Intellectual Property: A Chronological Compendium of Intersections between Contemporary Art and Utility Patents

Robert Thill

Leonardo, Volume 37, Number 2, April 2004, pp. 117-124 (Article)

Published by The MIT Press

For additional information about this article

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/len/summary/v037/37.2thill.html

Access provided by Lunds universitet (5 Nov 2013 11:38 GMT)

G E N E R A L

A R T I C L E

Intellectual Property: A Chronological Compendium of Intersections between Contemporary Art and Utility Patents
ABSTRACT

Robert Thill

The author presents a group of

projects in which the roles of inventor, artist, amateur and institution variously overlap, merge and blur, offering new perspectives on the relationship between contemporary art and utility patents. Addressing issues of originality, aesthetics, labor, ownership and value, these projects demonstrate a continuous link between art and patents and encourage thoughtful speculation about shared concerns, guiding ideologies and forms.

n the current cultural climate, in which art and invention are increasingly dened by their legal status as intellectual property, it is timely to explore the relationship between contemporary art and utility patents. This essay addresses a selection of divergent art-related undertakings in which the role of artist, inventor, amateur and institution variously overlap, merge with and blur into the patent concept. A principal concern of this study is how the multiple activities in question reveal, undermine and/or reinforce the subjective perceptions, myths and practices of ownership, valuation and originality. A fundamental issue in this endeavor is whether the relatively small number of intersections between art and patents presented here is indicative of limited activity in this area of art practice or whether the dearth of documentation and writing on the subject belies a larger body of work. The study therefore focuses on accounts of specic projects, with the intention of giving prominence to past practices and, perhaps, spurring new activity. The projects highlighted here are arranged chronologically to demonstrate a continuousif idiosyncraticalignment between art and patents. As suggested above, more research is necessary to form a concise thesis or derive a particular theory from this relationship (especially considering the broad range of examples); however, it is safe to state that the projects show a pattern of art activity that afrms the shared values and methods of ownership and protection of the global industries of culture, science and law.

champs recontextualization of industrial design presaged projects that join issues of aesthetics with those of patented innovation. Presented below is a chronological compendium of intersections between contemporary art and utility patents.

Fig. 1. Yves Klein, Do-Do-Do, sponges, pebbles, dry blue pigment, synthetic resin on panel, 199.0 165.0 18.0 cm (78.3 64.9 7 in), 1960. (Private collection. Yves Klein, ADAGP, Paris.) The sponge wall relief is saturated with Kleins patented International Klein Blue (IKB). Initially, Klein used sponges as a tool to apply IKB to objects. Then, taking note of their symbolic potential in relationship to his Rosicrucian spiritual beliefs, he began to use these porous forms as a central material.

THE PRESCIENCE OF MARCEL DUCHAMPS READY-MADES

Marcel Duchamp did not directly address patents in his art; however, his transformation of industrial-based objects into ready-mades by placing them into an art context includes an indirect commentary on the patent concept in relationship to art [1]. In fact, Duchamps idea is further developed below in relation to Michael Ashers project, which specically characterizes industrial, commercial objects as original patented design, not unlike original art and with similar forces driving their production, status and contextual transformations. Du-

Robert Thill (author), 274 Gates Avenue, #7, Brooklyn, NY 11216-1361, U.S.A. E-mail: rst0@juno.com.

2004 Robert Thill

LEONARDO, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 117124, 2004

117

YVES KLEIN: ARTISTIC EXPRESSION, TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS AND SPIRITUAL EVOLUTION

Precisely through the medium of the patenting process, Yves Klein often linked institutional authority to his art as a persuasive yet subversive signier of value. For example, in 1960, Klein obtained a French patent for his signature color form, a medium blue with a mat surface, under the name of International Klein Blue (IKB) [2]. The patent was for the innovative use of a colorless, transparent polyvinyl acetate to bind a commercially available dry ultramarine

pigment. The pigment could be applied to a surface in a liquid form; when dried, it approximated the color and material quality of the unaltered pigment. By infusing a conventionally prominent visual feature of artcolorwith the undeniable originality conveyed by its patent value, this undertaking effectively challenged viewers who might not see the intrinsic art value of an object coated with blue pigmentation or who might question the innovation in a narrow relationship to art-historical precedence in monochrome painting. In contrast, a vibrant eld of blue pigmentation might suggest to the viewer the limitations of worldly materials and perceptions. In

fact, Thomas McEvilley has noted Kleins agreement with Max Heindels Rosicrucian belief that religion, science and art must reunite in a higher expression of the good, the true and the beautiful in order for humankind to make the transition to another plane of existence [3]. Recognizing them as objects that were potentially symbolic of porous matter that could merge with spirit, Klein made natural sponges a central vehicle in IKB wall works and sculptures (see Fig. 1). In addition to IKB, Klein created seven other art-linked patent inventions, each of which underscored a correlation of values in artistic expression, technological progress and spiritual evolution.

