Graffiti Copyright in Italy and Europe: When Street Art Meets Corporate Use

Does graffiti — often created without authorisation on someone else’s property — receive copyright protection? The answer under both Italian and EU law is yes: copyright protection arises from creative authorship, not from the lawfulness of the creation process. Multiple high-profile cases have established that graffiti and street art are protected works under copyright law, with rights holders able to enforce against unauthorised commercial reproduction. The 2016 case of Jade Berreau (Dash Snow Estate) v. McDonald’s illustrates the framework clearly.

For the broader art law framework, see our master copyright guide. For moral rights specifically, see our moral rights guide.

The Dash Snow case

In 2016, the estate of Dash Snow — the New York street artist who died in 2009 — sued McDonald’s in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleging that the fast food chain had reproduced Snow’s graffiti tag “SACE” and other works in the décor of its new graffiti-themed restaurants in the UK and Asia. The complaint alleged:

• Copyright infringement: McDonald’s reproduced Snow’s protected graffiti without authorisation;
• Trademark infringement: use of Snow’s signature pseudonym “SACE” suggested affiliation;
• Unfair competition: McDonald’s traded on Snow’s reputation and the “outsider street cred” diametrically opposed to corporate fast food;
• DMCA copyright management information violation: alleged removal/alteration of Snow’s identifying information;
• Damages and injunction: order removing the artworks from all McDonald’s locations.

The case is part of a broader pattern of graffiti artist enforcement against fashion brands (Moschino, Roberto Cavalli faced similar lawsuits in 2014-2015) and other corporate users. The framework: corporate use of street art for commercial décor and marketing engages full copyright liability regardless of how the original was created.

Originality and illegality

A key doctrinal question: does graffiti created without authorisation on someone else’s property still receive copyright protection? Both Italian and EU law answer yes:

• Originality requirement: graffiti satisfies the EU originality threshold (CJEU Infopaq C-5/08: “author’s own intellectual creation”) where it reflects the artist’s free and creative choices;
• Independence from legality: copyright protection arises from creation, not from authorisation. The graffiti’s illegal creation does not extinguish copyright;
• Property law vs copyright law: the property owner may have rights against the graffiti artist for trespass and property damage, but these are separate from copyright;
• Commercial use by third parties: third-party commercial reproduction (advertising, décor, merchandise) engages copyright liability of the user, independent of the artist’s relationship with the property owner.

Italian framework

Italian law treats graffiti as protected art under:

• Article 2 paragraph 4 LDA: works of figurative art including drawings, paintings, and graphic works, regardless of medium;
• Article 12 LDA: economic rights vest in the author from the moment of creation;
• Articles 20-24 LDA: moral rights of paternity and integrity — inalienable and enforceable regardless of the work’s location or creation context;
• Italian Cultural Heritage Code (D.Lgs. 42/2004): where graffiti gains cultural recognition, additional protections may apply;
• L. 182/2025: extended photographic protections may apply to documentary photographs of graffiti.

Italian courts have followed this approach, recognising graffiti and street art as protected creative works while preserving property owners’ separate rights against the artist for trespass.

Moral rights for street artists

Street artists’ moral rights raise particular challenges:

• Right of paternity: artists have the right to attribution. Commercial users displaying graffiti must credit the artist where reasonably identifiable;
• Right of integrity: modifications, distortions, or contextual association prejudicing the artist’s honour engage moral rights protection — particularly relevant where outsider/anti-corporate artists’ work is used by corporate brands;
• Right of withdrawal: limited circumstances allow artists to withdraw consent from prior authorisation;
• Posthumous enforcement: heirs and estate managers can enforce moral rights after the artist’s death, as in the Dash Snow case.

For street artists whose work is appropriated by commercial users, moral rights enforcement is often as important as economic rights — the “outsider street cred” damage from corporate association can be legally redressed.

How DANDI supports artists and brands

DANDI.media supports street artists, art estates, galleries, brands, and commercial users on graffiti and street art copyright matters:

• Copyright registration and enforcement for street artists;
• Pre-commercialisation clearance for brands using graffiti aesthetic;
• Moral rights advisory and enforcement;
• Estate management for deceased artists;
• Brand campaign clearance for street-art themed marketing;
• Disputes between artists and commercial users.

For consultation, book directly with Avv. Claudia Roggero or Avv. Donato Di Pelino.

Related guides

Dandi Law Firm provides legal assistance in several Practice Areas. Check out our Services or contact Us!