Chapman Kelley

Chicago, Illinois
Website www.chapmankelley.com

January 24, 2017

U.S. House of Representatives

Judiciary Committee

The Honorable Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)

Judiciary Committee Chairman
2309 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5431
Fax: (202) 225-9681

Dear Representative Goodlatte,

To help ensure the Copyright Office keeps pace in the digital age, I am submitting my

comments for consideration as additional input on copyright policy issues during the open

commenting period ending January 31, 2017.

Wildflower Works as art

I am widely recognized for the artistic effort, Wildflower WorksSM (WWSM), including by such

institutions as the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University; Museum of Fine Arts,

Boston; The Schools of Art and Architecture, Yale University; the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine

Arts; and the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, among others.

My Chicago Wildflower Works 1984 2004 (CWW) was an environmental painting and

sculpture consisting of native flowers, gravel, and steel. As a non-commissioned art piece, I

designed it and self-financed its planning, development and installation. Under my direction, it
was tended to by unpaid volunteers for over two decades. At 66,000 square feet, the CWW was

installed on Chicago's lakeside Grant Park, near iconic Buckingham Fountain.

The Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 (VARA) should be amended to include works of art,

such as CWW, which consist of wildflowers, planted and arranged in an artistic design.

It is widely accepted that society is responsible for encouraging artists of each era to make

the best fine art and to preserve it for posterity. The elements of fine art is for it to be original

in concept, content, appearance, perhaps new or of new combination of materials etc. However,

it is unwise to set art guidelines, let alone rules which compel one to identify, define or

describe art in advance and to make legal constraints for it.

An important scientific benefit of using native plants is the conservation of potable water, an

obvious scarce resource on planet Earth. After it was established, and for over 20 years, CWW

required no tap water, obviously it thrived on rainwater. It blossomed through three seasons each

year and required no insecticides or fertilizer. It was an ideal public-private partnership. CWW

saved the City of Chicago millions of dollars in deferred maintenance and unused tap water. An

additional benefit to the environment, CWW provided a haven for our natural pollinators and

other beneficial creatures.

In 2004 I filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court to protect my artist rights under the Visual

Artists Rights Act of 19990, Kelley v. Chicago Park District, after the Chicago Park District

destroyed CWW without my permission. Presiding over the case was Judge David H. Coar. He

ruled CWW was a work of art, both a painting and a sculpture. He referred to Jeff Koons flower

sculpture Puppy and Alfred Calders mobiles as illustrative examples of art. (Amazingly, the 7th

Circuit court of Appeals dismissed Judge Coars examples as not being serious contentions.) If

Judge Coar considered Koons Puppy as copyrightable because it was a figurative work of art,
then my CWW is equally copyrightable because it too is figurative as it actually represents itself,

a field of wildflowers! Judge Coar ruled that my work was not original. He said, in effect, that

CWW was a copy of the Thomas Jefferson ovid-shaped (unlike CWWs elliptical shape, a

difference!) gardens at Monticello. It is my belief that legal decisions must be made through

examination of evidence presented and debated in open court, then measured by reason and legal

precedent. That President Thomas Jefferson used some ovid-shaped flower beds and some

native plants among many non-native ones and that he was not aiming to environmentally

actualize his other paintings (he was not a painter) as I did for some 20 years, demonstrates how

misdirected Judge Coar was in his ruling. Frankly, I am an avid fan of Jeffersons political

philosophy; I am not aware that he was a recognized artist. At the time of Judge Coars ruling I

was not aware of Jeffersons gardens at Monticello.

On appeal, the Seventh Circuit appeals court did not directly rule on the Is it a work of art?

issue. Instead, it said CWW was uncopyrightable because I was not the author of it, nor that it

had adequate fixation to dovetail with VARAs wording.