Fig. 2. Dorothee Fischer, folding exhibition invitation/poster advertisement with the heading, Denise Rene Left Bank Presents an Invention by Konrad Lueg, dark silver-gray ink on uorescent red-orange paper, 12 9 5 /8 in (31.8 24.5 cm), 1968. ( Dorothee Fischer. Courtesy Konrad Fischer Galerie, Dsseldorf. Photo Sarah DeSantis.) Designed by Dorothee Fischer, who was married to Konrad Lueg (aka Konrad Fischer), the document graphically represents the silhouette effect of Luegs invention of the Schattenwnde or Schattenrume (shadow walls or shadow rooms). The image and the additional text, which announces a presentation of Emanuel Ungaros fashion-design collection and live psychedelic music, vividly conjure the cultural moment of the late 1960s in Paris, France.

KONRAD LUEG: CENTRALIZING THE SPECTATOR IN AN EPHEMERAL ART INVENTION

Konrad Lueg responded innovatively to his particular experience of the growing role of the spectator as consumer after moving from the communist culture of East Germany to the capitalist culture of West Germany. In 1968, Lueg applied for patents on Process and equipment for creating silhouette images that cast the viewer as the subject [4]. Akin to a photogram, the Schattenwnde or Schattenrume (shadow walls or shadow rooms) allowed viewers to see a eeting visual trace of themselves on the gallery walls. The images were made by mixing paint pigment with colored phosphorescent pigment and applying the mixture to wall-mounted canvas. The paintings were shown in dark gallery rooms, illuminated by ashing lights that caused the panels to glow in the colors used. When a viewer stood before the wall in a darkened gallery and a ash from a strobe light was discharged from behind him or her, the uorescent light activated the luminous pigments, and when the gallery returned to darkness, the exposed surface areas began emitting phosphorescent light. Fittingly, the gures shadow was optically dened by its lack of visual radiance. Exhibited in 1968 and accompanied by an invitation/poster (see Fig. 2), Luegs centralization of the spectator in an ephemeral art that depended upon a specic circumstance and environment can be understood as a continuation of his previous attempts to confront and expose the circuitry of the commodication of life [5]. The Schattenwand form challenged cultural categories by collapsing art, subject matter, audience, materials, methods of production, time of execution and exhibition into a single format.

118

Thill, Intellectual Property

THE EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE: CONTEMPORARY ART IN AN INSTITUTIONAL PATENT CONTEXT

Emblematic of arts intricate union with a diverse range of institutions, ever since its inception in 1977 the European Patent Ofce (EPO) has had a consistent policy of acquiring contemporary art for display on its premises in Munich, The Hague, Vienna and Berlin (see Fig. 4). While it has the progressive goal of connecting art and invention through the power of imagination, with its potential to initiate the exchange of ideas and opposing views, and encouraging the linkage of creativity in art and science, the institutional tone of the text of their publications seems at times to be incongruously rigid: The underlying aim of the EPOs art program is to stimulate new thinking on how art can be exhibited, tolerated, and respected in a working environment [9]. Like the art collections of corporate, educational and religious institutions, the EPO also utilizes arts increasingly complex representative role as a pliant conveyor of cultural meaning and values to meet the EPOs own chang-

Fig. 3. William W. Adkins, Patent Pending: Hot Burning Sand Cuff, ballpoint pen on posterboard (double-sided), 22 28 in, ca. 19921995. ( William W. Adkins. Photo Ricco/Maresca Gallery.) In addition to the drawing and handwritten description of his self-certied pseudopatent/visionary artwork, Adkins assigns a value of $18,800.00 to the invention (see upper left-hand corner, third row, second phrase). The verso states: The certicate is for the cuff.

Luegs attempt to patent the process served as a reminder to increasingly international, capitalist societies that cultural expressions are continually negotiated in relationship to private ownership and the larger social context [6].

