quote:

Originally posted by GregY:Which is a horrifically repugnant notion to anyone sane.

Back around 1677 western law came up with the idea a the Statute of Frauds. Listing those "contracts" that needed to be in writing to be enforceable.

So the guys that painted my house, now have a claim against me if I repaint my house, or tear it down?

20 year old pinky swears trump all.

Lets say the building owner gave five "artists" permission 10 years ago. Since that time dozens of "artists" have helped themselves to your building. How do you distinguish who did what art work? Now your saying its a popular tourist spot. Who gave them permission to come on the property even if considered abandoned? Can a building ever be abandoned?

If you implying a contract exists could one imply that a real estate developer who ownes property in a prime location would eventually develop the property.

quote:

Originally posted by gpbst3:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0...affiti-judgment.html


Ruling that graffiti — a typically transient form of art — was of sufficient stature to be protected by the law,

So, if it's removed the next morning (and only a few people saw it) I assume it's graffiti and not art with significant stature?