Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 80 posts

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#61

Post by stanfordkid »

Banksy pretty much ripped off Blek Le Rat — so much of his work is completely derivative. Plus you could argue he did much of his work in the public domain. If I graffiti an image in a public place, haven’t I kind of given away copyright to it?

Given Banksy’s anti-capitalist, semi-anarchist stance, and utilization of public property for his own fame, I can’t think of any better means for him to honor himself than to allow people to rip off his work freely.

I certainly can see the case against those who misappropriate bad work to his name — artistic integrity is important. There is also nothing wrong with him wanting to make money. But I see no moral problem with selling knick knacks with banksy imagery on it.

FWIW I love his art and his moral stance. Just can’t have your cake and eat it.

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#62

Post by fortran77 »

celticninja wrote: post #45
unilynx wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just a copy paste from someone else's TOS.

Good artists borrow, great artists steal -- Pablo Picasso

Here's the story on that quote. It's not Picasso

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/03/06/artists-steal/

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#63

Post by fortran77 »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #27

> We legally photograph public graffiti and make it available to you Is that how the copyright works in the UK??? Like I can photograph anybody's art and just sell prints? That doesn't sound right.

If he painted something without permission on someone else's wall (for example), I don't have a problem with the owner of the wall trying to profit from it.

And if he painted something without permission on a wall owned by a Government, funded by "The People", I don't have a problem with anyone trying to profit from it via photographic reproduction (modulo local copyright / ownership laws of the country the wall is in).

Warhol made art from someone else's Campbell Soup cans and everyone loved that....

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#64

Post by NeedMoreTea »

_4ziu wrote: post #37
cookie_monsta wrote: post #16

I can kind of get this. He wants to remain anonymous but he doesn't want to see his work on every shonky piece of merch in every dollar store in town. Both of those seem like reasonable desires. Nobody's disputing that he's the creator after all. It looks to me like copyright law is broken, but I guess parliament won't be rushing to fix it to plug gaps for edge cases involving anonymous street artists. What surprises…

How is banksy going to protect their work if they cannot even prove they made it? I don't even believe all the 'banksy' originals over the years came from one person, it's more likely a group. Honestly it's frustrating to watch an anonymous entity decorate the city while still expecting people not to use their work. The way banksy has established themself as a figure would indicate they want the art to be free and op…

The system somehow allowed John le Carre and Andy McNab to protect their work and identity years before the world got to know of David Cornwell, or McNab's real ex-SAS identity. So is losing anonymity in copyright a recent innovation?

That an artist cannot have a pen name and remain anonymous seems to be a fault with the current system, not with the choice to remain anonymous.

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#65

Post by bertan »

jtbayly wrote: post #57
gkoberger wrote: post #12

I had two problems. First, I really didn't like the tone of the card company. They're selling someone else's work (whether legal or not), and then were condescending toward the person who made it. They say they're just trying to honor Banksy, but they paint him as an out-of-touch rich asshole. Second, it's hard to know for sure, but I think this analysis misses the bigger point... I feel like opening a small shop tha…

> they paint him as an out-of-touch rich asshole. That’s because that’s how he has treated them. Lying about them and what they are doing is nasty. That’s what Banksy did.

Banksy doesn’t want anyone to be profiting from his own work and he has every right to do so if copyright is used. Why would that mean he should accept their royalty offer? They can just stick to nature photos on their cards. How rich Banksy is nothing to do with this.

What the card company is doing is to take advantage of his desire to be anonymous and make money from his work.

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#66

Post by Jamwinner »

fortran77 wrote: post #62
celticninja wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good artists borrow, great artists steal -- Pablo Picasso

Here's the story on that quote. It's not Picasso https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/03/06/artists-steal/

Thats almost better...

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#67

Post by dangus »

tomxor wrote: post #58
dangus wrote: post #51

The whole situation is interesting at the very least. The only comment I have is that I have to fault the article for making a lot of assumptions and leaps to conclusions on Banksy’s intentions, it sort of unilaterally declares that Banksy is selling out and cheating the system. But what they want is far simpler: they don’t want other people claiming they’re Banksy, and they want to remain anonymous. The article gets…

> they don’t want other people claiming they’re Banksy, and they want to remain anonymous. Sounds like a perfect case for public key cryptography, although it doesn't help with duplicates - but duplicates help his work sell anyway. Would be interesting to see how it could be applied to something visual that is reproduced in non-pixel perfect ways.

If I were a famous artist I’d definitely be signing my works with a public key!

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#68

Post by dangus »

jtbayly wrote: post #59
dangus wrote: post #51

The whole situation is interesting at the very least. The only comment I have is that I have to fault the article for making a lot of assumptions and leaps to conclusions on Banksy’s intentions, it sort of unilaterally declares that Banksy is selling out and cheating the system. But what they want is far simpler: they don’t want other people claiming they’re Banksy, and they want to remain anonymous. The article gets…

> they don’t want other people claiming they’re Banksy No. This is obviously not the problem. Nobody at that greeting card company was claiming to be Banksy. The problem is that they are making money off of a Banksy work of art without his permission. His behavior is quite clearly protecting his financial interests in his own work. That’s actually the only explanation that makes sense. The other option being that he’…

Yeah I should have said people claiming to have Banksy’s blessing, or at least omitting the fact that they don’t.

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#69

Post by jtbayly »

bertan wrote: post #65
jtbayly wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they paint him as an out-of-touch rich asshole. That’s because that’s how he has treated them. Lying about them and what they are doing is nasty. That’s what Banksy did.

Banksy doesn’t want anyone to be profiting from his own work and he has every right to do so if copyright is used. Why would that mean he should accept their royalty offer? They can just stick to nature photos on their cards. How rich Banksy is nothing to do with this. What the card company is doing is to take advantage of his desire to be anonymous and make money from his work.

I think you mean Banksy doesn’t want anybody but himself profiting off his work. Agreed, that’s his right through copyright. But he refuses to use it. That’s the whole point of the article.

The other point is that Banksy is lying about this small business and what they are doing. This is an objective fact. He claims they sued him. They didn’t. He claims they are a big corporation. They aren’t.

Re: Banksy's Fake Store Is an Attempt to Abuse Trademark Law to Avoid Copyright Law

#70

Post by nullc »

anticensor wrote: post #6
droithomme wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Graffitti is copyrightable. In the US copyrightable works can be copyrighted by an anonymous or pseudononymous creator. There's even a box to check if the creator is anonymous. https://www.copyright.gov/eco/help-author.html Perhaps in the EU anonymous works can not be copyrighted?

They can, but you cannot remain anonymous before a court in Europe.

You can't in the US either, but the creator wouldn't need to appear before a court, the copyright holder would.
Post reply on HN