formats with a known service life. § 106A(c)(1).
[ ] Train the facilities team with a one-page rule: no work of art is moved, cleaned, altered, or removed without a call to [name].
- Why. Nearly every institutional VARA problem begins with maintenance, renovation, or a building project, executed by people who have never heard of the statute.
[ ] Run the register in due diligence. VARA exposure transfers with the building. See IP Due Diligence Toolkit.

Phase 13 — Litigate, if it comes to that

[ ] Prove the elements in order: a work of visual art; the author; the right invoked; and either prejudice to honor or reputation for a modification claim, or recognized stature for a destruction claim.
[ ] Assemble stature evidence: expert testimony, exhibition history, press, scholarship, tours and guides, public attention, and the judgment of the artistic community.
[ ] Develop the willfulness facts, which drive the number: destruction without notice, during pending litigation over the works' status, or before permits were in hand. Castillo, 950 F.3d 155.
[ ] Identify the remedies: injunctions under 17 U.S.C. § 502; actual damages and profits under § 504(b), which are hard here; statutory damages under § 504(c) of $750 to $30,000 per work and up to $150,000 per work for willfulness; and fees under § 505, guided by Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 579 U.S. 197, 202-09 (2016) and Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994).
[ ] Calendar the three-year limitations period. 17 U.S.C. § 507(b). Laches does not bar damages within it. Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 572 U.S. 663 (2014).
[ ] Check unfinished-work issues where relevant. Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Foundation v. Büchel, 593 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2010).
[ ] Tender to insurance. A general liability policy may respond depending on pleading and the IP exclusion. See Tendering and Winning an IP Coverage Claim.

Phase 14 — Negotiate the resolution most of these reach

[ ] Relocation at the owner's expense, to a site the artist approved or had a defined opportunity to comment on.
[ ] Professional deinstallation and transport by a named conservator or rigger, with condition reports before and after.
[ ] A documentation protocol — professional photography and, where appropriate, 3D scanning — at the owner's expense, with rights allocated.
[ ] A right of first refusal for the artist to reacquire, at a stated price or the cost of removal.
[ ] A payment where relocation is inconsistent with the work's conception, or where destruction is unavoidable.
[ ] Attribution terms for continued display, and the right to require removal of the artist's name if the work is altered — the disassociation right at § 106A(a)(2).
[ ] A proper waiver executed as part of the settlement, identifying the work and the uses.
[ ] Mutual releases and a confidentiality clause.
[ ] Price the alternative: a negotiated relocation costs $40,000 to $250,000; a litigated destruction claim costs each side $250,000 to $900,000 with statutory exposure of up to $150,000 per work.

Phase 12A — The renovation, sale, and demolition trigger list

VARA problems do not arrive as VARA problems. They arrive as construction schedules, and the people running those schedules do not know the statute exists. Build a trigger list and attach it to the events that actually happen.

[ ] Any tenant improvement or renovation project. Add one question to the project intake form: does this space contain any artwork, mural, sculpture, or installation? If yes, route to counsel before demolition planning begins.
[ ] Any building sale or refinancing. Add installed artwork to the representation and warranty schedule and to the diligence request list. A buyer that has not asked has inherited whatever exists.
[ ] Any demolition. Run the Phase 1 screen and the Phase 7 assessment for every work on the property before applying for permits, because the timing of the destruction relative to permits and to notice is exactly what a court examines on willfulness.
[ ] Any change of property manager or facilities vendor. Re-deliver the one-page facilities rule to the new team.
[ ] Any lease of space containing commissioned art. Address in the lease who may alter, cover, relocate, or remove the work, and who bears the VARA risk if the tenant does.
[ ] Any insurance renewal. Ask whether the policy responds to a claim characterized as damage to a work of art, and how the intellectual property exclusion is worded.
[ ] Any bankruptcy, foreclosure, or receivership. The successor takes the building and the exposure. Include installed art in the schedules and flag it for the trustee or receiver.
[ ] Any public-art grant or percent-for-art requirement. These programs frequently mandate specific artist protections beyond VARA, and the grant agreement may impose notice, consultation, and maintenance obligations enforceable independently of the statute.

And the one operational control worth more than the list. Photograph and catalogue every installed work at acquisition or installation, with dimensions, medium, artist name, and the date. Half of the difficulty in these matters comes from not being able to say what the work is or who made it, and a folder of photographs taken on day one answers most of it.

Phase 14A — The demand letter, from either side

Neither side benefits from a first exchange that reads like a complaint. These matters resolve well when the opening letter does three things and stops.

From the artist's side.

[ ] Identify the work, the date, and the installation, with photographs.
[ ] State the statutory basis in one paragraph — 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the right invoked, and, for a destruction claim, a summary of the stature evidence.
[ ] Request a specific, achievable thing: a pause, a meeting, a copy of any removal plan, or an opportunity to remove the work at the artist's expense.
[ ] Do not open with a damages number. The statutory exposure is real and it is more persuasive as a fact the owner's counsel discovers than as a threat.
[ ] Preserve evidence and send a preservation request covering photographs, the commissioning file, and any communications about the work.

