The book looks at how copyright laws are perceived within the graffiti and street art subcultures, and how artists and writers view certain creative aspects of their own practice. By drawing on the author’s ethnographic research and fieldwork, the book gives voice to the main actors of these communities and highlights their feelings and opinions towards issues which until recently they have often felt far from their everyday life and practice. This book, in other words, brings the ‘voice from the street’ into the debate over the legal (and non-legal) protection of street art and graffiti. The monograph also touches on related and complementary issues, such as the ‘gallerisation’ and economic exploitation of these forms of art (e.g. via merchandising) and the curious similarities between the graffiti and advertising worlds. The book includes inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary perspectives, showing how different disciplines can interact. The ethnographic research carried out by the author gives the monograph a strong empirical touch, thus providing insight and perspectives from the street art and graffiti subcultures.

This chapter explores the concept of ‘art’ from the perspective of law, art history and aesthetics. Drawing on examples from the visual arts, it discusses the concept of ‘art’ in light of Plato’s philosophical ideas, Weitz’s argument about art as an ‘open concept’, Danto’s philosophical investigations and the ‘institutional theory’ of the art. It further draws upon various areas of international law, including cultural heritage law and intellectual property law, in order to demonstrate that a precise definition of ‘art’ is not offered at present in any international instrument. The chapter further examines the legal challenges arising from the ‘non-definition’ of the concept of ‘art’, questioning the validity of the argument of artistic freedom as an exception to rules of general application. Last, the chapter details the need for legal protection against abuses and potential dismissal of artworks as ‘non-art’, in instances where the qualification ‘art’ (and consequently the question of artistic merit) plays the role of a ‘defence’ against attempts to interfere with freedom of speech.

The topic of this study might appear puzzling to creative artists and art worlds,1 namely painters, musicians, dancers, film-makers, playwriters, composers, all those who make artworks or work with artists, museum staff, art faculty, gallerists, collectors, art buyers and art lovers. What does international law have to do with art? And why is there a need to write a legal monograph on a topic that is self-evident? From the perspective of the aforementioned stakeholders, arts are and should remain free. Freedom is a vital condition for the realization of the creative process.