I am not a legal scholar but I believe CWW satisfied the fixation requirement of copyright

law. In works of art consisting of native plants, it is entirely possible, even probable, to have a

consistency of genetic material to make it possible for a work of art virtually remain the same in

every essential way, from generation to generation, through the centuries, unmatched by any

man-made print or material. Man-made material ultimately succumbs to the ravages of sun and

the elements. Thus, by means familiar to farmers and gardeners of guarding the generational

succession of animals and plants, we may have outdoor art in perpetuity. For it is not the choice

of materials from some hierarchical list of possibilities that make a work of art, but the

manipulation of whatever materials chosen by the artist into a form which allow these materials
to speak for the artist. As an additional consideration, the fixation requirement would be

challenged when confronted with an issue regarding the performing arts, as no two performances

are exactly alike.

I believe my CWW satisfies the authorship requirement of copyright law. I am a

professionally trained painter. I was trained at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts

(PAFA). The PAFA is the oldest art school (and museum) in the United States. I conceived the

idea of CWW. I am not a gardener, nor have I ever described myself to be one. That I am a

gardener and that CWW was a garden has erroneously crept into the public narrative

by outside sources which I do not control. I designed the CWW. The wildflower plugs of

CWW were meticulously arranged per my plan. As a noncommissioned public art project the

CWW was not authored by anyone or anything but me.

Lindsay Harrison, writing in The Problem with (Judge) Posner as Art Critic: Linnemeir v.

Board of Trustees of Purdue University Fort Wayne, In the context of copyright law, it is

considered bad policy for a judge to act as art critic. In Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing

Co., (1903) the Supreme Court held that a circus poster was eligible for copyright protection,

rejecting the appellants contention that because it did not rise to the level of fine art, the poster

was unworthy of protection. Writing for the majority, Justice Holmes explained: It would be a

dangerous undertaking for persons trained only to the law to constitute themselves final judges of

the worth of pictorial illustrations, outside of the narrowest and most obvious limits. At the one

extreme some works of genius would be sure to miss appreciation. Their very novelty would

make them repulsive until the public had learned the new language in which their author spoke.

It may be more than doubted, for instance, whether the etchings of Goya or the paintings of
Manet would have been sure of protection when seen for the first time. At the other end,

copyright would be denied to pictures which appealed to a public less educated than the judge.

As a final recourse, one Amici Curiae brief and one Amicus Curiae brief was filed on my

behalf with the U.S. Supreme Court. Unfortunately for the broader visual arts community in the

U.S. and the world, the Supreme Court declined to discuss the merits of the infringement issue.

Eight years after I filed my lawsuit against the Chicago Park District, in 2013 I was invited to

be a panelist to discuss Kelley v. Chicago Park District, at the annual meeting of the Copyright

Society of the United States of America (CSUSA) held at the historic Sagamore Hotel in upstate

New York. The opening remarks at the meeting were delivered by Maria Pallante, then-Register

of Copyrights, U.S. Copyright Office. Given my active participation as a panelist, I believe I

have standing for Congress to consider amending VARA to include works of art, such as CWW,

which consist of wildflowers, planted and arranged in an artistic design.

Last year Grant D. Talabay of the John Marshall Law School, Chicago, Illinois, wrote a

blistering paper titled, Wildflower Works: A Foregone Conclusion - Copyright, Artists' Rights,

Chapman Kelley, and the Ill-Fated Seventh Circuit Decisions. Access it here,

http://www.slideshare.net/GrantDavidTalabay/kelleypaper1

There are, however, many things that the legal world should provide for these most noble

expressions of mankind. Artists should be protected from being backlisted for criticizing art

museums. Among the first would be to enforce the laws regarding nonprofits that they must only

operate as 100% in the public interest and not for the personal profit of individuals or groups of

art market speculators and manipulators in this unregulated commodity that exists and dominates

the legal misuse of our public institutions and negates the true purpose and value of fine art in

society. If Congress seriously wishes to regain respect for the visual arts world, they would
insure the legal forbiddance of not-for-profit institutions to be used for the personal profit of art

market manipulators.

