Legal implications of street art as a ‘democratized’/’open’ form of art

The prestige of street art as an artistic expression has increased year after year. The analysis of its legal implications must take into account the difficulties in reaching a general operative concept of street art and the need to legally frame the creation, preservation and transaction of street...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Fernando Loureiro Bastos
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Centro Universitário Christus 2020-05-01
Series:Revista Opinião Jurídica
Subjects:
Online Access:https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3150
_version_ 1797895948360220672
author Fernando Loureiro Bastos
author_facet Fernando Loureiro Bastos
author_sort Fernando Loureiro Bastos
collection DOAJ
description The prestige of street art as an artistic expression has increased year after year. The analysis of its legal implications must take into account the difficulties in reaching a general operative concept of street art and the need to legally frame the creation, preservation and transaction of street art productions. Since the legal concept is not equivalent to the theoretical concept or the history of art, each State and even each municipality can create their own legal concepts, acting in accordance with these specific concepts in order to control production, to punish execution as vandalism or, in contrast, to protect works produced as part of their cultural heritage. Although street art is created in and for open spaces, usually as an ephemeral art, the commercial interest in street art productions raises questions of due diligence during its transaction, such as those related to ownership, authenticity and even provenance. As an expression of an artistic movement started about half a century ago, can street art works be equated with “traditional” works of art (such as “goods” or “merchandises”), being subject to ownership, commercial sale and copyright, or must they be appreciated as artifacts that can be preserved as part of the cultural heritage or, alternatively, starting from the specific artistic and creative intent of the artist, be understood as a type of works of art that require the creation of new legal categories and forms of understanding its meaning?
first_indexed 2024-04-10T07:35:02Z
format Article
id doaj.art-f76d386b33394c7daa322fc0a1e672e5
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1806-0420
2447-6641
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-10T07:35:02Z
publishDate 2020-05-01
publisher Centro Universitário Christus
record_format Article
series Revista Opinião Jurídica
spelling doaj.art-f76d386b33394c7daa322fc0a1e672e52023-02-23T13:23:00ZengCentro Universitário ChristusRevista Opinião Jurídica1806-04202447-66412020-05-01182821023010.12662/2447-6641oj.v18i28.p210-230.2020925Legal implications of street art as a ‘democratized’/’open’ form of artFernando Loureiro Bastos0Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Lisboa e CIDP – Centro de Investigação de Direito PúblicoThe prestige of street art as an artistic expression has increased year after year. The analysis of its legal implications must take into account the difficulties in reaching a general operative concept of street art and the need to legally frame the creation, preservation and transaction of street art productions. Since the legal concept is not equivalent to the theoretical concept or the history of art, each State and even each municipality can create their own legal concepts, acting in accordance with these specific concepts in order to control production, to punish execution as vandalism or, in contrast, to protect works produced as part of their cultural heritage. Although street art is created in and for open spaces, usually as an ephemeral art, the commercial interest in street art productions raises questions of due diligence during its transaction, such as those related to ownership, authenticity and even provenance. As an expression of an artistic movement started about half a century ago, can street art works be equated with “traditional” works of art (such as “goods” or “merchandises”), being subject to ownership, commercial sale and copyright, or must they be appreciated as artifacts that can be preserved as part of the cultural heritage or, alternatively, starting from the specific artistic and creative intent of the artist, be understood as a type of works of art that require the creation of new legal categories and forms of understanding its meaning?https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3150compra e vendadue diligenceintenção artísticapatrimônio culturalarte de rua
spellingShingle Fernando Loureiro Bastos
Legal implications of street art as a ‘democratized’/’open’ form of art
Revista Opinião Jurídica
compra e venda
due diligence
intenção artística
patrimônio cultural
arte de rua
title Legal implications of street art as a ‘democratized’/’open’ form of art
title_full Legal implications of street art as a ‘democratized’/’open’ form of art
title_fullStr Legal implications of street art as a ‘democratized’/’open’ form of art
title_full_unstemmed Legal implications of street art as a ‘democratized’/’open’ form of art
title_short Legal implications of street art as a ‘democratized’/’open’ form of art
title_sort legal implications of street art as a democratized open form of art
topic compra e venda
due diligence
intenção artística
patrimônio cultural
arte de rua
url https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3150
work_keys_str_mv AT fernandoloureirobastos legalimplicationsofstreetartasademocratizedopenformofart