17 U.S.C. § 106A

Rights of certain authors to attribution and integrity

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 17 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Rights of Attribution and Integrity.—Subject to section 107 and independent of the exclusive rights provided in section 106, the author of a work of visual art—(1) shall have the right—(A) to claim authorship of that work, and(B) to prevent the use of his or her name as the author of any work of visual art which he or she did not create;(2) shall have the right to prevent the use of his or her name as the author of the work of visual art in the event of a distortion, mutilation, or other modification of the work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation; and(3) subject to the limitations set forth in section 113(d), shall have the right—(A) to prevent any intentional distortion, mutilation, or other modification of that work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation, and any intentional distortion, mutilation, or modification of that work is a violation of that right, and(B) to prevent any destruction of a work of recognized stature, and any intentional or grossly negligent destruction of that work is a violation of that right.(b)Scope and Exercise of Rights.—Only the author of a work of visual art has the rights conferred by subsection (a) in that work, whether or not the author is the copyright owner. The authors of a joint work of visual art are coowners of the rights conferred by subsection (a) in that work.(c)Exceptions.—(1) The modification of a work of visual art which is a result of the passage of time or the inherent nature of the materials is not a distortion, mutilation, or other modification described in subsection (a)(3)(A).(2) The modification of a work of visual art which is the result of conservation, or of the public presentation, including lighting and placement, of the work is not a destruction, distortion, mutilation, or other modification described in subsection (a)(3) unless the modification is caused by gross negligence.(3) The rights described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) shall not apply to any reproduction, depiction, portrayal, or other use of a work in, upon, or in any connection with any item described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of the definition of “work of visual art” in section 101, and any such reproduction, depiction, portrayal, or other use of a work is not a destruction, distortion, mutilation, or other modification described in paragraph (3) of subsection (a).(d)Duration of Rights.—(1) With respect to works of visual art created on or after the effective date set forth in section 610(a) of the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990, the rights conferred by subsection (a) shall endure for a term consisting of the life of the author.(2) With respect to works of visual art created before the effective date set forth in section 610(a) of the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990, but title to which has not, as of such effective date, been transferred from the author, the rights conferred by subsection (a) shall be coextensive with, and shall expire at the same time as, the rights conferred by section 106.(3) In the case of a joint work prepared by two or more authors, the rights conferred by subsection (a) shall endure for a term consisting of the life of the last surviving author.(4) All terms of the rights conferred by subsection (a) run to the end of the calendar year in which they would otherwise expire.(e)Transfer and Waiver.—(1) The rights conferred by subsection (a) may not be transferred, but those rights may be waived if the author expressly agrees to such waiver in a written instrument signed by the author. Such instrument shall specifically identify the work, and uses of that work, to which the waiver applies, and the waiver shall apply only to the work and uses so identified. In the case of a joint work prepared by two or more authors, a waiver of rights under this paragraph made by one such author waives such rights for all such authors.(2) Ownership of the rights conferred by subsection (a) with respect to a work of visual art is distinct from ownership of any copy of that work, or of a copyright or any exclusive right under a copyright in that work. Transfer of ownership of any copy of a work of visual art, or of a copyright or any exclusive right under a copyright, shall not constitute a waiver of the rights conferred by subsection (a). Except as may otherwise be agreed by the author in a written instrument signed by the author, a waiver of the rights conferred by subsection (a) with respect to a work of visual art shall not constitute a transfer of ownership of any copy of that work, or of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive right under a copyright in that work.(Added Pub. L. 101–650, title VI, § 603(a), Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5128.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 610(a) of the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 [Pub. L. 101–650], referred to in subsec. (d), is set out as an Effective Date note below.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Pub. L. 101–650, title VI, § 610, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5132, provided that:“(a)In General.—Subject to subsection (b) and except as provided in subsection (c), this title [enacting this section, amending sections 101, 107, 113, 301, 411, 412, 501, and 506 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under this section and section 101 of this title] and the amendments made by this title take effect 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 1, 1990].“(b)Applicability.—The rights created by section 106A of title 17, United States Code, shall apply to—“(1) works created before the effective date set forth in subsection (a) but title to which has not, as of such effective date, been transferred from the author, and“(2) works created on or after such effective date, but shall not apply to any destruction, distortion, mutilation, or other modification (as described in section 106A(a)(3) of such title) of any work which occurred before such effective date.“(c)Section 608.—Section 608 [set out below] takes effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.”

Studies by Copyright Office

Pub. L. 101–650, title VI, § 608, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5132, directed the Register of Copyrights to study the extent to which authorship rights have been waived by visual artists under this section and to submit a final report to Congress not later than 5 years after Dec. 1, 1990, and also directed the Register of Copyrights to study the feasibility of implementing a requirement that, after the first sale of a work of art, would enable authors of visual art to share monetarily in the resale and enhanced value of that work, with a report to Congress due not later than 18 months after Dec. 1, 1990.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 125 cases (47 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Found., Inc. v. Büchel, 593 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Found., Inc. v. Büchel, 593 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2010). · cites it 10× “Passed in 1990, the Visual Artists Rights Act, 17 U.S.C. § 106A, was an amendment to the Copyright Act that protects the “moral rights” of certain visual artists in the works they create, consistent with Article Qbis of the Berne Convention.”