WILLIAM W. ADKINS: AN UNTRAINED INNOVATOR IS RECLASSIFIED AS A VISIONARY ARTIST

Individual intention and social circumstance are critical to the consideration of William W. Adkinss work in relation to the categories of art and invention. Begun about 1971 in Kansas City, Kansas, Adkinss creation of patent drawings and patent models of his own invention proposals is complicated by his physical impairments, which include atypical neurological functioning [7]. Adkinss drawings and models are based on his own conception and interpretation of a patent application and do not conform to the requirements of the United States Patent and Trademark Ofce (USPTO). His patent-pending drawingsmade with ballpoint pen on posterboard erode convention by closely joining a handwritten text with the drawing, and his patent models are idiosyncratic constructions made of available materials,

such as scrap wood, sponges and chicken wire. Conceptually, these detailed articulations might accurately be described as pseudo-patentseach bearing Adkinss self-certication. In 1995, his continuing endeavors came to the attention of art professionals and were redirected into the outsider or visionary art market. A student of Adkinss work situates it in relationship to art: The media for his ideas are patents and models instead of painting and sculpture [8]. At times the appearance of Adkinss proposals is difcult to reconcile with their intended use; he offers the following prescription for one of his most straightforward invention proposals, entitled Patent Pending: Hot Burning Sand Cuff (Fig. 3): Use this device in the desert for electric wiring around house trailers or freight elevators. Adkinss desire to patent his inventions reects the importance of patented innovation, regardless of its usefulness, in the popular imagination. His documents subsequent recognition and promotion as art speak to the phenomenon of ever-expanding and specializing art markets and their participants shifting agreements of perception and valuation, with the accompanying openings created for ambiguous practices like Adkinss to be seen, even if not clearly understood.

Fig. 4. Maurizio Nannucci, Mehr als das Auge sehen kann (More than Meets the Eye), an installation at the European Patent Ofce (EPO), Munich, 1999. ( Maurizio Nannucci. Photo Jean-Marie Bottequin.) As part of the EPOs series of special exhibitions and publications that promote EPOs art collection and European artists from member states, Nannucci employs a thoughtprovoking illuminated text, which he positions as a visual caption beneath the imposing faade of the EPO.

Thill, Intellectual Property

119

ing needs. Through public relations, indoctrination and patronage, the fostering of art within these societal institutions often appears to champion creative expression, inquiry and devotion as valuable in and of themselves, thereby positioning the institutions support of art as redeeming the organization from the negative impact of their participation in commercial interests and monopolistic exploitation. In the process, this form of collecting inadvertently reveals arts often-indiscriminate relationship to the same set of motivations and conditions.

BUCKMINSTER FULLER: VISUAL REFLECTIONS ON PATENTED INVENTIONS

Purposefully transgressing the limitations of professional elds and institutional contexts, Richard Buckminster Fuller described himself as a comprehensive anticipatory design scientist [10]. Advocating generalized learning and problem-solving in opposition to specialization and busy work, Fuller sought to alleviate social and economic ills by inserting efcient technical innovations into the environment, with the intention of helping humankind to understand more rapidly its larger role in the universe. In 1981, Fuller reected on the relationship between art and patented invention, using a selection of his diverse

portfolio of 25 patented inventions as the basis of a suite of prints entitled Inventions: Twelve Around One [11]. Evoking a geometric form [12], the series consists of 13 pairs of 30-x-40-in screenprinted sheets. Each pair includes a drawing of a patented invention and a photograph of its physical realization. The patent drawing is white ink on colorless transparent polyester lm, with a blue backing sheet that acts as a contrasting ground and gives the drawing the appearance of a blueprint. The photographic image is black ink on rag paper [13]. This potential diptych presentation, which contrasts the aesthetic of at utilitarian diagrammatic reprography with the illusionistic three-dimensional gradations of photography, suggests a progression from idea to material form. However, reecting the complexity of lived experience and confronting popular misconceptions about the logical ow of problem-solving and discovery, this display and narrative interpretation is mutable. Like many of Fullers innovations, Inventions is partially modular; the elements can be shown separately in two frames, as described above, or as a single work in one frame, with the blue paper backing sheet subtracted and the white ink patent drawing on the colorless transparent lm overlaid onto the photographic image. The latter format (see Fig. 5)in which areas of shared tonal values meld togethercreates an

Fig. 6. Michael Asher, Michael Asher, installation at the Renaissance Society at the University of Chicago, 1990. ( Michael Asher. Photo Tim Van Eynde.) The overlooked commonalities of originality in art and utility design are broached in the circumstance of the university art gallery. The number 3 on the windowpane denotes the sash lock on the gallery window, which is described on the reverse of one of three freestanding walls in the gallery as U.S. Patent # 4,050,724, invented in Japan by Yoshitaka Nakanishi in 1975. It is placed in theoretical contrast to the ideas of professors at the university at the turn of the century, which privileged unique design and handcraftsmanship over what they perceived as the unoriginal design and inartistic methods of mass production.

ambiguity of space and time that is neither a before-and-after view nor a simultaneous representation, and which symbolically both joins and distinguishes between the practices of art-making and inventing [14].