Recently, I created the Chapman Kelley Wildflower Works Foundation. The Internal Revenue

has approved the Foundation as a tax-exempt nonprofit under section 501(c)(3) of the Code.

The Foundation will allow for greater participation in the movement to, among other things,

educate the public how to transform the current water-guzzling landscaping to 100% indigenous

plant species, otherwise known as native plants, which is an offshoot and further development of

an idea I pioneered in 1976 via my Wildflower Works SM (U.S. Service Mark) concept. One very

important result of such landscaping will be the conservation of a most precious scarce resource:

potable water. An additional benefit to the environment of such a landscape will be to provid a

haven for our natural pollinators and other beneficial creatures.

As such, this thrust will entail a public relations effort along with information sessions and

presentations for those not familiar with the concept. Our landscape professionals, physical

scientists and others will share their knowledge and the "hard facts" of how this effort will help

alleviate environmental damage. The Foundation will provide free lectures in addition to ongoing

video segments to be available on our forthcoming website. Essentially, people will walk away

empowered to change the world.

Once implemented, the changed landscape will lead to what we conservatively estimate to be

50% in water savings for the average homeowner and others. This immediate economic savings

can then be reinvested to re-landscape to all-native plant species, thus paying for itself!

It is very gratifying that so many individuals and even large groups have adopted the use of

native plants, but is equally disappointing that they have almost universally misunderstood the
need to transform our residential and decorative landscapes to 100% native plants to reap the

critical environmental benefits. We much catch up.

Third-party recognition of CWW is listed below; for more material please visit

chapmankelley.com.

2017 - Spring Quarter, date TBA, Guest speaker DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois
2016 Clarida, Robert, Copyrightability of Conceptual Art: An Idea Whose Time Hasn't
Come, 39 Colum. J.L. & Arts 365
2016 Said, Zahr K., Copyright's Illogical Exclusion of Conceptual Art, 39 Colum. J.L. &
Arts 335
August 3, 2016 - Grant, Daniel, The More Art Changes, the More Urgent an Update to the
Visual Artists' Rights Act Becomes, New York Observer
March 10, 2015 - Kwall, Roberta Rosenthal, Living Gardens, Living Art, and Living
Tradition (March 10, 2015). 5 IP Theory Journal 73 (2015). Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2576379
Sept. 4, 2014 - Grant, Daniel, The Law Against Artists: Public Art Often Loses Out in
Court, New York Observer
May 29, 2014 - Carpenter, Megan M. and Hetcher, Steven A., Function Over Form:
Bringing the Fixation Requirement into the Modern Era (May 29, 2014). 82 Fordham
Law Review 2221 (2014). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2443520
June 13, 2013 - DePaul University, College of Law and the Center for Intellectual
Property Law & Information Technology (CIPLIT) and The Chicago Bar
Association Media and Entertainment Committee "The Visual Artists Rights Act,
Copyright and Conceptual Art: Creating and Protecting Art After Chapman Kelley v.
Chicago Park District"
June 10, 2013 - Panelist at the Copyright Society of U.S.A. annual conference
October 11, 2012 - Harvard Journal on Sports and Entertainment Law, "Fixation and
Authorship in Living Art: A Weakness in Copyright Law" by Erica Esposito
June 13, 2012 CLANCCO, "Artist Talk: When Cancellations Become Form."
June 5, 2013 - Ericsson, Lily (2013) "Creative Quandary: The State of
Copyrightability for Organic Works of Art," Seton Hall Journal of Sports and
Entertainment Law: Vol. 23: Iss. 2, Article 4.
Available at: http://erepository.law.shu.edu/sports_entertainment/vol23/iss2/4
2012/2013 - Henry Lydiate, University of the Arts, London, "What is Art?"
Southwestern Law School, Journal of International Media & Entertainment Law, Vol.
4, No.2, accessed August 31, 2013
Above: Chicago Wildflower Works (1984 2004) a noncommissioned work of public
art, an environmental painting, located on lakeside Grant Park, Chicago, Illinois.
Photo courtesy Chapman Kelley

