The New York Times‘s Randy Kennedy gives the Robins-Zwirner suit the once-over with little new to add to the seemingly endless debate about collectors vs. profiteers (at least we’re getting a change of nomenclature from the rather tired “speculators.”)

“By bringing suit,” the gallery’s lawyers argue, “the wealthy Robins has literally made a federal case of not being able to buy what he wants, when he wants.”

As for the supposed blacklist, the lawyers added, as if addressing a purely philosophical problem, “If such a list exists, and if Robins is on it, Zwirner did not put him there and cannot take him off.”

[…] Even serious collectors who are generally regarded more as keepers than as sellers complain that, in recent years, several dealers — and highly involved artists like Ms. Dumas — have gone overboard in their protectiveness and desire to control an artwork’s destiny after it is sold.

“I think sometimes there’s a fair amount of hypocrisy from some of these dealers,” said Adam Lindemann, a longtime collector and author of a 2006 book, “Collecting Contemporary,” that offers advice to aspiring collectors.

“I’m not buying a can of sardines here,” Mr. Lindemann said. “I’m buying something that I’m in love with. But times change, and sometimes you need to sell things.”

Lawsuit Describes Art ‘Blacklist’ to Keep Some Collectors Away (New York Times)