Banksy: Dismaland & Beyond

GNC

King-Sized Canary
Joined
Aug 25, 2001
Messages
33,500
Reaction score
22,346
Points
334
How about Mark Speight? Sorry, that's a bit dark.
 

escargot

Disciple of Marduk
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
36,982
Reaction score
54,020
Points
334
Location
HM The Tower of London
From t'BBC news just now -

Banksy loses battle with greetings card firm over 'flower bomber' trademark


Banksy has lost a battle with a greetings card firm over the trademark of one of his most famous works.

North Yorkshire-based Full Colour Black challenged the artist's right to trademark his image of a protester throwing a bunch of flowers.

The European Union trademark office has thrown out his trademark and accused him of being "inconsistent with honest practices" when trying to protect it.

For a trademark to be valid, the holder must sell goods using the image.

But the authority said he had filed it in order to avoid using copyright laws, which are separate and would have required the famously elusive Bristolian artist to reveal his true identity.

The cost of anonymity, eh.
 

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
32,283
Reaction score
52,585
Points
289
Woman changes her mind about selling her house at the last minute because Banksy painted on it last night .. experts think her house could now sell for £5 million instead of £300,000 ..

abanksy002.jpg


£300,000 Bristol house where Banksy mural appeared 'could now be worth £5MILLION' | Daily Mail Online
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
25,415
Reaction score
39,151
Points
314
Location
Out of Bounds
Yep, there's that ... And then there are the things Banksy has publicly stated that undermine his ability to claim proprietary rights at all.
The E.U. Rules Against Banksy in His Trademark Fight With a Greeting Card Company, Citing His Own Statement That ‘Copyright Is For Losers’

The European Union Intellectual Property Office also cited his anonymity.

The “Cancellation Division” of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) just issued a decision declaring a trademark owned by street artist Banksy invalid.

Further, an attorney says the mysterious street artist and his attorneys are themselves to blame. The “real nail in the coffin,” attorney Aaron Wood told the World Trademark Review in announcing the news on May 19, was the “public comments of Banksy and his lawyer.”

Wood represents a greeting card company known as Full Colour Black Limited, a specialty retailer of street art greeting cards, that went head to head with Banksy over its use of Banksy’s Laugh Now. One of the artist’s most famous images, the work shows a monkey wearing a sandwich board. Some versions of the image bear the inscription “laugh now but one day we’ll be in charge.” ...

Full Colour Black claimed that the art is a work of graffiti sprayed in a public place—and EUIPO agreed. “It was free to be photographed by the general public and has been disseminated widely,” the ruling states. “Banksy permitted parties to disseminate his work and even provided high-resolution versions of his work on his website and invited the public to download them and produce their own items.” ...

Furthermore, in his 2007 book Wall and Piece, Banksy had said that “copyright is for losers.” The ruling notes that the street artist explicitly stated that the public is morally and legally free to reproduce, amend, and otherwise use any copyright works forced upon them by third parties. ...

Another factor that played into the ruling was the fact that Banksy’s true identity remains a mystery. “It is also noted that as Banksy has chosen to be anonymous and cannot be identified this would hinder him from being able to protect this piece of art under copyright laws without identifying himself, while identifying himself would take away from the secretive persona which propels his fame and success,” the ruling states. ...
FULL STORY: https://news.artnet.com/art-world/banksy-trademark-full-colour-black-1971339
 

hunck

Antediluvian
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
6,931
Reaction score
11,284
Points
299
Location
Hobbs End
You've got to admit [maybe grudgingly] it's a pretty good stunt though..

If someone actually has paid £1 million for a stencilled picture, as Vardoger said, the shredding may not have 'destroyed' it as an artwork & may actually increase the value.
Well fancy that -

Partially-shredded Banksy back under the hammer at Sotheby's


Sold for £1.1 million in 2018, it now has an estimated price of between £4 & £6 million. An increase of 400% to 600% in 3 years if realised.

Must admit it would greatly amuse me if it didn’t even raise a million. Can’t see that happening though.
 

Nosmo King

I'm not a cat
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
7,562
Reaction score
14,678
Points
283
Well fancy that -

Partially-shredded Banksy back under the hammer at Sotheby's


Sold for £1.1 million in 2018, it now has an estimated price of between £4 & £6 million. An increase of 400% to 600% in 3 years if realised.

Must admit it would greatly amuse me if it didn’t even raise a million. Can’t see that happening though.
Is love it if some how Banksy arranged for it to go up in flames just as the hammer went down :p
 

hunck

Antediluvian
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
6,931
Reaction score
11,284
Points
299
Location
Hobbs End
Well fancy that -

Partially-shredded Banksy back under the hammer at Sotheby's


Sold for £1.1 million in 2018, it now has an estimated price of between £4 & £6 million. An increase of 400% to 600% in 3 years if realised.

Must admit it would greatly amuse me if it didn’t even raise a million. Can’t see that happening though.
It sold for £16 million on Thursday, vastly over its £4-6 million guide price.

So from 1.1 million in 2018 to 16 million in 3 years. 18.5 million including fees. Not a bad investment for whoever bought it in 2018, & money for old rope for Sotheby’s.
 
Top