VARA basically grants the artist full ownership of any work they do, and can extend to artwork that they don’t physically own anymore.

It’s vague and uses the term “recognized stature” to determine whether or not their work is protected from any destruction purposeful or not.

Not a lawyer, but from my understanding of the law, if, for example, I sell you a painting, and you destroy that painting, if I meet the vague requirements of being of “recognized stature” I could sue you for damages.

Edit: okay I am a bit wrong, it does have to be for public exhibition, so it doesn’t extend as far as my example, but it is still a bit ridiculous that it extends to graffiti

VARA basically grants the artist full ownership of any work they do, and can extend to artwork that they don’t physically own anymore.

It’s vague and uses the term “recognized stature” to determine whether or not their work is protected from any destruction purposeful or not.

Not a lawyer, but from my understanding of the law, if, for example, I sell you a painting, and you destroy that painting, if I meet the vague requirements of being of “recognized stature” I could sue you for damages.