re the upcoming NSF NEA Re/Search: Art, Science, and Information Technology workshop
One of the arguments for promoting art-science collaboration is that it can result in unexpected technological innovation that is useful to society
One way of documenting this kind of outcome is by identifying patents
filed by the art-science teams
I dont want to get into a discussion here of IP and whether the current patenting
system is an impediment to innovation- there are many arguments showing that
filing patents, especially too early or in areas that are too broad, impedes innovation
rather than encourages it. ( and less than one in a thousand patents ever get
Robert Thill (email@example.com) has been compiling a list of patents filed by artists
for the ARTSACTIVE network
if any yasminers know of patents filed resulting from art science collaborations
we would like to hear about them and Robert will add them to the list
One the Artsactive aims has been to try to develop ways of evaluating and assessing the impact of artistic contributions to what is broadly called ‘innovation’. We acknowledge there are many different ways in which this can be done and we are keen to explore and discuss this spectrum. One key area of analysis is how and to what degree legal systems are being used to support or exploit this contribution.
To start the process of investigation we are looking at how and where the patenting system has been used within collaborations or by artists who have been working with science, technology or business. One question we might raise is to what extent the filing of patents (and building examples and models of this) can help to boost the profile of artists as formal researchers within art and science and art and industry/technology collaborations. This list wish to promote the idea that artists are also investigators and we seek to offer examples of how and where artists have been formally recognised as such. Registering a patent is a specific way of demonstrating that an investigation is new and innovative.