OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Cady Noland, an artist, initiated this copyright action in connection with the display and attempted sale of what she alleges to have been an unauthorized copy of one of her wooden sculptures. Defendants are two German art galleries, the owner of one of the galleries, and a German art collector. Noland’s allegations are largely based on Defendants’ replacement of the sculpture’s wooden parts after years of outdoor exposure had caused the sculpture to begin to rot. (Dkt. No. 71 (“SAC”)
28-34, 38-40.) Before the Court now is Defendants’ motion to dismiss the operative Second Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 74.) For the reasons that follow, Defendants’ motion is granted.I. BackgroundPlaintiff Cady Noland is a visual artist. (SAC 1.) This suit is about Noland’s 1990 sculpture called “Log Cabin Façade.” (SAC 4.) The artwork (“the Log Cabin”) resembles the front facade of a log cabin in size and structure, with two short side walls for support. (SAC 5.) The facade’s discernible features include a door-shaped opening, two window-shaped openings with American flags hung below them, and a triangular-shaped top. (Id.) Noland included the following photograph of the artwork as part of her Second Amended Complaint:(SAC at 3.)Noland claims to own a copyright to the Log Cabin. (SAC 8.) However, when she applied to the Copyright Office for registration of a copyright in the artwork, the Copyright Office denied her application. (Id.) Noland has requested reconsideration of the Copyright Office’s denial of her registration application, and her request remained pending at the time the Second Amended Complaint was filed. (SAC 8.)In 1990, Defendant Wilhelm Schurmann, a German art collector, bought the Log Cabin. (SAC 11.) Schurmann exhibited the Log Cabin at various locations in Germany, including a ten-year stint at a museum in Aachen, Germany. (SAC