Fig. 5. Buckminster Fuller, WatercraftRowing Needles, from the print portfolio Inventions: Twelve Around One. Two discrete screenprinted sheets shown as overlay, black ink on rag paper and white ink on colorless polyester lm, 30 40 in, 1981. ( Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller, Santa Barbara, CA) Fullers prints join his patent drawings with photographs of the realization of the invention in a carefully structured meditation on the relationship between art and invention. (Original photo by John Loengard, from which Fuller derived this image.)

MICHAEL ASHER: CIRCUMSTANCE AND PERCEPTIONS OF ORIGINALITY

In 1988 Michael Asher began a project addressing the perception of originality in relationship to art and patents, ideology and context; it was executed in 1990 at the Renaissance Society at the University of Chicago [15]. The project used three freestanding walls in the gallery. On the front of each was conventionallooking didactic exhibition material, including graphic portraits of late-19thcentury and early-20th-century lightskinned men (representing professors rather than artists), along with their names and quotationsall in white on a eld of dark red, which is the universitys ofcial color. Each professors texts referred to the philosophy of the Arts and Crafts Movement, which sought to resurrect handmade production and aesthetics in order to bridge the gap between labor and consumption that was engendered by modernism and mechanized mass production, as well as to promote improved taste in the working class.

120

Thill, Intellectual Property

Fig. 7. Lisa Schmitz, detail of the interior room of the World Artistic Property Organization (WAPO) installation at the Akademie der Knste, Berlin, 1993. ( Lisa Schmitz) A room within a room is supported by a foundation of contemporary patent documents in the WAPO installation. On a controversial historic cultural site in the former German Democratic Republic, it also included an ofce area to emphasize the interdependence between the artist and the bureaucrat. Visitors were offered a cup of coffee and a talk about the Old and the New and art and invention as intellectual property in the reunied Germany. Implicitly, the concerns and social context of the WAPO raised the fundamental question What makes the self ones own?

In stark contrast, the backs of the walls were painted white, each with large black text and numerals identifying one of three patented utilitarian innovations that were functioning xtures in the space of the gallery. Each patent number was followed by a dark-red endnote. Corresponding numbers in the same color were placed on or near their physical referents. The patented innovations were a window-sash chain, a radiator cover, and a window-sash lock (see Fig. 6). By reminding art viewers that what might be referred to as a Duchampian ready-made in the context of ne art is often already physically adjacent to artseamlessly cloaked in its functionat the same time that it is a recognized original form in the context of utility design innovation, Asher highlighted the contradictions and afnities between multiple market concerns that perpetuate the desirability of originality in art and design, along with the actual operation of the design process of mass production [16,17].

boldly and thoughtfully proposed a new institution to be named the World Artistic Property Organization (WAPO) [18], which would operate as a patent-ofce equivalent for art ideas. Among many other questions, WAPO project asked, Is it possible to create an organization that recognizes, protects, and supports artistic property without subjecting it to the stranglehold of bureaucratic systems? [19] This potential institution was rst presented by Schmitz in Berlin as a communication project/installation that engaged an exhibition site with a history of controversial ideological expression and containment [20], thus intensifying the thematic relationship between the old and the new, symbolized by joining the subjects of art and patents with the site. The installation included an ofce environment, which featured historic and contemporary documentation related to patents and copyrights, and an interior room with walls that were mounted upon a base of evenly stacked contemporary European patent documents (see Fig. 7). Together, the discrete spaces created a multifaceted meeting/viewing experience, in which viewers could consider the mutual dependence of bureaucratic systems and artistic enterprises, which are often perceived as being in opposition to each other [21]. Most directly, the WAPO installation pondered the distinctions between art and invention through the differences in the legal protections of copyright and patents, asking who bene-

ts from the disparities and how artists might begin a constructive dialogue about how to protect art from exploitative appropriation. Phase two of the WAPO project in 1995, which included collaboration with Norbert Nowotsch and Mark Olson, explored the creation of a Web-based platform and repository for the documentation and disclosure of art ideas [22].

LUIS CAMNITZER: THE VANITY OF THE INVENTOR AND THE VANITY OF THE ARTIST
Luis Camnitzers project Patent Application (1997) examines historical institutional subject matter in order to present an enlightening parallel between art and patents, with relevance to contemporary practitioners in both elds. Camnitzers installation offers a disarming analogy between the vanity of the inventor and the vanity of the artist, and the social expression of both through ambition and the display of abilities. It centers on an inventors desire to apply for a patent to assure that he was credited with authoring an invention, without regard to its socialor anti-socialvalue. The invention is a high-capacity crematorium, designed by the engineer Fritz Sander of the Tpffer Company and submitted to the German Patent Ofce in Berlin in November 1942. In Camnitzers project (see Fig. 8), two diagrams of the invention have been enlarged and etched into the surface of

