Probably Not a Good Case in Which to Apply the Rule of Reason

When is erotic dancing "art" and when is it just "dancing on a bar"? [h/t to BF]

The issue came to a head earlier this month when an Oslo court ruled that a local strip club was exempt from imposing a 25-percent value-added tax (VAT) on entry fees because it was an art form on a par with ballet and theatre.

"Striptease is an art just like any other dance on stage. It's sensual dance which is more tasteful than some drunk girls dancing on a bar on a night out," says Electra, a 23-year-old lightly-clad Swede who started go-go dancing -- with her clothes on -- when she was 14 using a fake ID.

... When the Oslo court granted the Diamond Go Go Bar the same tax exemption as theatre performances, the judge explained that there were two types of striptease: one that was artistic and the other vulgar.

The judge said that "to the court's knowledge", the shows in question were artistic.

Who will be qualified to determine what is art and what is vulgar?
At what cost would these determinations be made?

Why is it that too many judges seem to prefer solutions that increase legal determination costs and hence increase the derived demand for lawyers?

What a dumb and inefficient decision.