Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 AUGUST 2023

Noh Discusses Vermont College Murals Ruling

Pryor Cashman LLP
Pryor Cashman LLP
Contributor
Pryor Cashman LLP

Pryor Cashman LLP

Pryor Cashman is an award-winning midsize law firm headquartered in New York City. With over 200...

View firm profile
Explore more from Pryor Cashman LLP

Pryor Cashman Partner Megan Noh, co-chair of the Art Law Group and Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) Practice, spoke to The New York Times following a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision involving...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Megan Noh
Megan Noh
Author LinkedIn connections

Pryor Cashman Partner Megan Noh, co-chair of the Art Law Group and Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) Practice, spoke to The New York Times following a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision involving a Vermont college and depictions of slavery in on-campus murals.

In "Law School That Covered Slavery Murals Didn't Violate Artist's Rights, Court Rules," Megan commented on the ruling in Samuel Kerson v. Vermont Law School, Inc., which said that the school could conceal 30-year-old murals in the student center.

Megan noted that this latest decision, allowing the school to conceal the murals rather than remove them, was in line with typical applications of the 1990 Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA), which describes artists' "moral rights" involving their artwork:

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Tenth Circuit Stays Nationwide Eligibility Injunction For Class Of 2022 In Wisne v. NCAA

On August 21, 2026, the Tenth Circuit granted the NCAA’s stay request in Wisne v. NCAA, temporarily restoring the NCAA’s age-based eligibility rules pending resolution of the appeal. Three weeks earlier, Judge Sweeney of the District of Colorado had issued a nationwide injunction that permitted athletes in the Class of 2022 to pursue a fifth year of eligibility.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney
Article

Show Your Work: California Federal Court Denies Preliminary Approval Of Data Breach Class Action Settlement

A federal court in California denied preliminary approval of a $2.3 million data breach settlement affecting over 220,000 individuals, finding seven critical deficiencies in the proposed agreement. The decision highlights the rigorous scrutiny courts apply to class action settlements, particularly regarding claims-made distribution processes, inadequate documentation of settlement value, and unexplained disparate treatment among class members.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

California Federal Court Denies TikTok’s Motion To Dismiss Children’s Privacy Claims Based On Prior Class Action Settlements

A federal court rejected TikTok's attempt to use two prior nationwide class action settlements—totaling over $93 million—to dismiss new privacy claims brought by minors alleging violations of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. The ruling hinged on whether the current plaintiffs were demonstrably members of the earlier settlement classes based solely on the pleadings, raising critical questions about the scope and enforceability of broad settlement releases in successive privacy litiga
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Video

MR. NUMBER 1 WINS AGAIN!: Concora Credit To Pay $9.375MM To Settle TCPA Wrong Number Class Action As Another Company Bows To Greenwald (Video)

Concora Credit has agreed to pay $9.375 million to settle a TCPA class action lawsuit over wrong number robocalls, with prominent TCPA attorney Mike Greenwald securing another major victory. The settlement includes over $5 million for approximately 147,000 class members, $3 million in attorney fees, and a commitment to spend at least $1 million on TCPA compliance over three years.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Troutman Amin LLP
Troutman Amin LLP
Article

Florida Federal Court Holds That The TCPA’s Do-Not-Call Provisions Do Not Apply To Cell Phone Users

A federal judge in Florida has ruled that cell phone users cannot sue under the TCPA's do-not-call provisions, determining that the FCC exceeded its authority when it extended protections to wireless subscribers in 2003. The decision challenges decades of regulatory interpretation and could fundamentally reshape telecommunications privacy litigation if adopted by other courts.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

Sterling v. City Of Jackson And The Limits Of Substantive Due Process In Environmental Harm Cases

The Fifth Circuit's en banc decision in Sterling v. City of Jackson tests whether residents exposed to lead-contaminated municipal drinking water can sue under Section 1983 for substantive due process violations. In a 10-5 ruling, the court held that environmental harms caused by government mismanagement belong to tort law and the political process, not constitutional claims, creating a significant circuit split with implications for how environmental compliance failures by public officials are litigated.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Arnold & Porter
Arnold & Porter
Article

The First Major AI Meeting Assistant Lawsuit: Practical Lessons From The Otter.ai Litigation

A consolidated class action lawsuit against Otter.AI reveals how AI products that collect and train on user data face significant legal exposure under privacy statutes, unfair competition laws, and invasion of privacy torts. The case demonstrates that privacy policies alone may not shield companies from liability, particularly when they shift consent obligations to customers or obscure how user data trains AI systems.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
ZwillGen
ZwillGen