In a situation where an artist is entering into a collaborative research
oriented venture with an established research entity, such as an academic
research centre, the sort of models ANAT is developing (along with others
Interdisciplinary Arts at Arts Council England was working on this before it
was disbanded) are highly relevant. However, my concern is not in this area.
It is more general, concerning the way creative arts education functions in
In the UK we have an established system where all individual academics are
potentially submissable for research assessment. This includes artists
teaching in art schools, whatever their media, new or old. If an artist is
being shown within an appropriate context (eg: a juried exhibition such as
the Venice Bienale), is awarded a juried prize (eg: the Turner), is invited
to speak at a peer reviewed conference or has their work written about in a
peer reviewed journal then that will be counted for the research assessment.
Currently artists working in academia own the IP around their work. However,
if we move to a situation where work submissable for research assessment is
owned in part (or its entirety) by the institution submitting it then
artists authorial rights will be compromised. In this context few
professional artists would choose to work in academia. This would result in
a destructive split between practice and pedagogy/research.
I think the above scenario is not one that anybody would plan to bring about
but things have been moving in this direction, over time. Rogerıs proposals
would, in my opinion, likely accelerate this process. Kenıs suggestion that
we ³should use IP models as
they (the sciences) do² would also lead to this eventuality. Unless artists
are willing to give up their authorial and IP rights the outcome of this
would see almost every professional artist working in academia leaving it.
edinburgh college of art
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
From: Vicki Sowry <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Vicki Sowry <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 11:03:22 +0930
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Conversation: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] Models of author/owner-ship
Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] Models of author/owner-ship
On 14/5/08 7:10 PM, "Simon Biggs" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> In the sciences it is quite normal for the university to claim IP
> rights over new knowledge or to develop shared ownership models if ideas and
> inventions are spun out into industry. As yet I am not aware of this having
> happened in the creative arts...but I can see it coming.
This is something ANAT has been dealing with the past couple of
years in relation to our art/sci residency programs. Whilst not strictly
creative arts only, collaborations between artists and science/research
institutions throw up all sorts of challenges around IP for exactly the
reasons you mention: generally artists own their IP, generally institutions
own their employees IP..
For this reason, it generally takes 2-3 months of liaising before we can
lock off contracting for each residency and this usually entails joint