May 17- 18, 2012 - Annual conference International Bar Association, by David
Liatowitsch, "New Art: New Legal Challenges," Museo Nazionale Delle Arti del XXI
Secolo, Rome, Italy
Feb. 29, 2012 - Kwall, Roberta Rosenthal, The Lessons of Living Gardens and Jewish
Process Theology for Authorship and Moral Rights (February 29, 2012). Vanderbilt
Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2017955 (revised June 22, 2012)
Oct. 1, 2011 - Radio Nederland Wereldomroep (Radio Netherlands Worldwide),
Earth Beat with Marni Chesterton. Listen to the conversation online here
Sept. 30, 2011 - The Art Newspaper, "This copyright confusion ought to end" by
Donn Zaretsky. issue 228, October 2011
Sept. 4, 2011 - Chicago Wildflower Works blueprint 1984 (legal evidence)
Sept. 4, 2011 - Chicago Wildflower Works by Kelley, watercolor 1984 (legal
evidence)
Sept. 4, 2011 - Chicago Wildflower Works scale model by Peter Block Architects,
1984 (legal evidence)
Aug. 24, 2011 - Intellectual Property Association of Chicago, "Amicus curiae brief for
Chapman Kelley filed with U.S. Supreme Court
Aug. 24, 2011 - Amici Curiae brief filed with U.S. Supreme Court by visual artists
Blane de St. Croix, Thomas Lawson, Molly Dilworth, arts organizations and arts
educators the Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts and the Arts and Business Council of
Greater Boston, read the brief here.
Spring 2011 - Carpenter, Megan M., Drawing a Line in the Sand: Copyright Law and
New Museums (October 5, 2010). Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 13,
No. 3, Spring 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1687735
July 26, 2011 - D Magazine, Front Row, by Peter Simek, "Dallas Artist Chapman
Kelley Takes Wildflower Case to Supreme Court," accessed July 26, 201
June 1, 2011 - Oxford University Press, Journal of Intellectual Property and Practice,
by Jeff John Roberts, "Rare US moral rights ruling by Seventh Circuit; no protection
for Chicago garden," Subscription required
May - June 2011 - Art Asia Pacific, by Chin-Chin Yap, "The Un-Edenic State of
Copyright," accessed May 4, 2011
April 27, 2011 - The Media Institute, by Prof. Randal C. Picker, Univ. of Chicago Law
School, "A Walk in a Chicago Park," accessed April 28, 2011
April 21, 2011 - The Art Newspaper, by Martha Lufkin, "Chicago court denies artist's
copyright appeal, Chapman Kelley will now seek an appeal with the US Supreme
Court" Accessed April 21, 2011
Spring 2011 - Maryland Lawyers for the Arts, Arts Brief "Wildflower Garden Cannot
Be Copyrighted, Appeals Court Says" by Marcia Semmes, Accessed April 18, 2011
April 18, 2011 - Daily Telegraph by Rupert Christiansen, "It's a boy--and 25 minutes
to curtain up [Flower Power--but is it art?]" accessed April 18, 2011
April 14, 2011 - JETLawBlog: The Official Blog of the Vanderbilt Journal of
Entertainment and Technology Law, by Kat Kubis, "Uncertain Future for Conceptual
Art" accessed April 18, 2011
Mar. 22, 2011 - Artinfo.com, by Emma Allen, "Copyrights and Copy Wrongs:
Learning from the Legal Precedents Set by Jeff Koons, Shepard Fairey, and Others"
accessed March 23, 2011
Mar. 7, 2011 - IPKat, by Jeff John Roberts, edited by Jeremy Phillips, "Wild flowers
give Chicago city bosses a run for their money" accessed March 10, 2011
March 2011 - D Magazine, by Peter Simek, "Art Cops," Subscription required
Feb. 25, 2011 - Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, "Seventh Circuit Denies Moral
Rights Protection to Chicago Garden" by By Albert Wang Edited by Matthew
Gelfand, accessed February 25, 2011
Feb. 23, 2011 - Chicago Tribune, Voice of the People, "Artistic Success," by Council
for Artists' Rights, accessed March 3, 2011
Feb. 23, 2011 - Mallesons Stephen Jaques (Australia), IP Whiteboard blog,
"Copyright in a Chrysanthemum?" by George Croft, accessed February 2011
Above: Chicago Wildflower Works (1984 2004) a noncommissioned work of public
art, an environmental painting, located on lakeside Grant Park, Chicago, Illinois.
Photo courtesy Chapman Kelley

