Community, Leadership, Experimentation, Diversity, & Education
Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
CMU School of Drama
Thursday, February 06, 2014
Know Your Rights When it Comes to Furniture Design
www.popularwoodworking.com: It has often been said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Perhaps nowhere is imitation more commonplace than in furniture making. Attractive pieces from antiquity as well as the avant-garde are studied, scaled and reproduced by industrious woodworkers everywhere. But not all furniture creators and designers consider imitation a compliment – especially when it leads to lost income or damaged reputation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
As a first instinct, I was surprised to hear copy write protection surrounding furniture was so strict. Furniture is, at its core a functional, not artistic thing. It was first invented for a practical purpose, however it now can be just of strong of an artistic expression or design feat as a painting or sculpture. In a way, the minds behind furniture design are doing even more creative work, for their art must also comfortably hold a people! To me, it seems individuals building furniture for their own homes should be allowed to ‘copy’ previous designs in the same way that people are allowed to replicate a Monet and hang it in their home or give it to a friend. But if the ‘copier’ wants to make any sort of profit of his creations, it must be original work. Or, if he or she withes to display the ‘copied’ work, they must give credit to the original artist.
Even after reading the article, I am still unclear where the line is drawn between what is considered violation of the law in these circumstances. It is not clear where the line between say; drawing on a style developed by so-and-so, which would be completely okay, and stealing an element that is unique to a single person is. I would like to think that in an educational setting, problems over furniture design would not come up.
This is an interesting argument and its sort of difficult to figure out. It does make sense that furniture designer's work should be protected, as it is their "intelectual property." But at the same time, when looking into purchasing furniture, I would most likely not purchase a designer piece of furniture. It makes sense as a consumer who is looking at furniture for function, not as art, to opt for the cheaper option. Especially when you can get a piece that looks are nice as a designer work. I think prior to reading this, I would have never even thought much about it.
Post a Comment