Fig. 8. Luis Camnitzer, Patent Application, installation at the Galerie Basta, Hamburg, 10 January1 March 1997. ( Luis Camnitzer. Photo Dirk Masbaum. Courtesy of Galerie Basta, Hamburg.) The tabletop in Camnitzers installation is etched with patent drawings of an invention for a high-capacity crematorium by Fritz Sander, which he submitted to the German Patent Ofce in Berlin in 1942. Text on the border of the glass quotes Sanders testimony before a Russian military tribunal, in which he stated that the invention could not be patented because it was a secret state affair. Even during a trial for war crimes, Sander seemed still to be attempting to garner recognition for his ingenuity. Camnitzers project ensures that Sander will be remembered for his invention, his drive to patent it and his lack of reection on his contribution to a genocidal holocaust.

LISA SCHMITZS WORLD ARTISTIC PROPERTY ORGANIZATION: A PATENT-OFFICE EQUIVALENT FOR ART
Moving beyond the illumination of cultural blind spots, Lisa Schmitz in 1993

Thill, Intellectual Property

121

a sheet of glass that is horizontally mounted on a tubular metal frame positioned on a rectangular section of white carpet [23]. Text taken from statements made by Sander before a Russian military tribunal, in which he said that the invention could not be ofcially registered at the Patent Ofce in Berlin because it was classied as a secret state affair by the German Third Reich, forms a border for the drawings. This table-like object, set in a room-installation beneath a single hanging ceiling lamp, is accompanied by 19 evocative wall-mounted color photographs of patches of grass-seeded earth. By highlighting a remarkable attempt to be recognized through a patent application for the creation of an invention intended to hasten the disposal of human corpses during a genocidal holocaust, Camnitzers project creates salient interconnections between ones hopes for achievement, nancial reward and contribution, the inuence of social circumstance in creating and training this desire, and the effects that uncritical design and production might engender [24,25].

Fig. 10. Diane Ludin (concept) and Hans Zaunere (programming), i-Biology Patent Engine (dynamic database web site), begun 2002, ongoing. Ludins patent tracing engine is Tactical Media, aimed at calling attention to the increasing number and variety of patents related to life forms. Its low- structure is used to explore le sharing on the Web as an art form.

L.A. ANGELMAKER: WHAT CONSTITUTES COMPLETION IN ART, INVENTION OR ANYTHING?

A 1999 project by L.A. Angelmaker questioned the fundamental social impulse toward productionthe drive to move
Fig. 9. L.A. Angelmaker, Reduction to Practice: Collapsible Platform Assembly Patents by Alvin S. Grant: License or Sale of Utility Patents Available through Gallery (U.S. Patent, August 21, 1990, 4,949,647, Collapsible Platform Assembly), photocopy toner on white cardstock, exterior of frame: 9 5/16 7 3/8 11/8 in, 1999. ( L.A. Angelmaker. Photo Dean Brown. Alvin Grant patent courtesy of Norma J. Grant.) Angelmaker offered patents for license of sale through a commercial ne-arts gallery. This patent drawing is one of ve of a portfolio of two patents. The drawings were used on ve different versions of the exhibition announcement card; together, they formed a print portfolio.

from inception to completion, problem to solution, beginning to endin a project intimately intertwined with the life cycle, survival and curiosity. It further asked, What actually constitutes completion, especially in the face of continuous disposability, neglect, decay, restoration, and ruin? The artist sought to offerthrough a commercial ne-arts gallerythe license or sale of patents for inventions that had not yet been commercially produced [26]. With the primary title Reduction to Practice, the project presented U.S.-granted patents that remained apart from the marketplace to emphasize the often continuous and permanent state of potential between the completion of a patent and the actual production of the invention. The gallery offered two utility patents for collapsibleplatform-assembly technology by Alvin S. Grant [27]. Angelmaker identied and secured the patents by responding to an advertisement for them in the Ofcial Gazette of the USPTO. In addition to creating a comparison between patents and copyrights, the project altered many conventional roles, including causing the unrealized patented innovation to assume the added role of art; assigning the gallery owner the additional role of technology-transfer agent; and confusing the roles of artist and inventor. The exhibition announcement cards featured a printed image of one of ve different patent drawings. Highlighting the unusual position held by professional patent drawingsas a simultaneously traditional, utilitarian form of representa-

tion and a legally sanctioned embodiment of originality and innovationthe ve postcards were on display in the gallery as a framed print portfolio (Fig. 9). However, they were not available for purchase until the patents were licensed or sold or until the show ended, raising anew the old question Exactly what is for sale in a gallery?