Feb. 21, 2011 - Dallas Art History blog, "U.S. Court of Appeals short changes Dallas
artist's solution to world's water supply," by Sam Blain, accessed February 22, 2011
Feb. 21, 2011 - American University Intellectual Property Brief, Washington College
of Law, "A Garden is Planted, but Never Authored" by Mark Trantos, accessed
February 22, 2011
Feb. 17, 2011 - Tech Dirt.com, "Millennium Park Garden Deemed Not Copyrightable,
Because Gardens Are Not Authored" by Mike Masnick, accessed February 22, 2011
Feb. 17. 2011 - Seattle Copyright Watch, "Fixation in Copyright Does Not Extend to
Wild Flower Garden" by Tonya Gisselberg, accessed February 22, 2011
Feb. 16. 2011 - International Municipal Lawyers Association, Newsletter #3, "Implied
Contract Based on Casual Remark," accessed March 9, 2011
Feb. 16, 2011 - Clancco.com, "Court: Not All Conceptual Art May Be Copyrighted"
by Sergio Muoz Sarmiento, accessed February 22, 2011
Feb. 16, 2011 - Law.com, The National Law Journal, "Garden not eligible for
copyright protection, 7th Circuit rules" by Sheri Qualters
Feb. 16, 2011 - Art Law Blog, "7th Circuit Wildflower Decision (Updated), by
Donn Zaretsky, accessed February 22, 2011
Feb. 16, 2011 - Jennifer Kuhn, "The Wildflower Case: Chapman Kelley v. Chicago
Park District. The Seventh Circuit holds no protection for gardens, VARA loses
again." accessed April 3, 2011
Feb. 15, 2011 - Chicago Tribune, "Appeals court backs city over wildflower gardens.
Artist sought federal protection for project in Bicentennial Plaza" by Erika Slife,
accessed March 3, 2010
Feb. 15, 2011 - More Law, Lexapedia, Chapman Kelley v Chicago Park District by
Kent Morlan, accessed April 20, 2011
Dec. 26, 2010 - Dallas Art History blog, "Welcome to the Dallas Art History
blog" by Sam Blain, accessed January 6, 2011
July 7, 2010 - WRR 101.1 FM, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Classic Cafe, (live broadcast) with
Tempie Lindsey
June 19, 2010 - Texas Wesleyan University, College of Law - Intellectual
Property, Legal Issues Faced by Galleries, Museums and Artists, Second Annual
Colloquium
June 1, 2010 - Clancco.com, Law students crazy over Visual Artists Rights Act,
accessed June 2, 2010
March 25, 2010 - Radio Nederland Wereldomroep (Radio Netherlands Worldwide),
Earth Beat, with Marnie Chesterton. Listen to the conversation online here
February 10, 2010 - Land Lies Fallow blog, Nottingham, UK, Chapman Kelley -
Wildflower Artist accessed February 11, 2010
2009 - Virginia Cascio, Hardly a Walk in the Park: Courts Hostile Treatment of Site-
Specific Works under VARA, 20 DEPAUL J. ART, TECH. & INTELL. PROP. L. 167
(2009) abstract accessed April 15, 2010 Dec. 7,
2009 - Public Art Network, an arm of Americans for the Arts, (repost of Deanna
Isaacs Dec. 3, 2009 article) Chapman Kelley's Mutilated Garden posted by Peggy
Kendellen, accessed on February 14, 2010 2010 -
North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology Volume 11, Issue 3: Special 2010 -
Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) and the Protection of Digital Works of
"Photographic" Art by Llewellyn Joseph Gibbons, page 531
Dec. 3, 2009 - Chicago Reader, The Business, Chapman Kelley's Mutilated
