• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Copyright, Daily Blog, Featured

Woman claiming royalties after ruining “Ecce Homo”

Submitted by Caroline Jamet on September 24, 2012 – 12:31 PM59688 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2012%2F09%2F24%2Fwoman-claiming-royalties-after-ruining-ecce-homo%2FWoman+claiming+royalties+after+ruining+%E2%80%9CEcce+Homo%E2%80%9D2012-09-24+16%3A31%3A01Caroline+Jamethttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D5968

Internet users, or at least 9gag and Reddit fans, are familiar with “Ecce Homo,” Elias Garcia Martinez’s depiction of Jesus that can be found in the Santuario de Misericordia in the village of Borja, near Zaragoza, Spain.  This audience may also be familiar with the new version of the painting of “Beast Jesus.” For those of you who are not, here are the facts.

“Ecce Homo” was given to the Santuario by Martinez, a local artist and professor at the School or Art of Zaragoza, about 120 years ago.  Unfortunately, the humidity and moisture in the Church caused the surface of the painting to deteriorate.  So, a sweet old lady, parishioner Cecilia Gimenez – 81 years old – took it upon herself to restore the artwork, with devastating results.  She completed her “restoration” without anyone noticing, and her work was only discovered when descendants of the artist made a donation towards its upkeep and an expert was sent to examine the painting. They were obviously expecting to find a deteriorated painting, but they were definitely not expecting to find what some have come to refer to as “a furry alien Neanderthal.”   At first, church authorities thought it had been vandalized, until the octogenarian came forward and turned herself to the police.

The Centro de Estudios Borjanos, a local cultural organization responsible for the preservation of artistic heritage in the town, called for a full investigation into how this unauthorized “restoration” was allowed to happen. According to a spokesman from the Center, “the value of the original work was not very high but is was more of a sentimental value. As incredible as it may seem, this is all that remains of the work of an artist whose descendants still live in our city. We do not know whether this unspeakable deed can be remedied, but there can be no doubt whatsoever that someone should take the necessary action to ensure that such behavior is not repeated. Whatever the motives were, it must be roundly condemned.” According to Javier Silvestre, the councilor of Culture at Borja town hall: “Unfortunately a local resident with very good intentions decided without consulting anyone that she would restore the fresco. The result is disastrous and we are consulting experts to see what can be done.” After expert investigation, the restoration seems to be irreversible: The original face has been almost completely painted over with amateur brushstrokes, causing Gimenez’s efforts to be dubbed “the worst restoration in history,” “a botched job,” and “a crayon sketch of a very hairy monkey in an ill-fitting tunic.” Personally, my favorite is the “Ewok Jesus.”

The restoration made headlines across the world, became an Internet sensation, and sent thousands of curious sightseers to the church.  But it also caused the authorities and Martinez’s family to threaten to sue Gimenez for her unauthorized attempt, which she insisted had been carried out with only good intentions because the painting was in need of repair. One could almost feel sad about the fate of a nice old lady who was simply trying to help.  Her unwanted notoriety, and the threat of legal action from both the artist’s family and the authorities, originally ruined Gimenez’s life who was reported to have had anxiety attacks.  According to neighbors and relatives, she felt overwhelmed because of the media frenzy over the unintentional damage she caused to the mural.  She claimed that the priest knew about her attempts to restore the painting, and told Spanish television that she had done nothing in secret. “The priest knew it and everyone who came into the church could see I was painting.”

Despite all the negative press and public outcry, it did not take long for Gimenez to get back on her feet. She seems to be feeling better, since she is now claiming rights in her “artwork” and has announced on September 19th that she intended to sue the Church in order to obtain royalties.  To be more accurate, to get economic compensation out of the destruction of someone else’s intellectual property.  This newly acquired pride in her work may have arisen from the fact that, as surprising as it may sound, a part of the art world has fallen in love with this particular version of the painting.  Devotees went as far as launching a petition attempting to halt the restoration of the “restoration.” As Gimenez’s artwork went viral, and many media outlets referred to the painting as “the worst restoration in history,” the “Best Jesus Restoration Society” came to life. Jonathan Jones from the Guardian hailed Gimenez for bringing a virtually invisible work into the pop culture purview. He even cheekily suggested that “the well-meaning restorer of this obscure Spanish painting should be turned loose on a couple of works that actually matter. Many true masterpieces are starved of the global attention this second-rate Ecce Homo has now got.” And many people agree. Over 5,000 people, referred to as “ironic art fans” by the Associated Foreign Press, have signed a change.org petition attempted to save Ewok Jesus. This petition states that Gimenez’s masterpiece “reveals a subtle criticism of the Church’s creationist theories while questioning a resurgence of new idols.”

Ever since late august, Ecce Homo has become a tourist attraction and Internet fans are now flocking the little Sanctuary of Merci Church in Borja.  According to the northern newspaper El Correo, tourists started flocking to the Church, but most of them were not leaving any donations. This led the Santi Spiritus Hospital Foundation, which owns the sanctuary, to charge a 4€ fee (about $5) to see Ecce Mono – a.k.a. Behold the Monkey. In four days, the Foundation made 2000 Euros (about $2600). This angered Gimenez and her family, who have sought lawyers to claim royalties for her work. According to Enrique Trebolle, the lawyer hired by Gimenez, “she just wants the church to conform with the law.”  The Santuario de Misericordia intends to defend its earnings as well, and has retained lawyers. In addition, the family of the original artist, who had let go of its original lawsuit threat given the fact the sweet old lady seemed of good faith and explained that she was just acting out of good faith and trying to help the church, have now reiterated their intention to seek legal action against her for destroying the work.

The Foundation is not the only entity making money out of the restoration of the painting. Budget airline Ryanair also got in on the act, laying on a special flight to Zaragoza Airport. And, for those of you that enjoy playing The Sims, you will be happy to hear that you can now acquire your very own “Furry Jesus” to decorate your virtual house.

Needless to say that this is an unprecedented case.  No case law seems to deal with the question of what to do in situation where and “artist” does not simply copy another person’s work and transforms it, in which case a fair use argument can definitely be made.  Here, Gimenez painted a very hairy monkey on the sole and only original painting of Elias Garcia Martinez’s Ecce Homo. And it is also still unclear whether the family of the original artist will get anything out of the mounting entry fees, or whether the church will be reimbursed for the ruining of a work of art.

Let’s just hope that Gimenez will not also bring legal action for copyright infringement against the millions of Internet users who have shared and spoofed her “masterpiece.”

 

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: Caroline Jamet

Caroline is an international JD student at American University Washington College of Law, class of 2012. She received a dual bachelor of Law in French and Common Law from the University of Nanterre, in Paris. She specialized in international Public Law as part of her French Bachelor of law, and is now specializing in Intellectual Property law as part of her French Master’s degree as well as her J.D. She spent the summer working as a legal intern with the Institute of Museum and Library Services and as a Dean’s Fellow at the Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property (PIJIP). She is also a student Attorney in the Glushko-Samuelson Intellectual Property Law Clinic for the year 2012-2013. Caroline is particularly interested in the constitutional issues raised by IP law, International IP law, and Copyright Law.

Caroline Jamet has written 8 posts for the IPB.

59688 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2012%2F09%2F24%2Fwoman-claiming-royalties-after-ruining-ecce-homo%2FWoman+claiming+royalties+after+ruining+%E2%80%9CEcce+Homo%E2%80%9D2012-09-24+16%3A31%3A01Caroline+Jamethttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D5968 »

  • EcceHomo says:
    September 24, 2012 at 5:12 PM

    Her restauration became one of the most talked about art subjects of 2012. She ruined the painting but you gotta admit it looks pretty cool on a tshirt: http://goo.gl/nNNmP

    Reply to this comment »
  • shapi says:
    September 24, 2012 at 5:54 PM

    Her "royalties" can go towards paying back what the original painting was worth.

