• ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    2 个月前

    The article says it could result in a fine that’s based on the value of the damage. You’d think having a famous artist’s work would increase the value of the building.

    • 100@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      2 个月前

      would be funny if courts did agree it was net increase to value if they didnt destroy it

      • credo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 个月前

        So really they devalued public property by destroying his artwork. I say bring the State up on charges.

    • jabjoe@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 个月前

      Interesting. “The value of the damage.” I’d say it’s pretty likely the Banksy worked increased the value of the wall, if not the whole property. So is that negative damage? The people who decreased the value where those who tried to clean off the artwork.

    • JohnnyFlapHoleSeed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 个月前

      How much does it cost to hire someone to pressure wash a wall for an hour in the UK?

      But no, that’s an excellent point, removing the art work would actually be more damaging

    • HexesofVexes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 个月前

      So, if the damage increased the value of the building, it would necessitate the courts paying? Sounds reasonable.