A Whitehorse artist is not satisfied with a court-ordered public apology from the Yukon Arts Centre for displaying his art without his permission and without attribution.

Owen Williams is a calligrapher trained in England. He developed his craft into an art practice.

He pursued two lawsuits against the centre. Both were the result of the centre displaying his art without his knowledge nor attribution between January and March 2009.

Both lawsuits were in the Small Claims Court of Yukon. The first one was dismissed due to issues with the statute of limitations. The second lawsuit resulted in the court order subject to the disagreement.

It was filed in 2017.

The Star obtained a copy of the order, dated Nov. 5. According to the document, territorial court Judge Peter Chisholm ordered that the centre give Williams a letter of apology, to be published in the media.

The Star published the apology Nov. 27. It was an idea that came up during case management.

Chisholm ordered that both parties would have to agree to the contents of the apology. He added it had to acknowledge that Williams’ artwork had been displayed by the centre without his permission nor proper attribution.

Williams believes the arts centre has not complied with the terms of the court order. He told the Star recently the apology letter would have been enough to solve the issue, if issued properly. He was under the impression that the apology had to be approved of in advance.

He claims he was sent a copy of the letter by email, but had missed seeing it.

He read the letter and concluded it is not a proper apology.

“I can’t accept it because it’s not a public apology,” Williams said.

He feels the letter is not up to his standard, and argues it shows the centre does not want to take responsibility for the mistake. He believes there should have been more information in the letter, including:

• the specifics of what happened;

• why it happened; and

• explaining why displaying art in such fashion is wrong.

“They don’t do that in this letter,” Williams alleges.

He said it’s tough for an artist to see his or her work reused without permission, adding he had an emotional reaction. He added he felt physical pain.

He called the incident a violation of his exhibition, reproduction and moral rights. He added he takes his copyrights very seriously.

He would like to see the arts centre approach him with a draft apology they both can work on.

“That would be a good start,” Williams said.

He would like to see a new apology published locally, in two national newspapers and in The Art Newspaper, an international monthly publication.

He wants the apology to appear in English, French and in one Indigenous language.

He feels artists’ rights are important, and cultural institutions should respect that.

“It’s unfortunate that there’s been this breakdown,” Williams said.

Casey Prescott, the art centre’s CEO, feels the matter has been settled.

A public apology was published locally as instructed, he noted. He said the centre has admitted to using Williams’ art without his consent and proper attribution.

“We now see this matter as closed,” Prescott said in an email response.

Prescott went into further detail in a call to the Star.

He explained the public apology was agreed to as an alternative to taking the matter to trial. The court ordered the centre to write the letter of apology to resolve the issue.

“We followed the court order,” Prescott said.

While Williams may express online his dissatisfaction with the apology, he said, the centre followed what Chisholm directed it to do.

He added that the court order did not include any provision that would give Williams the power to approve the wording of the apology. He said the order only covered distribution of the message.

As far as Prescott is concerned, the matter is settled. He feels the centre has taken responsibility for displaying Williams’ art without his consent nor proper attribution.

The centre will not write another apology letter in line with Williams’ demands, Prescott added.