Page 24 - Katten Kattwalk and Kattison Avenue - Winter 2026 - Issue 5
P. 24
Why Are British Artists Suing a British Fashion House Over Graffiti
on British Buildings, in America? (continued)
jax10289/Shutterstock.com
(coded) identities on subway cars or abandoned clothing may be evaluated as pictorial representations
buildings, as a way of expressing to the world that of architectural works located in or ordinarily visible
they exist and matter,” and Vivienne Westwood’s from a public place, which are fair game under the
goal is “to sell some clothing.” As such, Vivienne Copyright Act.
18
15
Westwood’s incorporation of the graffiti may be fair All this being said, DISA, SNOK and RENNEE may
use, regardless of how transformative it is to print a have a viable claim that their tags are copyright
collage of graffiti pictures on pants for the sake of management information subject to the Digital
fashion.
Millennium Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 1202) — as
Third, if DISA, SNOK and RENNEE’s graffiti is in fact other courts in the Central District have ruled in
uncommissioned, a court may find that the artists lack similar cases against fashion houses Moschino and
standing to sue for copyright infringement because Roberto Cavalli. They might also have successful
19
the only property right attached to the works would claims under the Lanham Act, and its state law
concern the tangible copies of the work owned by counterpart, California unfair competition law
the owner of the buildings on which the graffiti (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et seq.), given
is painted. And without the benefit of copyright their allegation that their tags, like signatures and
16
protection extended to commissioned murals on names, are recognized by members of the public
buildings, the imagery on Vivienne Westwood’s as signaling their association or involvement.
20
17
24 katten.com/intellectualproperty
