Well, without lights and plates that is probably why they are in trouble. Otherwise, I don't see the issue.

The cops were a little uptight, but they had to cover their butts. It seems unlikely that they were gonna put anyone in danger going back around the corner to the gallery. I can see it now - "RAMMING SPEED!!!!" Yeah.

I love the concept. It's so... Fred Flintstone :)

Lights and Plates aren't required on bicycles though. At what point does a car become a car and not a quadricycle? If it was a bicycle built for two they wouldn't have a problem because of... size?

Probably wasn't street legal, I imagine because of size but it's a good question for the courts.

Excellent point, and maybe that's exactly the kind of issue the "artist" was trying to raise.

Link to a follow-up mini-article which mentions that the participants' case was dismissed.

Personally, I find public artistic demonstrations of annoyance to be, well, annoying.

This is a good cause, but if an artistic demonstration is in violation of local laws, and especially if they cause a traffic hazard because a bicycle can over take them(!) (briefly shown in the video clip), by all means, shut it down.

There are better venues for protesters, other than the streets, to voice their discontent over the traffic on the streets, or fossil-fuel use, or human-powered locomotion, or whatever, without causing a road hazard.