Last week, we noted that Annie Leibovitz and her lender Art Capital Group had reached a settlement in which Annie Leibovitz would be allowed to restructure her debt instead of transferring her entire life’s work to Art Capital Group.
In our post, we also noted that Reuters had used the word “predatory” to describe Art Capital Group. Specifically, we said:
Art Capital objected to our noting that Reuters had described the firm as “predatory.” In several phone calls from its representatives, followed by a letter from its attorneys, the firm has since demanded that we:
- “Retract the defamatory statements made…about Art Capital”
- “Remove the link to the Reuters article”
- Publicly apologise
We must say: Until we received the urgent phone calls from Art Capital Group’s reputation-management firm and the letter (below) from its attorneys, we actually felt some sympathy for Art Capital Group. Flaky Annie Leibovitz, it seemed, had entered a voluntary arrangement with the firm, and then failed to hold up her end of the bargain. So how else was Art Capital supposed to collect other than to take possession of Annie Leibovitz’s many houses and life’s work?
After observing how Art Capital has behaved with us, however, and reviewing the logic Reuters’ Felix Salmon used to support his use of the description “really predatory”, we’re feeling a lot more sympathy for Annie Leibovitz.
NOW WATCH: Briefing videos
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.