Archinect - News 2015-11-30T08:37:56-05:00 Should architecture strive for originality? Can it ever achieve it? Nicholas Korody 2015-11-23T20:03:00-05:00 >2015-11-28T17:34:53-05:00 <img src="" width="514" height="248" border="0" title="" alt="" /><em><p>...the [Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act] is a [comparatively] recent development. Architecture shares certain myths with art that influence its commercial value, such as that of the singular author and singular work, but these are also relatively recent: Renaissance architects believed the peak of civilisation existed in antiquity, and so imitated ancient ruins. The commercial and social value of &ldquo;new&rdquo; and &ldquo;novel&rdquo; and even &ldquo;original&rdquo; are, arguably, products of modernity.</p></em><br /><br /><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><head><meta></head></html> Copying is good for design Archinect 2012-02-06T13:59:29-05:00 >2012-02-06T16:06:43-05:00 <img src="" width="460" height="344" border="0" title="" alt="" /><em><p>In pre-industrial days, copying used to be a positive act. It was seen as a skill. Artists were looked upon as handworkers. Copying became a negative notion with the cult of the individual artist and the arrival of mass production, which made replication extremely cheap and easy. Copyright and intellectual property laws were created to protect the original. In those days, the amount of new products reaching the market was relatively small.</p></em><br /><br /><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" ""> <html><head><meta></head></html>