creative ©
- Started
- Last post
- 3 Responses
- toastie
As a programmer and a huge supporter of open source, I have no problems bashing software patents and pointing out why patenting software procedures hurts innovation.
However, as a designer, I find myself asking myself the same questions in regard to artwork, fonts, photography, etc. As both a designer and programmer, I have trouble exclusively calling only the latter 'creative', since i think that code is just as much a creative medium as anything else. While I understand full well that this is how people make money, it makes me cringe when i hear someone defending the legalities of a font or a photograph. I'm not talking about credit and appreciation, just legal copyright issues. Are code and visual artwork really that different? Especially in this age of new media where code often blends with design and vice versa. What are your thoughts on that?
- fate_redux0
Common Code is less unqique than artwork/design. There are only so many ways to do something with code. But you can search for 10,000 photos of a turtle and come up with different examples each time.
Design elements like 45 degree lines or lens flares are so incredibly un-unique, no one makes a claim to them and they are "open-source"
In the end, it really has to do with originality, not matter the medium.
- toastie0
Well, that's the issue here. Should originality be patented?
- toastie0
wow, i guess noone cares