Garden by Deanna Isaacs, page 10
November 2009 - Art Monthly (London), Art Law, "Moral Rights: Chapman Kelley v
Chicago Park District", by Henry Lydiate, p. 37, read it here
November 2009 - State Bar of Michigan, International Property Law
Section Proceedings, "Copyright as the Stealth Issue in Real Estate and Urban
Renewal", by Danielle Gaier, page 8-9, color illustrations page 11
Aug. 24, 2009 - NCAC.org (National Coalition Against Censorship), "Kelley Vs.
Chicago Park District", accessed on Aug. 24, 2009, read it here
June 19, 2009 - Clancco.com "Chapman Kelley files Response & Reply brief",
acccessed June 23,2009, read it here
June 17, 2009 - RSA Arts & Ecology (Royal Society for the encouragement of the
Arts, Manufactures and Commerce) blog, "City digs up wildflowers: artist sues", by
William Shaw, accessed June 17, 2009, read it here
June 5, 2009 - CLANCO.com "Chapman Kelley: My Art is Original", acccessed June
5,2009, read it here
June 4, 2009 - Los Angeles Times, Arts - Living, Culture Monster by Lisa Fung
June, 2009 - The Art Newspaper "Artist Chapman Kelley launches federal appeal
over Chicago Wildflower work", by Martha Lufkin, accessed June 5, 2009, read the
article here
May 27, 2009 - The Art + Law + Blog at artlawteam.com "The Price for Planting",
by attorney John-Paul Benitez, accessed May 26, 2009, read it here
May 12, 2009 - The Art Law Blog "This case has profound implications for artists",
by Donn Zaretsky, accessed May 12, 2009, read the blog here
May 2009 - Rights &Reproductions Information Network Community Portal wiki
viewable here
Mar. 2009 - March Law Review, "Copyright Claim for Park Wildflower Display," by
James C. Kozlowski J.D. Ph.D, read the pdf file here
Mar. 2009 - Health & Tourism Court Reports, George Mason University School of
Recreation, by James C. Kozlowski J.D. Ph.D.
Mar. 2009 - Parks & Recreation Magazine, National Recreation and Park
Association, Law Review, "Seeds of Disagreement," by James C. Kozlowski J.D.
Ph.D.
2009 - Charles Cronin. 2009. "DEAD ON THE VINE: LIVING AND CONCEPTUAL ART
AND VARA" ExpressO, available here
Winter 2008 - "Artists and Moral Rights: Do You Have Any?", Vol.1, Issue 1,
Maryland Lawyers for the Arts, by Cynthia Blake Sanders, Volunteer Lawyer, read the
article here
Nov. 2008 - The Art Newspaper, "Judge overturns artist's rights ruling" Page 8, by
Martha Lufkin
Oct, 6, 2008 - Chicago IP Litigation blog, "Famous Grant Park Wildflower Works
both Sculpture and Painting but Not Protected by Copyright or VARA." by R. David
Donoghue view it here
Oct. 3, 2008 - Chicago Sun Times, "Artist was right to stand up for free speech",
Letters to the editor, Page 28, by John Viramontes
Oct. 1, 2008 - The Art Law Blog "Ugh", by Donn Zaretsky, accessed Nov. 21, 2008,
read blog here
Oct.1, 2008 - NBC5 website "Artist awarded $1 for lost work", accessed Nov. 21,
2008 read entire article here
Oct. 1, 2008 - Chicago Sun Times, "Flower power, to a point," Page 9, by Andrew
Herrmann
June 13, 2008 - Chicago Tribune, "When will the Park District learn" Voice of the
People, Editorial page, by John Viramontes, read the letter here