Carter v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 861 F. Supp. 303 (S.D.N.Y. 1994). · cites it 14× “grant temporary or final injunctions on such terms as it may deem reasonable to prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright.”

Simon Cheffins v. Michael Stewart, 825 F.3d 588 (9th Cir. 2016). · cites it 6× “17 U.S.C. § 106A. “The purpose of VARA is to protect two ‘moral rights’ of artists—the rights of ‘integrity’ and ‘attribution.”

Kerson v. Vermont Law Sch., Inc., 79 F.4th 257 (2d Cir. 2023). · cites it 14× “39 Statutory Appendix: Text of Relevant VARA Provisions 17 U.S.C. § 106A - Rights of certain authors to attribution and integrity (a) RIGHTS OF ATTRIBUTION AND INTEGRITY.”

Kelley v. Chicago Park Dist., 635 F.3d 290 (7th Cir. 2011). · cites it 6× “Kelley sued the Park District for violating his “right of integrity” under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (“VARA”), 17 U.S.C. § 106A, and also for breach of contract.”

Joanne Pollara v. Joseph J. Seymour & Thomas E. Casey, John Does, 344 F.3d 265 (2d Cir. 2003). · cites it 5× “In relevant part, VARA secures an author’s lifetime right to protect against “intentional distortion, mutilation, or other modification” of a “work of visual art” and against “any [intentional or grossly negligent] destruction of a work of [visual art having] recognized…”

Castillo v. G&M Realty L.P., 950 F.3d 155 (2d Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “” 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(B); see also Carter, 71 F.”

Jan Randolph Martin, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. City of Indianapolis, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee, 192 F.3d 608 (7th Cir. 1999). · cites it 5× “17 U.S.C. § 106A(a). In order to restrict VARA’s reach, the Act was limited to preventing-destruction of works of art that had attained a “recognized stature.”

Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 539 U.S. 23 (2003). “…5128 , provides that the author of an artistic work “shall have the right ... to claim authorship of that work.” 17 U. S. C. § 106A(a)(l)(A). That express right of attribution is carefully limited and focused: It attaches only to specified “work[s] of visual art,” §101, is…”

Hunter v. Squirrel Hill Assocs., L.P., 413 F. Supp. 2d 517 (E.D. Pa. 2005). · cites it 4× “” See 17 U.S.C. § 106A; see also Carter v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc.”

Flack v. Friends of Queen Catherine Inc., 139 F. Supp. 2d 526 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). · cites it 6× “17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(A). Modifications resulting from “the passage of time or the inherent nature of the materials”, however, are excluded from the scope of section 106A(a)(3)(A), id.”

Cohen v. G & M Realty L.P., 320 F. Supp. 3d 421 (E.D.N.Y 2018). · cites it 4× “Plaintiffs, 21 aerosol artists, initiated this lawsuit over four years ago by seeking a preliminary injunction under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 ("VARA"), 17 U.S.C. § 106A, against defendants Gerald Wolkoff ("Wolkoff") and four of his real estate entities to prevent…”

Show all 125 citing cases →

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(1)(B) — 1 case

Cheairs v. Thomas (W.D. Tenn. 2023).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(2) — 1 case

Baby-Cakes Studio LLC v. Robinson (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(3) — 1 case

Hunter v. Squirrel Hill Assocs., L.P., 413 F. Supp. 2d 517 (E.D. Pa. 2005). “” See 17 U.S.C. § 106A; see also Carter v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc.”

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(3)(A) — 1 case

David Lew v. The City of Los Angeles (C.D. Cal. 2021).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(A)(a) — 1 case

Mahon v. Mainsail LLC (N.D. Cal. 2020).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a) — 39 cases

Simon Cheffins v. Michael Stewart, 825 F.3d 588 (9th Cir. 2016). “17 U.S.C. § 106A. “The purpose of VARA is to protect two ‘moral rights’ of artists—the rights of ‘integrity’ and ‘attribution.”

Kelley v. Chicago Park Dist., 635 F.3d 290 (7th Cir. 2011). “Kelley sued the Park District for violating his “right of integrity” under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (“VARA”), 17 U.S.C. § 106A, and also for breach of contract.”

Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Found., Inc. v. Büchel, 593 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2010). “Passed in 1990, the Visual Artists Rights Act, 17 U.S.C. § 106A, was an amendment to the Copyright Act that protects the “moral rights” of certain visual artists in the works they create, consistent with Article Qbis of the Berne Convention.”

Carter v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 861 F. Supp. 303 (S.D.N.Y. 1994). “grant temporary or final injunctions on such terms as it may deem reasonable to prevent or restrain infringement of a copyright.”

Fahmy v. Jay-Z, 908 F.3d 383 (9th Cir. 2018).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(1) — 2 cases

Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art Found., Inc. v. Büchel, 565 F. Supp. 2d 245 (D. Mass. 2008).

