With the law, it's a balancing act . . .

Queue on 29/5/2015 at 04:22

"...if we ban every bizzaro Boulder character that causes a stir, we’re left with nothing more than a college town with a Target that’s about to become Google’s new headquarters."

And you don't think that alone is reason enough? Seriously, it is the responsibility of today's law enforcement to make sure quaint towns are safe for corporate banality by purging anything that could potentially stand in the way of making a buck off of homogenized Chinese trinkets, or might cause an independent thought. Don't ever forget, art is dangerous to the corporation mindset -- unless it's approved by committee and a team of lawyers.

(http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/boulder-cops-declare-rock-stacking-a-jailable-offense-to-stop-local-artist-who-spent-7-years-creating-sculptures/) http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/boulder-cops-declare-rock-stacking-a-jailable-offense-to-stop-local-artist-who-spent-7-years-creating-sculptures/

demagogue on 29/5/2015 at 05:03

Yeah ... except in this case the city's lawyer was the good guy that saved the day.
The ordinance was clearly being interpreted overbroadly by the fuzz, and it's the lawyers' job to stop that kind of thing.

Just saying.

Edit: The problematic one is public chalk art, since in caselaw it doesn't get protected as speech and is considered graffiti, even though you can erase it with a hose. Public rock arrangement, not so much a problem.

Tocky on 8/6/2015 at 05:31

(Peter Grichttp://www.gric.at/kleinteile/paintings.jpg) Peter Gric had a lot to say on this last week facebook wise. If they were being stacked high enough to do damage when they fell I would say different but until then I'm going with his assessment that it is a form of art that hurts nobody. Grab got free publicity out of it though so it worked out. As an artist Grab is no Gric however.