On 15th November 2011, Apple was granted its first ‘architecture patent’ from the US Government.
What does this mean for the evolution of architectural language and thinking? Yes, fair enough that building technologies, systems and products can be patented, but architecture itself? There are already 2 elements to architectural copyright : (1) the technical drawings or ‘blueprints’ of the building and (2) the finished article, i.e. the architectural work itself.
A building is a summation of technologies, systems and products all of which involve thinking and creativity. Patenting architecture would reduce it to just another ‘product’. Is this right?
Read the following article Architectural Patents: On what Grounds? for more info and share your views here!