Spray-on law: Even graffiti artists have a claim on copyright

The ubiquity of graffiti inside a sharing economy has led many people to think C mistakenly C that it may be employed when needed.

“Because graffiti tends to come in public facilities and often is a result of vandalism, lots of people, including people in the artistic community, possess the view that it is not protected by copyright,” says Tara Parker, an entertainment lawyer at Goodmans LLP in Toronto.

But there’s a good chance they are wrong. In fact, when it comes to graffiti, crime would likely pay – hard as it might be for many to know legislation that permits vandals to learn using their illegality.

“Copyright legislation protects every original artistic work so long as it fixed in certain permanent way,” Parker says. “It doesn’t need that the work be created lawfully.”

The Copyright Act also provides artists with “moral rights,” that are breached if the work they do can be used or modified to in order to damage the reputation of its creator.

Regardless from the legality of graffiti artists’ activity, recent events suggest they are becoming more vulnerable to assert their rights in court.

In 2015, Alexandre Veilleux sued producer from the popular Television show 30 Vies for featuring his spray-painted graffiti, available on one of Montreal’s main streets, inside a show and without his permission. In the U.S., a Brooklyn graffiti artist sued an extravagance fashion brand for featuring a version of his graffiti on its clothing.

“Many graffiti artists, like other artists, do not want their street credibility or even the worth of the work they do damaged when you are associated with particular brands or products,” Parker says.

To some extent, graffiti artists might have brought misconceptions regarding their rights on themselves.

“Their attitude to copyright has traditionally been relaxed,” Parker says. “The famous graffiti artist, Banksy, once asserted ‘copyright is perfect for losers.’ “

 Financial Post