• Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    You should be able to form your arguments about the merits of Banksy’s work and whether or not they commit crimes without pulling in emotional and irrelevant facts like, “I don’t like everything I can see advertized (typically on private property) from public.”

    Look, their whole shtick is that their art is criminal. That’s their fucking gimmick. I don’t know why people are pushing back so hard on this.

    • GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      The point isnt that it is illegal to do, but the criticism expressed towards many societal issues and capitalism. The fact that it is often done clandestinely is more an indication for a desire for his personal privacy and/or safety I would guess, albeit I admit that it meshes well with the anti system message.

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        It seems hypocritical from my standpoint. He can use private property as much as he wants for his art, but no one can infringe on his god given copyright? He can’t have it both ways, either they are both in the wrong or neither of them are.

        • hate2bme@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          The problem is this isn’t a person using his art, it’s a company using it to make more money. So in this case he can have it both ways.