Dec. 2007 - Chicago Artists' News, "Travails and Triumphs: The Visual Artists Rights
Act", Page 6, by Daniel Grant, read the article here
Nov. 22, 2007 - Chicago Reader, The Business, "Restored or Wrecked?" by Deanna
Isaacs. Read the article here
Nov. 2007 - The Art Newspaper, "Fields of flowers destroyed by City of Chicago was
a sculpture, says judge", Page 7, by Martha Lufkin
Nov. 7, 2007 - f news magazine, "Art Vs.The Parks Department", by Katherine Pill,
read it here
Oct. 21, 2007 - Chicago Tribune, "Artist fights to hide a work", by Ameet Sachdev,
read it here
Oct. 14, 2007 - Chicago Tribune, "Wildflowers wrecked by city's arrogance", Voice of
the People, Editorial page, Page 6, by V.A. Smith, Chicago, IL
Oct. 8, 2007 - ArtsJournal blog, "Protecting the Landscape", by Douglas McLennan.
Read the blog here
Oct. 7, 2007 Oct. 7, 2007 - Chicago Tribune, "Weedy Masterpiece", Editorial page,
read it here
Oct. 5, 2007 - Skyline-Chicago, "Wildflowers were 'art'", by Anne Gerber
Oct. 4, 2007 - Chicago Reader, "A Garden Can Be Art", by Deanna Isaacs, (scroll to
bottom of web page) read it here
Oct. 2, 2007 Edward Winkleman blog, "VARA Controversy in the Heartland Settled:
Verdict to the Artist", accessed Nov. 21, 2008, read blog here
Oct. 1, 2007 - Chicago Sun Times, "Cheers for artist", Page 34, in Talkback at
SunTimes.com
Sept. 29, 2007 - Slate Magazine, "Wildflower Artist Wins VARA Prelim Decision in
Federal Court", read the article here
Sept. 28, 2007 - NBC5-affiliate Telemundo, Chapman Kelley interviewed by Ms.
Leda Santodomingo, Chicago, IL
Sept. 27, 2007 CBS2 Chicago "Artist May Be Paid For Cut Flowers In Grant
Park", from the Chicago Sun Times News Group Wire 2006. Read the complete
article here
Sept. 27, 2007 - Chicago Sun Times, "Judge: Garden was art", Page 8, by Andrew
Herrmann
Sept. 25, 2007 - Chicago Public Radio - WBEZ 91.5 FM, "Legal Questions Bloom
Around Chicago Garden", interviewed by Robert Wildeboer, listen here
Sept. 24, 2007 - Chicago Sun Times, "Art or Weeds?", Page 6, by Andrew Herrmann
Sept. 14, 2007 U.S. Northern District Court 18-page instructions from the Court
Nov. 18, 2006 - Visual Artists Rights Act lecture with Dallas, Texas, Esq. Frank P.
Hernandez, presented by the Council for Artists' Rights, at Hot House, Chicago, IL
July 10, 2006 - Chicago Public Radio - WBEZ 91.5 FM, "Artist Sues City over
Wildflowers", interviewed by Jenny Lawton, listen here
2006 NBC5-affiliate Telemundo, Chapman Kelley interviewed by Ms. Leda
Santodomingo, Chicago, IL
June 16, 2006 - Chicago Reader, "Is Gardening Art?", Page 2, by Deanna
Isaacs, read it here
June 10-11, 2006 - "Public Art Under Attack", 2nd annual grassroots public protest:
Outrage Against the Destruction of the Chicago Wildflower Works, Chicago, IL
April 5, 2006 - Chicago Sun Times, "Lost Garden", Letters to the editor, Editorial
page, by John Viramontes
April 5, 2006 - Chicago Tribune, "Landscape Lacking", Voice of the People web log,
Editorial page, by John Viramontes
March 29, 2006 - 34th Annual American Law Institute - American Bar Association
Program "Managing and Protecting Museum Intellectual Property", panel: "Is That
