[Beren]

I seem to recall something about them planning to move it in a year. Kinda fuzzy on that, though.

They give it more and more time, it seems they don't mean to remove it actually.

[Dubayoo]

He's absolutely right, his piece of art was hijacked. It also started as guerrilla art though.

Right, but it's not clear that those appreciating the girl statue get this.

The original sculptor seems to be provoking the girl statue's supporters into giving him what he really wants - an appeal to tradition by following precedent. They would have to follow his pattern of not getting advance permission.

The implication is despite how the girl statue supporters are trying to rock the boat, they're actually keeping it from capsizing.

Fuck this artist. He can take his litter home for that is what it originally was. He is angry because someone else did exactly what he did.

I happen to like both of the statues. Now I like one of the artists.

I guess the ACLU is in this. What with the Trump administration firmly in the driver's seat they have nothing else to do.

I'm not sure he's angry at all actually. He's probably chuckling from how the girl statue supporters are giving him exactly what he's looking for. Art is weird like that. Your best efforts are admired on accident by your biggest rivals.

The fact that the ACLU has sided with him just reinforces this point. You'd think they'd side with the opposition, but nope.

The sculptor has violated my rights by effectively forcing me to look at his mediocre statue of the bull every time Wall Street is featured on any news item. How dare he?! I think I'll sue. Anyone else with me? We could bring a class action against him....

Not sure what this has to do with you as a consumer, but OK then...

It seems more like he just wants to ensure credit is given to contributions to the public domain. The girl statue supporters will have to demand credit for their own contribution just as much.