4 ms·

Huh. The potential non-copyrightability of graffiti I understand but I am failing to understand the anonymous ownership issue. Why he cannot transfer the copyr

by nullc 7y ago

Huh. The potential non-copyrightability of graffiti I understand but I am failing to understand the anonymous ownership issue. Why he cannot transfer the copyright for the work to a corporation which enforces the copyright? -- it isn't like he needs to register the work before transferring it to the company, the berne convention assures that.

droithomme 7y ago
Graffitti is copyrightable. In the US copyrightable works can be copyrighted by an anonymous or pseudononymous creator. There's even a box to check if the creator is anonymous. https://www.copyright.gov/eco/help-author.html https://www.copyright.gov/eco/help-author.html Perhaps in the EU anonymous works can not be copyrighted?
- anticensor 7y ago
  They can, but you cannot remain anonymous before a court in Europe.
  - nullc 7y ago
    You can't in the US either, but the creator wouldn't need to appear before a court, the copyright holder would.
    - beerandt 7y ago
      The copyright holder needs to prove he's the copyright holder, which is difficult to do without a paper trail to the creator.
cormacrelf 7y ago
You understand what? Graffiti is copyrightable. He can’t transfer it because that (in general) must be done in writing and with a signature. Any target of copyright litigation will demand to know who is purported to have assigned copyright, so just putting “Banksy” there won’t hold up. Those are the evidentiary issues.