I'm aware that he owns the intellectual rights to his art, but it's the property owner of the 'canvas' that owns the finished product.

Can a graffiti artist really have legal support for illegal activity? I take your point about the prospect of legal action, but in my naivety, I like to think that any self respecting graffiti artist would actually support my intentions.

That's just it. There's no way of knowing for certain. He's said himself that he can't always authenticate his own work. Your point about admitting to vandalism/criminal damage mirrors my own thoughts.

Thank you Mr. P Some of the images remain in situ, while most were erased by local councils and property owners, or even defaced by fellow graffiti artists shortly after being painted. Can someone really lay claim to an act of vandalism(in law)?

Hi. I have created a deck of Tarot cards using graffiti images, based primarily on the art work of Banksy. The images are all from publicly viewable graffiti, as opposed to the recent 'Dismaland' exhibition in Weston-Super-Mare, which was purpose built and required an entrance fee to view it. All the work I've used is unofficially attributed to Banksy, although there's no way of knowing this for certain. Public graffiti, nomatter how popular the artist, is classed as criminal damage and carries a maximum sentence of 10 years upon conviction. My question is this... if I were to commercially produce such a deck of cards, would I be opening myself to legal action? I have tried to send messages to Banksy asking for permission, but there's been no reply as yet. Any profits from such a venture are to be donated to a social welfare charity.