In the context of this artwork, explain the Ownership of the History.
The sculpture technically has a temporary permit allowing it to stand on city property since the city does not own the sculpture, but the temporary permission has lasted since 1989, when city officials said the new location would not be permanent. Art on loan is usually limited to a year's display, and although the city does not buy art, it does accept donations. By 1993, Di Modica wanted to sell the statue to recover the $320,000 cost of manufacturing it. However, there was only one major bid for the statue: a hotel in Las Vegas that offered $300,000.A writer in the New York Daily News wrote in 1998 that the statue's placement was "beginning to look a mite permanent". According to an article in Art Monthly, Di Modica, as well as officials and New Yorkers, "view it as a permanent feature of Lower Manhattan". In 2004, Di Modica announced that Charging Bull was for sale, on condition the buyer did not move it from its location. The sculpture remained unsold by 2008.Di Modica continued to own the artistic copyright to the statue, and filed several lawsuits against firms making replicas. For instance, Di Modica sued Wal-Mart and other companies in 2006 for selling replicas of the bull and using it in advertising campaigns. Three years later, Di Modica sued Random House for using a photo of the bull on the cover of a book discussing the collapse of financial services firm Lehman Brothers.
artistic copyright Las Vegas Manhattan Lehman Brothers Random House Bull New York Daily News bull Art Monthly Wal-Mart copyright Lower Manhattan