JOSEPH SCANLAN: A POETIC PATENTED RECIPE FOR DIRT

In 2001 Joseph Scanlan led a U.S. patent application as the conceptual framework of an art undertaking [28]. The patented Plant growth medium is primarily composed of coffee grounds that are mixed with other commercial and industrial waste, including gypsum, sawdust and Epsom salts [29]. Once mixed and processed, these unlikely materials create a synthetic soil suitable for growing plants. Scanlan exhibits his innovative loam, which is entitled Pay Dirt, in installation-style congurations that include a gallery with a shovel planted rmly in a scattered mound of the soil (Color Plate A No. 1); displays of processoriented stages of fermentation and pH balancing that enable the latent minerals to become soluble; an array of process drawings for the potting soil and packaging designs and graphics for its marketing and distribution; and stacks of the nal product. Scanlan describes his intent in patenting his innovation as twofold. First, he saw the invention as a viable commercial product:

122

Thill, Intellectual Property

For me, no matter the form the idea takespatents, recipes, mass-produced productsit is art. Historically speaking, I do not see Conceptual art and Pop art as being mutually exclusive in the typical pop/arcane, object/nonobject, image/ text way. The patent was a way of collapsing intellectual rigor with commercial appeal.

although intended to be understandable to a layperson, it is often opaque to the uninitiated. An example of a patent in the i-BPE is Patent No. 6,307,121, Bacteriophage-based transgenic sh for mutation detection.

tion fr den Kapitalistischen Realismus (Life with Pop: A Demonstration for Capitalist Realism)an oftcited multifaceted event in which he and Gerhardt Richter linked contemporary art and domestic design with social, economic and political ideology by displaying themselves among items for sale in a Dsseldorf home-furnishings store. For a detailed account see Kellein [4] pp. 1523. 6. Luegs patenting was not a conscious critique; it was a protective act. He and his dealer at that time, Hans Mayer, wanted to ensure that other artists would not use the concept. Since there was no interest, they abandoned the patent in 1971. This information was provided via an e-mail by Bettina Ruhrberg of Galerie Hans Mayer to the author, 15 September 2003. 7. Specic diagnosis of Adkinss neurological condition remains elusive. Margaret Doan describes Adkins as having one eye that has gone bad; Margaret Doan, William W. Adkins: Field Notes Prepared by Margaret Doan from Interviews with Bill Adkins, February 2, 1995August 17, 1995 (written in Kansas City, Kansas; in Adkinss le at the Ricco/Maresca Gallery in New York), not paginated. If his vision is impaired, this could be a factor in his drawing and model making. 8. Doan [7]. 9. Monica Poalas et al., eds., Art at the European Patent Ofce: A Selection of the Works of Art at the Buildings of the European Patent Ofce (Munich, Germany: EPO, 1997) p. 8. 10. See http://www.b.org/EveryThing/every thing_i_know10.htm. 11. This project is reproduced in R. Buckminster Fuller, introduction by Calvin Tomkins, Buckminster Fuller: Inventions: Twelve Around One (Cincinnati, OH: Carl Solway Gallery, 1981), not paginated. 12. The number of patents that Fuller included in the portfolio corresponds to the structure of the tetrahedron form, which he used to generate the geodesic dome. 13. In the print portfolio, each set of the 13 parts includes Fullers short patent text screenprinted on rag paper as a fourth and separate component that is also reproduced in the book; Fuller [10]. 14. Another venture related to art and patents in this period is Hubert Duprats biological behavior and system intervention project, French patent document no. 83 02024, Manufacture of cases for the aquatic larvae of caddis ies with the help of precious materials, led 9 February 1983. See Hubert Duprat and Christian Besson, The Wonderful Caddis Worm: Sculptural Work in Collaboration with Trichoptera, Leonardo 31, No. 3, 173177 (1998). Unfortunately, the text omits Duprats motive for patenting the innovation, which was to protect the process from use by the jewelry industry; however, Duprat writes, In fact, reconsidering the act today reveals a double navet. First in believing that it would be of interest to a jewelerin twenty years I was never solicited for such a request for this application. Second, in thinking that such a patent would have protected me if anyone in the jewelry industry were interested in it. Referencing the artistic inventions by Duchamp (rotoreliefs), Klein (IKB) and his own work, Duprat observes that when the artist tries to enter the social realm, he or she also enters the economic realm; he writes, In fact, at least these examples show us that the only eld in which these inventions function well is in the exclusive arena of art, at least so far. Quoted from an e-mail by Duprat to the author, 26 November 2003. 15. The project is documented in Birgit Pelzer (translated from the French by Richard Miller) and Anne Rorimer, in Joseph Scanlan, ed., Michael Asher (Chicago, IL: The Renaissance Society at the University of Chicago, 1990). 16. Ashers factual, cultural analysis is contrasted by Walter Martins ctive, humorous patent drawings from 1990. Martins patent drawings, which were drafted, signed and aged to resemble 19th-century

Second, he was pleased by the way the legal structure of intellectual property strains under the absurdity of a recipe for dirt. In fact, Scanlan says, The text of my patent is quite poetic, evoking the writing of Gertrude Stein, Samuel Beckett and others. Scanlan explains, Where most people tend to critique intellectual property in the deconstructive/Napster/hippie sort of way, I prefer to adhere as closely as possible to the system and let it celebrate/critique itself [30,31].