Lawn a Sculpture? What Every Museum Needs To Know About the Visual Artists
Rights Act", Legal Issues in Museum Administration, Cosponsored by The
Smithsonian Institution with the cooperation of the American Association of
Museums, presented at the Millennium Knickerbocker, Chicago, IL, access the
item here
Winter 2005 - Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal, "Revisiting the Visual Artists
Rights Act of 1990. A Follow-up Survey About Awareness and Waiver". Vol. 13, No.
2, Winter 2005 by RayMing Chang. Accessible here
July 11, 2005 - Chicago Tribune, "Let Promotion Bloom", Voice of the People,
Editorial page, by John A. Viramontes, Chicago, IL
Above: Chicago Wildflower Works (1984 2004) a noncommissioned work of public
art, an environmental painting, located on lakeside Grant Park, Chicago, Illinois.
Photo courtesy Chapman Kelley
July, 2005 - Landscape Architecture, "Art Attack: The Plot Thins", Page 28, by Jane
Roy Brown
June 11-12, 2005 - "Public Art Under Attack", 1st annual grassroots public protest:
Outrage Against the Destruction of the Chicago Wildflower Works, Chicago, IL
Spring 2005 - Commenced "Public Art Under Attack", letters to the editor writing
initiative to denounce the destruction of the Chicago Wildflower Works, Chicago, IL
Winter 2004 - Initiated "Public Art Under Attack", petition-signing campaign
launched to rally public support for public art the Chicago Wildflower Works,
Chicago, IL
Dec. 1, 2004 - Chicago Tribune, "Park District sued over wildflower art; '84 Grant
Park garden cut in size", Page 3, by Hal Dardick
Dec. 1, 2004 - Chicago Sun Times, "Wildflower garden artist sues city over its
destruction", Page 14, by Andrew Herrmann (Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990 issue)
July 18, 2004 - Chicago Tribune, "Garden too wild for new landscape; wildflower
artist sees part of work now destroyed", by Hal Dardick (Visual Artists Rights Act of
1990 issue)
Summer 1993 - "Green Landscaping with Native Plants", in John Marshall Law
Review, Volume 26, Summer 1993, Number 4, Page 15, from U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, retrieved on April 27, 2008. Read the article here
Dec. 23, 1988 - Chicago Reader, "This Garden is Condemned" by Fran Zell (1st
Amendment issue)
Aug. 18, 1988 - Chicago Tribune, "Parks make wildflower garden offer", by William
Recktenwald (1st Amendment issue)
Aug. 5, 1988 - Chicago Sun Times, "Artist sues to maintain flower power", Page 13,
by Adrienne Drell (1st Amendment issue)
July 6, 1988 - Chicago Tribune, "Gone To Seed: How One Artist's Dream of
a Wildflower Garden Turned into a Blooming Nightmare", Page 15, by Barbara
Sullivan (1st Amendment issue)
June 1988 - Chicago Artists' Coalition News, "Chapman Kelley Vs. Chicago Park
District", Page 6, 7, by Naomi Schreier (1st Amendment issue)
May 7, 1988 - Chicago Tribune, "Consider the lilies of the field," Editorial

I would be willing to testify as a witness.

Respectfully submitted,

__________________________
Chapman Kelley
Cc:

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.)

Dean of the House of Representatives
2426 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5126
Fax: (202) 225-0072