yeah I saw that at the NYT:

Graffiti Artists Awarded $6.7 Million for Destroyed 5Pointz Murals

Simply frigging jaw dropping! Not the value, but that it happened.  As in "say what?!" I didn't know that law even existed.

That said, there's no details in these initial stories about what actually happened, as like perhaps, some authority warning the developer "you can't do that" and then he did it anyway in the dead of night. If something like that happened, NY juries are not exactly known to be that sympathetic to landlords, especially ones trying to skirt rules. 

But it's not clear if this "V.A.R.A." law used to protect public art of “recognized stature” created on someone’s else property is like landmarking a building or it's just a kind of eminent domain seizure for artist's thing? The questions: who says? And why do the artists get the money when they broke the law when they painted the thing on someone else's property? If it's become publicly important art why doesn't the public get the money if it's destroyed? Or if it was a publicly owned abandoned building before he bought it, then the public still should get the money. You don't get to just walk up to someone's house and paint the front wall and then say you own the wall because you painted it.. Does this mean the first person to throw red paint on a fur coat gets the coat? That was a historic protest and major cultural moment, after all.

There'll be an article in the inbox on it soon, I can imagine. I know the law firm, kinda radical of them to be going into what appears to be contingency work. Banksy will likey hearing about it, no doubt.