SUMMARY
The diverse undertakings presented in this text demonstrate a pattern of continuous exploration of the relationship between contemporary art and utility patents as intellectual property. They offer a remarkable range of aesthetic expressions and points of engagement between the subjects: showing the participants critical thinking, imaginative dialogues, melding of disciplines, subversive acts, humor and idealism, acceptance of circumstances and determined activism in relation to social and economic power and bureaucracy. The parallel between art and patents highlights each areas real and imagined dynamic power and prestige, calling into question the ideology, values and economic systems that support and perpetuate the drive for originality, exclusion and recognition. Finally, implicit in many of the endeavors and interactions is the question of whether or not the economically based patent system of protection and disclosure that rewards inventors with temporary monopoly of the invention actually fullls its stated purpose of encouraging rapid production of innovations to benet society as a whole. References and Notes
1. This idea was suggested to me by A.S. Bessa. By way of contrast, Duchamps display of his rotoreliefsdiscs featuring designs that when rotated create the optical illusion of motion in perspectiveat an inventors fair in Paris served to place artistic innovation into an invention context. 2. Yves Klein, International Klein Blue, French patent no. 63471, dated 19 May 1960. See Carol C. Mancusi-Ungaro, A Technical Note on IKB, in Yves Klein et al., Yves Klein, 19281962: A Retrospective, exh. cat. (Houston, TX: Institute for the Arts, Rice University, 1982) pp. 258259. See also Jean-Paul Ledeur, Yves Klein: Catalogue of Published Editions and Sculptures, Pascale F. Ledeur, trans. (Belgium: Guy Pieters, 2000) p. 84. 3. Thomas McEvilley, Yves Klein and Rosicrucianism, in Klein et al. [2] pp. 238254. 4. Konrad Fischer-Lueg, French patent document no. 1554961, Process and equipment for creating silhouette images, led 23 January 1968. Konrad Fischer-Lueg, German patent document no. 1903202, Process and equipment for creating silhouette images, led 23 January 1969, disclosed 4 September 1969. The patent documents contradict the patent date of 1966 published in Thomas Kellein, Ich nenne mich als Maler Konrad Lueg (When I Paint My Name Is Konrad Lueg), exh. cat. (Bielefeld, Germany: Kunsthalle Bielefeld, 1999) p. 35. 5. In 1963 Lueg explored the increasing currency of the artist as subject in Leben mit Popeine Demonstra-

DIANE LUDIN: TACTICAL MEDIA AIMED AT PATENTS RELATED TO LIFE FORMS

In an effort to highlight the growing arena of patents related to life forms, Diane Ludin created an art project on the Web that draws attention to this phenomenon. Simultaneously, her project was a response to the unfullled initial promise of the Internet as a forum that offered a level eld of information sharing. She intended the project as a form of Tactical Media, which she views as a contribution to Web activism. Ludin focused her critique on patents, which she equates with copyrights and views as the brick that institutions use to build their intellectual properties, which shape economic and cultural futures [32]. In early 2002, Ludin began developing the i-Biology Patent Engine (i-BPE) to explore these concepts through the art form of le sharing on the Web [33]. More conventionally, the project operates as a museumlike collection of germane patents drawn from the USPTO Web archive. The collecting is done by watchful copy-andpaste donors, who are also interested in displaying potentially harmful transgressions and the ethical implications of patenting biology. In an intentionally low media intervention, Ludin used U.S. patents, which are open to public access on the Web, as the projects source (Fig. 10). Ludins patent-tracing engine allows users to follow a ve-step system on the web site, which includes identifying a patent in the USPTO archive and entering it into the patent lter, adding it to the sites list, which assigns a barcode to the patent. The ltering process is also intended to expose the specialized language used to articulate innovation:

