An Indianapolis street artist is warning fellow creators about copyright theft after discovering his popular mural featuring local sports stars was being reproduced and sold without his permission at a holiday craft show. Kwazar Martin, whose murals can be found throughout the city, learned about the unauthorized sales when a friend alerted him to prints of his work being displayed at the Christmas Gift & Hobby Show in November 2025.
Martin's mural, which depicts Indiana Fever basketball star Caitlin Clark and Indiana Pacers player Tyrese Haliburton, is located at 1825 W. 18th St. on the near northwest side of Indianapolis. The artist completed this particular piece in early 2024, and it has since become one of his most recognizable works in the city. Martin creates his street art and murals for public enjoyment rather than profit, viewing his work as a gift to sports fans and the community.
When Martin approached the vendors selling prints of his artwork, he encountered a surprising response that highlighted the brazenness of the copyright violation. "The guy says, 'I have the artist's permission,'" Martin recalled. "He didn't know I was the artist." The situation became even more egregious when Martin discovered that the unauthorized prints had been digitally altered to blur out his signature, which he strategically places on his murals for visibility and attribution.
"I purposefully put my name in certain spaces to be seen," Martin explained, emphasizing the deliberate nature of the sellers' attempt to remove his identification from the reproduced artwork. The prints were being sold for $35 each, generating profit from Martin's creative work without any compensation to the original artist. Despite Martin's request for the vendors to remove the unauthorized prints from sale, they reportedly refused to comply.
Copyright attorney Katie Charleston from Carmel provided legal insight into the severity of this type of intellectual property theft. "Absolutely not," Charleston said when asked if art can be legally copied, recreated, and sold without permission. "A creator's work is his own. They have copyrights to it, meaning that no one else can take it and reuse it, commercial or not." She emphasized that artists have immediate rights to their work under common law copyright protection, regardless of whether the artwork is formally registered with the copyright office.
Charleston outlined several legal remedies available to artists in similar situations. For cases like Martin's, creators can file a "cease and desist" order to stop the unauthorized sale of copied artwork. For digital violations, "take down notices" can be submitted to platforms hosting the infringing content. "An author or creator has rights to its work immediately," Charleston explained. "There is common law, copyright law that is applied to an original work. So as soon as he creates that work, it is his to control."
The financial implications for copyright violators can be substantial. Charleston noted that Martin could request records of how much money the sellers made from his artwork, and that amount could be applied toward actual damages in a legal proceeding. For registered artwork, statutory damages can reach up to $150,000, making copyright infringement a potentially costly mistake for unauthorized sellers.
Despite the personal frustration of seeing his work exploited for profit, Martin views this incident as an opportunity to educate other artists about protecting their intellectual property. "I really don't even want to deal with it honestly, but I have to set an example for artists coming up behind me to know," Martin said. "Do your research. I'm doing a lot more now and understanding that people cannot produce your work without licensing your work or without talking to you."
Charleston delivered a direct warning to potential copyright violators, emphasizing the importance of seeking proper permission before using others' creative work. "Don't do it," she advised. "If there is something that you want to use that someone else has created, seek permission." She also stressed the broader principle that creators deserve recognition and compensation for their work: "We should be giving credit to these creators and providing some sort of share or benefit to them from their work."
