Copenhagen City Court has ruled that the photo agency Ritzau Scanpix must pay 25,000 Danish kroner in damages to artist Jens Haaning, whose provocative art piece “Take the Money and Run” stirred international debate over artistic expression and copyright law.
A Small Victory for a Controversial Artist
The Danish artist Jens Haaning has long been known for pushing boundaries in the art world. His most famous and controversial work, “Take the Money and Run,” involved a museum loaning him half a million kroner to display inside glass frames. When the frames arrived at Kunsten Museum of Modern Art in Aalborg in 2021, they were empty. The absence of cash became the artwork itself. It was meant as a protest against the often poor payment conditions artists face.
After a legal battle over the missing money, Haaning and the museum reached a settlement. Kunsten kept the piece, and Haaning explained that he had permission to retain the funds and even received an additional payment later.
The Court Case Against Ritzau Scanpix
In a new chapter of this ongoing saga, Haaning and his union, the Danish Visual Artists Association, filed a claim against the news and image agency Ritzau Scanpix. They demanded 861,000 kroner in compensation. Their argument was that Ritzau Scanpix had distributed and sold images of “Take the Money and Run” without proper authorization, which they believed violated Haaning’s copyright.
Københavns Byret, or Copenhagen City Court, has now ruled that the agency must pay 25,000 kroner in damages. While it is far less than what Haaning requested, the ruling confirms that his artistic rights were infringed.
The Arguments on Both Sides
According to Haaning’s calculations, images of his artwork had reached an estimated 2.44 billion people globally. Based on the usual sales prices of pictures through Ritzau Scanpix, typically between 3,000 and 4,000 kroner per image, he argued that his claim for roughly 861,000 kroner was reasonable.
Ritzau Scanpix, on the other hand, maintained that they had acted within the law. Their legal defense relied on an exception in Danish copyright law that allows publicly displayed artworks to be reproduced in coverage of current news events. The company stated that the photographs were taken by a photographer who had been invited by the museum itself.
Art, Law, and Public Exposure
The case highlights the fine balance between artistic ownership, media freedom, and the public’s right to information. In Denmark, these discussions are deeply connected to the country’s strong art scene, especially in its capital. For those exploring Danish contemporary art, the city’s numerous art galleries in Copenhagen often engage directly with similar social and legal issues.
Despite losing much of the claim, Jens Haaning’s partial win could still set a significant precedent. It reinforces the principle that even widely shared and debated artworks remain under the legal protection of their creators.
After the Verdict
So far, neither party has indicated whether they intend to appeal. Legal experts point out that such copyright disputes are complex, particularly when art and journalism intersect. In similar cases, Danish courts tend to weigh the artist’s moral and economic rights against the press’s need to document cultural events.
Given that the artwork has already achieved near-legendary status, some observers believe the verdict adds yet another layer of symbolic value to Haaning’s concept. After all, the artist who once turned a breach of contract into art has now seen his own copyright upheld, even if only partially.
In the end, “Take the Money and Run” continues to live up to its title. What started as a statement on underpayment has evolved into a wider discussion about ownership, value, and artistic freedom in Denmark’s cultural landscape.
Sources and References
The Danish Dream: Art Galleries in Copenhagen
The Danish Dream: Best Lawyer in Denmark for Foreigners
DR: Billedbureau skal betale 25.000 kroner i erstatning til kunstner bag ‘Take the Money and Run’
