Well the law says otherwise. And I bet you didn’t read the facts of the case either.
1. Did the owner pay the "artist" to paint it or at least supply the $$ for the supplies?
2. $6.7 million for graffiti?? how is it worth that much? At least that is challengable.
3. Who decides on "recognized stature"? Shouldn't that be decided upon before it can be erased/painted over?