Graffiti Is Not a Crime 

  Previous: Nuclear Apocalypse Near Misses | Next: Wired | Tired | Expired

Story Tools

Story Images

Click thumbnails for full-size image:

Rants + Raves

• More »

START

• MLB.com levels baseball’s playing field
• The 1,350-hp, jet-turbine Beetle really flies
• Phew! The best apocalyptic near-misses.
• More »

PLAY

• Sufjan Stevens’ avalanche of odes to Illinois
• A mecha makeover for Japanese monster flicks
• Online craft faire – Linux blankie, anyone?
• Meet your next favorite game guru
• More »

POSTS

• Monk ebusiness
• Superheroes go ape for Stan Lee
• Lessig examines Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth
• More »

Fashion designer Marc Ecko isn’t new to graffiti culture. He built his multimillion-dollar Ecko Unlimited brand around the art form and even produced a videogame in which the main character paints pieces all over an urban landscape. Now you can add legal advocate to his résumé. He has recently lent his support to a suit to quash NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg’s attempt to make it illegal for anyone under 21 to carry broad-tipped markers and aerosol spray paint. Wired asked Ecko how to reconcile graffiti and the law.

WIRED: Removing unwanted graffiti in the US costs more than $8 billion each year.
ECKO: That’s called vandalism.

OK, but there’s obviously a problem. How do you suggest politicians deal with it?
Plenty of after-school programs could use the billions of dollars we spend to clean up graffiti (money that does nothing to solve the problem anyway). In Philadelphia, there’s the Mural Arts Program, which creates venues for legal graffiti walls. Statistically, it’s been successful in disrupting vandalism.

Given that both your clothing line and videogame celebrate graffiti culture, some might see your crusade as self-serving.
It’s completely self-serving. There’s nothing hidden about it. Why is it OK for Procter & Gamble, which owns the Pampers brand, to advocate for all things family and baby? I have commercial interests, too. Nike funds an after-school sports program. Is that self-serving?

Of course it is.
But it’s also the culture that represents them. It upholds their values, and this upholds mine.

On your site, StillFree.com, you state that you’re advocating free speech. Is graffiti defensible on free speech grounds?
Listen, if something’s not yours and you don’t have the owner’s consent, you shouldn’t paint there. That’s the same as taking something that’s not yours.

   Previous: Nuclear Apocalypse Near Misses | Next: Wired | Tired | Expired