Banksy loses trademark claims on 4 of his works

[aceplace57]

Flower Thrower
Laugh Now
Girl With an Umbrella
Radar Rat

Banksy is trying to protect his work from commercial use by using trademarks. He’s lost cases on 4 works. He has other works in dispute.

I’m conflicted because Banksy has said copyright is for losers. I also understand his concern that companies are commercializing his work.

I’m linking three articles. There’s others that discuss Girl With an Umbrella and Radar Rat. The Telegraph article does and is behind a pay wall. I can’t find a single article that covers all 4 cases.

Copyright is for losers… yet it turns out to be the only IP right protecting...

Banksy trademark 'at risk' after street artist loses legal battle

Not laughing now: Banksy loses second trademark case over famous monkey image

Banksy’s trademark filing over his monkey image also raised broader issues concerning “the monopolisation of art works via trade marks [and] the question of collateral purpose”. Copyright protects an artist’s work from reproduction for their lifetime plus 70 years after their death, while a trademark identifies and secures the commercial origins of a product.

The judgment also notes that, at the time he registered for the trademark, Banksy’s monkey image existed as graffiti in a public place, which meant it was “free to be photographed by the general public and has been disseminated widely”.

[aceplace57]

How do you feel about Banksy desire to remain anonymous and still claim copyright and trademarks?

The trademark dispute goes beyond Banksy’s identity. The courts are ruling he can’t claim trademarks on work he doesn’t plan to use for profit.

That’s the entire point of his work. He rejects commercialization of art.

[furryman]

In a perfect world Banksy would be legally in titled to protecting his work from commercialization while taking into account his desire to not make a profit in this manner. I can’t help thinking though that he wants to have his cake and eat it too.

[hogarth]

@furryman

In a perfect world Banksy would be legally in titled to protecting his work from commercialization while taking into account his desire to not make a profit in this manner.

He does have a way to protect it: “copyright Robin Gunningham 2021”.

[Pleonast]

@aceplace57

The trademark dispute goes beyond Banksy’s identity. The courts are ruling he can’t claim trademarks on work he doesn’t plan to use for profit.

That can’t be quite right. Non-profit organizations can protect their trademarks (see many universities, for example). It was his failure to commercialize his trademarks that caused the court to rule against him.

@hogarth

He does have a way to protect it: “copyright Robin Gunningham 2021”.

It’s possible to protect one’s copyright using a nom de plume and a lawyer, at least in the United States. I’m surprised it works differently in Europe–I thought these things were standardized by the Berne Convention.

[Chronos]

The first problem I can see is that he’s trying to use trademark protection, which is the wrong tool for the job. He could trademark the name “Banksy”. If he has some distinctive way of writing his name (or some other symbol) that he customarily uses to sign his works, he could trademark that symbol. But he can’t trademark individual works.