From the owner's side.

[ ] Respond promptly, and say what the plan actually is. Silence produces an injunction motion.
[ ] Enclose the removability assessment if one exists.
[ ] State whether a § 113(d) notice is being given and on what date, and confirm nothing will happen to the work in the interim.
[ ] Offer the Phase 14 terms — relocation, documentation, right of first refusal — rather than defending the right to destroy.
[ ] Do not assert that the artist has no rights because the owner owns the object or "all intellectual property rights." It is wrong under § 106A(e), it will be quoted back, and it signals that nobody on the owner's side has read the statute.

For both. Put a short mediation proposal in the first exchange. These disputes involve a physical object on a schedule, and a mediator who can convene the parties within three weeks resolves far more of them than a motion calendar can.

Phase 15 — Budget and review

| Task | Elapsed | Cost | |---|---|---| | Coverage screen | 20 min-2 hours | $1k-$4k | | Commissioning documents and waiver | 1-2 weeks | $6k-$20k | | Removability assessment | 2-4 weeks | $8k-$35k | | Ninety-day notice procedure | 90 days + prep | $6k-$18k + removal | | Institutional register, 50 works | 6-12 weeks | $30k-$95k | | Negotiated relocation | 2-5 months | $40k-$250k | | Stature evidence development | 4-10 weeks | $25k-$80k | | Preliminary injunction motion | 3-8 weeks | $50k-$180k | | Trial on a multi-work destruction claim | 18-36 months | $250k-$900k per side |

[ ] Present the first two rows — under $25,000, entirely preventive — against the last two.
[ ] Diarize an annual register review for institutional clients, and a review of the artist's address of record.

Key Authorities at a Glance

| Authority | What it provides | Phase | |---|---|---| | 17 U.S.C. § 106A | Attribution and integrity; duration; waiver | 1, 4, 14 | | 17 U.S.C. § 101 | "Work of visual art"; work made for hire | 1 | | 17 U.S.C. § 113(d) | Building incorporation; instrument; notice | 3, 7, 8 | | 17 U.S.C. § 301(f) | Preemption limited to works of visual art | 2 | | 17 U.S.C. § 106 | The ordinary copyright claim | 2 | | 17 U.S.C. § 120(a) | Architectural works exception, and its limit | 6 | | 17 U.S.C. § 408 | Registration | 10 | | 17 U.S.C. § 502 | Injunctions | 13 | | 17 U.S.C. § 504 | Damages and statutory damages | 13 | | 17 U.S.C. § 505 | Costs and fees | 13 | | 17 U.S.C. § 507(b) | Limitations period | 13 | | 37 C.F.R. § 201.25 | Visual Arts Registry | 8, 10 | | Castillo v. G&M Realty L.P., 950 F.3d 155 (2d Cir. 2020) | Recognized stature; temporary works; willfulness | 11, 13 | | Cohen v. G&M Realty L.P., 320 F. Supp. 3d 421 (E.D.N.Y. 2018) | The willfulness findings | 8 | | Carter v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 71 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 1995) | Work made for hire excludes VARA | 1 | | Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730 (1989) | Employee status | 1 | | Kelley v. Chicago Park District, 635 F.3d 290 (7th Cir. 2011) | Medium and fixation limits | 1 | | Phillips v. Pembroke Real Estate, Inc., 459 F.3d 128 (1st Cir. 2006) | Site-specific art and removal | 9 | | Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Found. v. Büchel, 593 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2010) | Unfinished works | 13 | | Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003) | No Lanham Act authorship claim | 2 | | 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) | The surviving narrow theories | 2 | | Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 579 U.S. 197 (2016) | Fee-award standard | 13 | | Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517 (1994) | Fee-award discretion | 13 | | Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 572 U.S. 663 (2014) | No laches bar within the period | 13 | | Cal. Civ. Code § 987 | California statute | 2 | | N.Y. Arts & Cult. Aff. Law § 14.03 | New York statute | 2 |

The five things people get wrong

Assuming the client has a moral rights problem. Five questions and twenty minutes will end most inquiries, because the definition excludes posters, applied art, books, film, editions over 200, and every work made for hire.

Relying on an "all intellectual property rights" clause. VARA rights are non-transferable, and a boilerplate assignment identifies neither the work nor the uses a waiver must specify.

Skipping the § 113(d)(1) acknowledgment. One paragraph at installation, and its absence is what turns a routine renovation into a federal case.

Acting during the ninety days. Waiting is free and it is the entire defense. Acting while the question is live is what produces a willfulness finding.

Letting facilities handle it. Nearly every institutional problem begins with maintenance or renovation performed by people who have never heard of the statute.