Thill, Intellectual Property

123

patents, address the many myths of the success and folly of the inventor (and by extension, the artist), including the entrepreneur who gets rich by patenting a familiar object and the nave tinkerer who goes broke but achieves originality through patenting a useless invention; the inventions include an ordinary comb and an extraordinary mechanical crying baby http://ppowgallery.com. 17. Joining art and utility, Christoph Kellers patented inventions resist the anti-utilitarianism of art by making art that has a practical function and creates a new visual experience. They include a 1991 patent for a camera that captures multiple simultaneous perspectives in panoramic photographs through the continuous movement of lm over the shutter during exposure (see http://salondigital.zkm.de/~wapo/christoph.keller.html) and a 1993 patent for a device that reects sunlight into shaded areas of the built environment (see http:// www.helioex.de/helioex/helioex.index.html). 18. WAPOs name references the Geneva-based World International Patent Organization (WIPO). 19. Norbert Nowotsch, Mark Olson and Lisa Schmitz, World Artistic Property OrganizationWAPO, Ars Electronica Katalog Archive at http://www.aec.at. 20. The Experimental Studio of the Akademie der Knste at the Pariser Platz, where the exhibition was held, was the former studio of Albert Speer, who installed the Model of Germania in this space and presented it to Hitler. 21. Reecting the tension between artist and bureaucrat, Schmitz altered the space of the Experimental Studio of the Akademie der Knste by removing from viewwithout permissiona permanent display of photographic documentation of past art environments, art studios and art exhibits, mostly by German Democratic Republic artists. Schmitz writes that she removed the old documentation because I needed the physical empty space on the two walls, and I did not like at all that the WAPO presentation was confronted with visual ma-

terial that had nothing to do with my project. Schmitz further describes the exhibition scenario: Many former GDR visitors, who obviously were accustomed to perceiving art objects in their specic, usual ways in this place, suddenly were confronted by a rough installation of thousands of written papers, which they could not even read. Instead they were offered a cup of coffee and a talk about the Old and the New. E-mail to the author, 7 August 2001, supplemented by e-mail, 7 December 2003. 22. For details on all phases of the WAPO see http://www.zkm.de:81/~wapo/. 23. The tubular metal is gas pipe. My description of the projects meaning is based primarily on a onepage statement written by Luis Camnitzer about Patent Application, including a translation by Camnitzer of the text taken from statements by Fritz Sander. 24. According to Camnitzer [22], Sander was proud of the elegant solution of his design, the same as an artist is proud of his/her work of art, without regard for the consequences of that piece. The primary aim is to be recognized for ones talent, whether by a patent ofce or by a museum. It is the ideology of this private property of ideas and the ensuing competitiveness that ultimately can convert anybody into an accomplice in events like the Holocaust. 25. Noting earthly follies, the Mars Patent introduced the Mars Exhibition Site as a challenge to earthculture. It asks for new solutions and concepts. On the eve of the 21st century, Helene von Oldenburg and Claudia Reiches Mars Patent sought to reimagine spatial relationships, foster female identication, and add an interstellar twist to Web-based activity, questioning conventional exhibition forums. See http://www.mars-patent.org. 26. This project was made for the exhibition L.A. Angelmaker: Prior Art: A Retrospective, 19961999, held at M.Y. Art Prospects gallery in New York, 20 October20 November 1999 http://www. myartprospects.com/.

27. Alvin S. Grant, U.S. patent no. 4,949,647, Collapsible platform assembly, led 27 March 1989, granted 21 August 1990; and Alvin S. Grant, U.S. patent no. 5,669,314, Motorized collapsible platform assembly, led 1 December 1995, granted 23 September 1997. 28. Steve Mann is another artist who has been working with the patent concept during this period. Since 2000, he has led several patents in Canada, the U.S.A. and elsewhere as a critique of authority, power and control and as an expansive form of artistic expression and exhibition. Patent applications provide him with a tting form for both disclosing his inventions publicly and enclosing them through potential temporary monopoly. Manns inventions are disruptive statements in the subversive exhibition display space of governmental archives http:// wearcam.org/dusting/tpw/. 29. Scanlan, U.S. patent no. 6,488,732, Plant growth medium, led 9 May 2001, granted 3 December 2002. 30. Quotes from an e-mail by Scanlan to the author, 28 July 2003. 31. Moving patents into a theatrical audio realm, in 2001, Juan Muoz wrote a text based on a U.S. patent, entitled Optical Illusion-Producing Box (A Drummer inside a Rotating Box). Muozs text was set to music by Alberto Iglesias, read by actor John Malkovich and broadcast as the radio play A Registered Patent; it debuted at Documenta IX in Kassel, Germany. 32. Diane Ludins intentions are summarized from a telephone conversation with the author, 25 July 2003. 33. See http://www.ibiology.net. Manuscript received 20 May 2003.

Robert Thill is an independent writer.

124

Thill, Intellectual Property