We received this interesting competition which proposes a new concept. The aim is to build a know-how on running alternative, open license-based two-phase architectural competitions. Participants of the first phase are required to submit their works under Creative Commons licenses – this allows in the second phase to feel freely inspired by and reuse others’ designs without critical legal restrictions.
Organizers intend to develop a methodology to organize such competitions while examining its sociocultural, economical and political aspects and necessities. As a result they would prepare this methodology so it can be tested later in real life conditions and become a starting point of a open license driven public building processes.
For more information go to the competition’s official website.
so in the end the cheapest office screws up the most interesting and creative concept? Please tell me I’m wrong, really do!
Please explain this REMIXArchitecture concept economically
and for the benefit of architects and clients.
Is there another link somewhere with more information on this?
What motivation would a firm have to enter in the first phase of the competition?
Sounds like the concept of “open-source” is being used in order to exploit designers for free work.
for instance, let’s say you are a small design office. you don’t really have big chance to win a competition, do you? (among big offices)
but if your idea can still be valuable, can be picked up by someone else, and can be used in the project AND you get paid for your idea. how does it sound?
I agree with the comments already put forward. How can this be of benefit to a discipline that is already expected to work for free in a competition process without any protection of intellectual property?
it only makes sense to take part in competitions, if
a) you already know the client
or
b) you are invited.
otherwise, architectural competitions are just another form of prostitution.
hunh? hookers get paid, more like masochism.
Prostitutes get paid for the act, not for looks. And besides, architect’s already steal ideas from each other, nobody has a copyright on columns or windows or sustainable urban design. We already don’t get paid enough the ideas we do come up with