Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The latter is funny to me, because claiming the removal of paint makes a work "irreparably damaged" just sounds like insurance fraud to me.


The piece could, in theory, be restored to its previous form. But the question comes down to: is the art the result or the process that creates it? If it's the latter, then it can never be properly restored.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: