The Mondrian Trust claims a 1930 painting is still protected—citing “dual copyrights,” Spanish law, and a misreading of the Copyright Act.
Last February, I wrote about a troubling trend: estates and rightsholders making aggressive (and legally questionable) claims to works that have entered the public domain. From Tintin to Charlie Chaplin to Sherlock Holmes, the playbook is consistent: send threatening letters, cite convoluted legal theories, and expect recipients to back down rather than fight.
A year later, the pattern continues. Now, it’s the work of Dutch abstract painter Piet Mondrian. And this time, the estate’s legal argument is more Dada than De Stijl.
A Celebration Interrupted
On January 1, 2026, Piet Mondrian’s iconic Composition II with Red, Blue, and Yellow (1930) entered the U.S. public domain, 95 years after its first publication. An art magazine marked the occasion with a Public Domain Day roundup, noting that the painting—along with works featuring Betty Boop, William Faulkner, and The Little Engine That Could—was now free to use, adapt, and celebrate. Standard Public Domain Day fare.
The Mondrian/Holtzman Trust saw things differently.
Piet Mondrian died in New York in 1944, leaving his estate to his close friend and fellow artist Harry Holtzman. The Trust is now administered by Holtzman’s descendants—professional stewards of Mondrian’s rights rather than heirs of the artist himself.
When the art publication reached out to the Mondrian/Holtzman Trust to confirm the painting’s public domain status, the Trust responded that the work remains protected in the United States—and warned that reproducing it without permission constitutes copyright infringement.
The correspondence, shared with me by Jennifer Jenkins, Director of Duke Law’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain, is a masterclass in legal confusion.
Dual Copyrights and Spanish Detours
The Trust’s argument rests primarily on the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), which restored U.S. copyright protection in 1996 to certain foreign works that had previously fallen into the public domain for failing to comply with U.S. formalities. According to the Trust:
“Between 1944 and 1996 the work of Piet Mondrian not meeting the technical requirements of U.S. copyright law, was in public domain in the US. In 1996 the Uruguay Round Agreement Act… gave protection to the images by foreign artists which were first published outside of the United States between 1923 and 1977 (95 years from the date of first publication).”
So far, so good. But then the letter takes a turn:
“The duration of the U.S. protection for all other works… was for 70 years from the artist’s date of death. This is the reason of the dual copyright’s terms on the works of Piet Mondrian.”
To be clear, copyright law isn’t a choose your own adventure book. There’s no such thing as a “dual copyright” regime under U.S. law—no parallel terms running simultaneously, no option to select whichever happens to be longer.
Different categories of works receive different terms, but each work falls into one category based on its actual history. For works first published outside the United States between 1923 and 1977, URAA restoration provides the remainder of a 95-year term from first publication. For works created before January 1, 1978 that were neither published nor copyrighted, Section 303 of the Copyright Act supplies a term of life plus 70 years.
The Trust appears to be blending these categories to suggest Mondrian’s works might enjoy whichever term is most favorable. But even on its own terms, the argument fails. Mondrian died in 1944. Any of his works subject to a life-plus-70 regime would have entered the public domain on January 1, 2015—more than a decade ago.
Then the letter pivots to Spanish law, citing an 1879 statute and a decision of the Spanish Supreme Court (as one naturally does when disputing U.S. copyright over a Dutch painter’s work).
Spanish law governs copyright in Spain. U.S. law governs copyright in the United States. And even under the Spanish rule the Trust invokes—life plus 80 years for certain authors—Mondrian’s works (he died in 1944) would have entered the public domain no later than 2025.
What the Law Actually Says
Under U.S. copyright law, works published before 1978 are protected for 95 years from the date of first publication. Composition II with Red, Blue, and Yellow was published in 1930. The painting entered the public domain on January 1, 2026—exactly when Duke’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain said it would.
Yes, URAA restored copyright in Mondrian’s works in 1996 after they had originally lapsed into the U.S. public domain for failure to comply with formalities. But URAA restoration doesn’t extend the term. It fills the gap. Section 104A of the Copyright Act is clear: a restored work is protected only for “the remainder of the term of copyright that the work would have otherwise been granted in the United States.”
For a work published in 1930, that remainder ran out on December 31, 2025.
The Chilling Effect, Again
What makes this episode especially frustrating is the target. The art publication wasn’t selling prints or producing merchandise. It ran an educational article celebrating works entering the public domain, complete with proper attribution and links to legal resources.
For doing its homework and reaching out to confirm the painting’s copyright status, it received a warning letter.
That outcome isn’t accidental. The Trust’s website invites anyone wishing to reproduce Mondrian’s work to “contact us about images you wish to reproduce… so that we can check on the copyright status and clear rights if needed.” The implication is clear: ask permission first, and the answer may depend less on the law than on who’s asking.
Complexity is the strategy. If the rules sound uncertain enough, people keep asking. And if people keep asking, licensing fees keep flowing, even after the copyrights have expired. Confusion, after all, is far cheaper than litigation.
And Mondrian isn’t an isolated case. In recent weeks, similar post–Public Domain Day claims have surfaced from Fleischer Studios in connection with Betty Boop’s earliest appearances, and from representatives of Harold Lloyd’s estate concerning Safety Last! (1923), which entered the public domain over seven years ago. Different works, different theories—but the same objective: discourage use first, sort out the law later.
A Clear Picture
Mondrian’s abstractions are famous for their clarity—primary colors, clean black lines, precise right angles. The Trust’s legal arguments, on the other hand, are anything but.
Composition II with Red, Blue, and Yellow is in the U.S. public domain. It has been since January 1, 2026. No amount of Spanish law or invented “dual copyright” theories changes that.
If the Trust believes otherwise, it’s free to test that theory in court. For now, it appears content to keep its arguments abstract.
As always, I’d love to hear your thoughts—leave a comment below, find me on social media @copyrightlately, or, if you’re asserting exclusive rights in a public-domain Mondrian, feel free to reach out directly to [email protected].