Michael Pellis Architecture PLC v. M.L. Bell Constr. LLC (E.D. Va. 2023).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(1)(A) — 3 cases

Chan v. Schatz, 280 F. Supp. 3d 546 (S.D.N.Y. 2017).

Hayden v. Koons (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Foss v. E. States Exposition (1st Cir. 2025).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(1)(B) — 1 case

Goszczynska (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(2) — 2 cases

Kerson v. Vermont Law Sch., Inc., 79 F.4th 257 (2d Cir. 2023). “39 Statutory Appendix: Text of Relevant VARA Provisions 17 U.S.C. § 106A - Rights of certain authors to attribution and integrity (a) RIGHTS OF ATTRIBUTION AND INTEGRITY.”

Tobin v. the Rector (2d Cir. 2018).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3) — 13 cases

Joanne Pollara v. Joseph J. Seymour & Thomas E. Casey, John Does, 344 F.3d 265 (2d Cir. 2003). “In relevant part, VARA secures an author’s lifetime right to protect against “intentional distortion, mutilation, or other modification” of a “work of visual art” and against “any [intentional or grossly negligent] destruction of a work of [visual art having] recognized…”

Kleinman v. City of San Marcos, 597 F.3d 323 (5th Cir. 2010).

Cohen v. G & M Realty L.P., 320 F. Supp. 3d 421 (E.D.N.Y 2018). “Plaintiffs, 21 aerosol artists, initiated this lawsuit over four years ago by seeking a preliminary injunction under the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 ("VARA"), 17 U.S.C. § 106A, against defendants Gerald Wolkoff ("Wolkoff") and four of his real estate entities to prevent…”

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(A) — 13 cases

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(B) — 17 cases

Castillo v. G&M Realty L.P., 950 F.3d 155 (2d Cir. 2020). “” 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(B); see also Carter, 71 F.”

Scott v. Dixon, 309 F. Supp. 2d 395 (E.D.N.Y 2004).

Jan Randolph Martin, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. City of Indianapolis, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee, 192 F.3d 608 (7th Cir. 1999). “17 U.S.C. § 106A(a). In order to restrict VARA’s reach, the Act was limited to preventing-destruction of works of art that had attained a “recognized stature.”

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(a) — 1 case

Bernhardt v. City of St. Louis (E.D. Mo. 2022).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(b) — 2 cases

Pollara v. Seymour, 206 F. Supp. 2d 333 (N.D.N.Y. 2002).

Pollara v. Seymour, 150 F. Supp. 2d 393 (N.D.N.Y. 2001).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(l) — 2 cases

Lilley v. Stout, 384 F. Supp. 2d 83 (D.D.C. 2005).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(l)(A) — 2 cases

Giordano v. Claudio, 714 F. Supp. 2d 508 (E.D. Pa. 2010).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(b) — 2 cases

Pavia v. 1120 Avenue of the Americas Assocs., 901 F. Supp. 620 (S.D.N.Y. 1995).

Bean v. McDougal Littell, 669 F. Supp. 2d 1031 (D. Ariz. 2008).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(c) — 1 case

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(c)(1) — 4 cases

Castillo v. G&M Realty L.P., 950 F.3d 155 (2d Cir. 2020). “” 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(B); see also Carter, 71 F.”

Castillo v. G&M Realty L.P. (2d Cir. 2020).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(c)(2) — 4 cases

Phillips v. Pembroke Real Est., Inc., 459 F.3d 128 (1st Cir. 2006).

Flack v. Friends of Queen Catherine Inc., 139 F. Supp. 2d 526 (S.D.N.Y. 2001). “17 U.S.C. § 106A(a)(3)(A). Modifications resulting from “the passage of time or the inherent nature of the materials”, however, are excluded from the scope of section 106A(a)(3)(A), id.”

Phillips v. Pembroke Real Est., Inc., 819 N.E.2d 579 (Mass. 2004).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(c)(3) — 2 cases

Berrios Nogueras v. Home Depot, 330 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.P.R. 2004).

Goszczynska (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(c)(l) — 1 case

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(d) — 1 case

Guzman v. New Mexico State Dep't of Cultural Affairs (D.N.M. 2021).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(d)(2) — 2 cases

Pavia v. 1120 Avenue of the Americas Assocs., 901 F. Supp. 620 (S.D.N.Y. 1995).

Hayden v. Koons (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(d)(3) — 3 cases

Phillips v. Pembroke Real Est., Inc., 288 F. Supp. 2d 89 (D. Mass. 2003).

Carter v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 852 F. Supp. 228 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(e) — 3 cases

Lilley v. Stout, 384 F. Supp. 2d 83 (D.D.C. 2005).

Fields v. Baseline Props. LLC (W.D. Okla. 2021).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(e)(1) — 3 cases

Tobin v. the Rector (2d Cir. 2018).

— 17 U.S.C. § 106A(e)(l) — 2 cases

Martin v. City of Indianapolis, 982 F. Supp. 625 (S.D. Ind. 1997).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.