A Wren Says

I could start this philosophically, asking, “Does anyone really own art?” Because that is the question here. Somehow, in ways unknown to me now, the group Brandalised secured the rights to use Banksy’s art. This group then provided Guess the right to use that work on a clothing capsule. Neither of these groups are affiliated with Banksy, the artist who created it. As a result, Banksy has (perhaps just as an exaggerated protest) told his supporters it is perfectly alright for them to shoplift the clothing items at the center of this matter. Tit for tat. They stole from Banksy, clearly they think theft is fine.

As a backstory, Banksy works with Pest Control, and organization that authenticates and owns the trademark for his art. In 2019, they filed suit against Milan’s Mudec Museum for producing merchandise in connection to their show, The art of Banksy. A visual protest. As a result, the museum was forced to stopped selling merchandise with the artist’s work, but they could still use it on promotional materials that informed about the show. This marked a shift in the artist’s approach, taking legal action to enforce his anti-consumerist approach.

Previously, and in the case of Brandalised, people have pointed to Banksy’s eschewing of copyrights and encouraging reproduction of his work. However, Pest Control has this message posted on their site:

You are welcome to use Banksy’s images for non-commercial, personal amusement. Print them out in a colour that matches your curtains, make a card for your gran, submit them as your own homework, whatever.

But neither Banksy or Pest Control licence the artist’s images to third parties. Please do not use Banksy’s images for any commercial purpose, including launching a range of merchandise or tricking people into thinking something is made or endorsed by the artist when it isn’t. Saying “Banksy wrote copyright is for losers in his book” doesn’t give you free rein to misrepresent the artist and commit fraud. We checked.

Clearly, Banksy is not anti-reproduction. What he appears to be against is being turned into another tool for corporate greed. And this seems to be at the heart of the issue here with Guess. I don’t think it is merely the use without asking, it is the use of his work for commercial gain.

This to me appears to be an unconventional use of trademarks. Rather than ensuring limited use so to speak, it seems the trademark enforcement here keeps the work more in the public domain, to be enjoyed rather than co-opted.  

Although, the most interesting to me though is how we got to this place at all. How did Brandalised get the rights to commercialize Banksy’s and other graffiti artists’ works?  This is something I am still trying to figure out. If you have the answer to that question, please comment it below.

As always, please tell me what you think of this issue.

Sources used:

BBC. (November 18, 2022). Banksy accuses clothing brand Guess of ‘helping themselves’ to his artworks. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-63682298

Bonadio, E. (February 25, 2019). Banksy finally goes to court to stop unauthorised merchandising, despite saying copyright is for losers. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/banksy-finally-goes-to-court-to-stop-unauthorised-merchandising-despite-saying-copyright-is-for-losers-112390

Pest Control (n.d.) Use. https://www.pestcontroloffice.com/use.asp