    Reply to this comment »
  • Dave Murray says:
    September 27, 2012 at 7:51 PM

    The original artist gave/sold the work to the church. The restorer did the restorationfor the church. The church should get the donations/fees from visitors. Lawyers, pleas stay out of it. Individuals don't get a cut.

    Reply to this comment »
  • stuven farlow says:
    October 3, 2012 at 5:02 PM

    the lawyers would have stayed out of it if this moron "Giminez " didnt try and sue the church. I hope she and her family lose there house over this, i really cant believe how first stupid and ignorant now greedy and parasitic this women is

    Reply to this comment »
  • LordEnglish says:
    October 5, 2012 at 9:46 PM

    What a ridiculous woman

    Reply to this comment »
  • http://tinyurl.com/climwatts54593 says:
    January 10, 2013 at 11:07 AM

    I really blog likewise and I am creating something related to
    this excellent blog, “Woman claiming royalties after ruining
    “Ecce Homo”

    Reply to this comment »
  • OregonMarijuana says:
    January 14, 2013 at 6:03 PM

    Hilarious old lady haha

    Reply to this comment »
  • seo agency says:
    March 16, 2013 at 3:36 PM

    I am sure the vast majority of blog site readership know the power of a good social media marketing strategy. What’s more, many people know the fact which will marketing and advertising as a result of web 2 . 0 can certainly magnify website ranks and also improve your web based position. What precisely the vast majority of users have no idea of can be -how they can take advantage of the power of web 2 . 0 for their small firmrrrs edge. Mentioned some suggestions that may help you in ones own social media undertakings. The most important thing to not overlook relating to social media is that you simply want to create a motivating and also unique content. It’s a kind of written information what individuals will want to give his or her contacts and also readers on his or her cultural information. Develop written information that may be useful and also useful, or else nobody will want to promote the item. Fascinating written information http://www.cloudcontessa.com will probably push a persons vision within your enthusiasts and also followers. They will more than likely need to promote the idea, that can increase your chances to obtain more readers and also customers. Get away from space for trials and also issues in the web 2 . 0 marketing, particularly in first. Watch out for what exactly is and what’s not working. Test out every little thing. Cause improvements seeing that necessary. Something which useful for some various different corporations will not job for you. You should learn on ones own trials and also problems. When working with this sort of marketing, maybe you have to adjust and also renew ones own concentrate and also goals often. In that position you can continue to concentrate on. Really exist a good a number of points that might consider ones own marketing and advertising downward unanticipated ways. So it is wise to re-evaluate any track it is going often. Get it done usually. Check your marketing and see which one is one among the flourishing. xrtiu6fd8g

    Reply to this comment »

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

The Food and Drug Administration’s recent decision, which reasoned that the drug posed public health and safety concerns, creates serious patent implications with regard to generic drugs.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme, one of the most coveted skate-inspired clothing brands, is suing women’s clothing brand Married to the Mob and its founder Leah McSweeney for trademark infringement to the tune of $10 million.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

Urban Outfitters, the Navajo Nation, and Another Reminder of the Need for Greater Traditional Cultural Expression Protections The ITU, ICANN, and Control over the Internet Lady Gaga Legal Woes NPR Show Settles Lawsuit Against Creationist Radio Program Real Science Friday Italian Clothing Company Tries to Protect its “Jesus Jeans” Trademark  Olympic Themed Anti-Romney Ad Pulled After Request From Olympic Committee Playstation 3 Jailbreaking an Open Source of Controversy Should Apartment Hunting Be Even Harder?: Craigslist Sues Padmapper and 3Taps for Aggregating its Listings Without Permission Charlie Sheen Attempts to Trademark Over 20 Catch Phrases? Park Your Nonsense!  #WINNING
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan
  • Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay
  • Oh, That’s Different … Never mind: USPTO Withdraws Ruling that IPAD MINI is “Merely Descriptive”

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License