Evil company vs artist
Evil company vs artist
Evil company vs artist
How did this play out?
Umm, isn't Banksy's entire career centered around helping himself to others property without asking permission?
I'm honestly confused if he is using this display to advance his subversive messaging or if he is upset that he is the one being subverted.
As far as I know, he doesn't make money from that. He gets publicity from street art, but it's not like someone is paying for it âat least, they aren't paying for it to be created, but many will pay more for it after.
The public has a right to public spaces
He's just noting that Guess has entered the ring.
I'm kind of surprised it was Guess instead of Urban Outfitters. UO is always always lifting other people's work
Can't say I agree with the path he took to get there, but I do agree with the conclusion.
wait wait wait wait ... if I vandalize property, do I get intellectual property rights over the creation?? Or even ignoring the legal aspect, do I get moral rights to the creation? Not sure I have the balls to make that claim.
Yes, you absolutely do get Copyright protection: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_Kingdom (see the section on âQualification for protectionâ)
You donât get property rights over the physical object, but you automatically get copyright protections on the work itself.
Those are completely separate things and thereâs no reason they would be tied together.
Hilariously enough though, someone can cut the piece of wall the artwork is on out, and sell it, which has happened.
It's their wall, after all.
You donât get property rights over the physical object
Woah, not true dude! I've spent enough time with gangbangers to know that if you tag something, it means you own that entire city block, and anyone who says differently gets their ass kicked, or shot.
How is creating a work of art by an artist of worldwide renown on an ugly bare concrete wall vandalism? If it in some way affected the utility or even the aesthetics, you might have a point. But trying to make a crime out of improving public spaces through art is just silly.
except that it's literally a crime to vandalize public spaces to impose your ideas, aesthetics, and art on the public. Are you in actual denial or what is happening here?
this is not a comment on my opinion of Banksy's artistic value. But a major component of their art is the simple fact that it IS a crime. If you take that away, it loses most of its meaning.
I thought about that as well, but don't forget that this can also be commissioned. Where I live this happens a lot on places where they know people are gonna spray anyway. It's a lot nicer to look at and other sprayers are less likely to spray over it
To be fair, we all know that Banksy's work was not commissioned by anyone.
curious how you know it's vandalism. like murals are a thing, getting approval from the building owner is a thing, one of the parts I miss most about my hometown was the art everywhere, but "fuck you" if you use spray paint as your medium I guess
Banksy got da balls
No, you donât.
All I see are two companies.
sip
Banksy is overrated sentimental trash and I will die on this hill. Also yeah it's a money making cooperative, not a single artist
Also aren't a few of his(their) pieces literally made of collages of other people's art?