Book review: Copyright in the street. An Oral History of Creative Processes in Street Art and Graffiti Subcultures

This is a review of “Copyright in the street. An Oral History of Creative Processes in Street Art and Graffiti Subcultures”, authored by Enrico Bonadio (City University of London).

As its title suggests, this book focuses on the relationship between US copyright law and street art and graffiti. This book should not be perceived as a classic manual on the application of copyright to these art forms. On the contrary, this book looks at the evolution of the practice and thinking of street artists, illustrated by numerous key issues and their personal testimonies.

The main advantage of this book is that the author's comments are backed up by numerous artists' testimonials on very specific points. Gathering such a large number of testimonials on a specific subject is no easy task. This does not detract from the reading experience, even if the reader is not a fan of street art and graffiti (-quite the contrary!). This highly illustrative aspect makes the book easier to read and more digestible than a traditional law book. If one of the objectives put forward by the author is to illustrate the relationship between artists and copyright, it is achieved. The point of view adopted goes beyond the legal strictu senso, and therefore provides a different approach to that usually adopted for legal works.

However, readers seeking to understand the principles governing the application of copyright to this type of work will not be satisfied only with this book. A more traditional work will have to supplement the reading, if only to know the whole of the relevant legal framework and the relevant case law. Furthermore, although the book deals with copyright, it is mainly American copyright and not British copyright. It might also have been interesting to examine the various topics covered from a European perspective.

Ultimately, while 'Copyright in the Street' is not a working document on which students and practitioners could rely in a traditional way, it does provide a deeper dimension that gives a better understanding of the practices and ethics of these artists, a subject that is often neglected. This Kat therefore strongly recommends reading this book, taking into account its pros and cons.

The book contains six chapters, the first of which is an introduction to the author's encounter with the world of street art and graffiti. The second chapter is entitled “Creativity and originality of graffiti lettering”. In this chapter, Bonadio asks whether graffiti letterings are original enough. He stresses that letters are the perfect canvas for writers to unleash their creativity and project their artistic ideas, reinterpreting the alphabet in their own personal style. A mere pencil stroke words indicating a name and a place should not be protected by copyright. Protection should be available when the graffiti letterings consist not only of alphanumeric elements but are also elaborated, personalized, and extravagant enough to be perceived and appreciated as an artistic endeavour rather than just as letters and numbers. Such a view is counterbalanced by the opinion of the artist Zephyr. The more he observed graffiti the more his eyes became trained to see them. Zephyr believes that each graffiti is different, representing the artist's unique identity.

Chapter 3 is entitled "Copyright within the street art and graffiti circles". This chapter examines whether street artists and writers are interested in copyright. Would they be prepared to take legal action for copyright infringement if someone exploited or copied one of their works? While in the 70s and 80s the use of legal means might have seemed futile to some artists, including Bansky, this is no longer necessarily the case today. The aim is to fight against misappropriation and unauthorized reproduction. Interviews with Keo, Greg Lamarche and Lady Pink provide further support. It emerges that brands should pay for the use of street artworks. The number of registrations with the US Copyright Office has been growing since the 1970s. The use of cease-and-desist letters is widespread too. Protection can be achieved through solid contractual clauses for works produced on commission. It should be noted that, for many artists, the fact that the work is in a public space does not mean that their rights have been waived. However, private use without commercial exploitation is generally tolerated, particularly for educational or documentary purposes. The disadvantages of taking legal action include the cost, the fact that copying is difficult to prove and the technical impossibility of monitoring all the walls containing works of art.

Another important question is raised in this chapter. Without the authorization of the owner of the surface upon which it is placed, can copyright protect street art and graffiti? One of the theories raised is the unclean hands doctrine. It is an equitable defence in which the defendant claims that the plaintiff should not obtain a remedy and profit when the latter has acted unethically or in bad faith or has carried out illegal activity.

A Kat-mural by Rogue One

Chapter 4 is entitled “Feelings about attribution and preservation”. This chapter reminds one that there is case law in which street artists and writers have asserted their moral rights. Those artists are attached to their creations and to the right of attribution. Once again, opinions are divided on the importance of the right of attribution. For some artists, a simple copy of the work featuring their work is enough to compensate for the absence of their name. Others are satisfied with the visibility that the public display provides. It is also pointed out that the lack of respect for authorship rights can be explained by the difficulty for publishers to identify and contact the artists and photographers of the works. Bonadio also points out that, to use a photo without authorisation, the publisher must establish that the searches to identify the artist and photographer were reasonable or diligent. In this case, the infringement of authorship rights would not be upheld.

Bonadio carrries on by underlining that the right of integrity covers not only alterations to the work but also respect for the artists' values. Very often political and demeaning associations are unwelcome to artists.

As far as the destruction of works is concerned, there is a lack of legal clarity in many countries, except in France and the Netherlands. Some artists would oppose the destruction of their works only under certain conditions (e.g., the type of permission, payment, and contract). It should also be noted that nothing in the street lasts too long (e.g., because of rain).

The decontextualization of the work (e.g., relocation in galleries, museum ,houses, indoor, auction sales) jeopardizes the conceptual meaning. Bonadio asks whether the relocation prejudices the reputation or honour of the artist. Decontextualization is not a recent phenomenon (e.g., Keith Haring’s works during the 80s). Some artists are reluctant to object to the removal or relocation of the work if it is placed in the street illegally. Others think that it provides greater visibility. Relocation can also protect the work from natural elements.

Chapter 5 is entitled "The subcultures between an anti-establishment ethos and mainstream."

Street art and graffiti have an anti-establishment nature, resistance to legal and political authority. This chapter looks at whether such characteristics suggest that copyright is not suitable to govern these creative communities. For Baldini, street art and graffiti are subversive by nature. The penetration of copyright would be corrupting. But for some artists, copyright can be a tool to keep the message as antiestablishment (e.g., to protect the reputation of artist). The same is for moral rights.

Chapter 6 is entitled "Sharing bitting and social norms". This chapter begins by stressing that street art and graffiti have a nature based on sharing and appropriation. Artists borrow styles concept details from pop culture (e.g., cartoon characters, album cover art, movies, poster, tv commercials, billboards, brands, history) and colleagues. It let them enhance their creative process. But it doesn't mean that blatant copy, particularly when there is no mention of the earlier source is acceptable. Bonadio asks whether tolerating appropriation and sharing practices contradict copyright principles. Once again, opinions differ. Some accept the appropriation of their art. It is seen as flattery, a homage, an honour, especially when the source is acknowledged.

Appropriation is not new or specific to street arts and graffiti. Several art movements are based on it, such as pop art. It should also be noted that appropriating artists such as Jeff Koons have also won disputes based on fair use.

The fact remains that the difference between bitting and inspiration is blurred but needs to evolve (own style). However, there is copying when the artist does not add anything substantial, not their own style. Writers often copy from their mentors as a training.

Another aspect explored is that street art and graffiti have social norms. Those norms mainly prohibit painting over someone else's work (e.g., feud between Robbo and Banksy). Social media are used by artists to spread info on bitting.

Finally, Bonadio concludes by emphasising the complementary nature of social norms and copyright. Both fill the gaps left by the other.


Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Extent: 161 pages

ISBN: 978-1-009-19863-9