Release of Report on ‘UK Artists, Copyright and Creative Commons'
The Arts Council England and OpenBusiness.cc announce the release of a report, which represents the results of a six-month study into artists’ attitudes towards copyright, creativity and alternative licensing practises, in particular Creative Commons (CC). Although the number of UK artists using open licensing has been growing for the last decade there had been no investigation into how or why such licences were being used.
This is a timely report which tells us something about how artists are increasingly using the law in innovative ways to distribute their work. It flags up the need for further research into the increasing use of open content licences not just by individuals but also by organisations and agencies worldwide and we are delighted to have provided some funds to allow Open Business to begin this analysis.
Bronac Ferran, Arts Council England
The focus of the report is twofold:
- to investigate how artists working in a digital environment view copyright, which structures many commercial relationships, but often prohibits sharing, copying and the easy adaptation of existing artistic works.
- to examine why some artists use Creative Commons licences, which, in contrast, facilitate sharing, copying and, depending on the terms of the particular licence used, allow derivative use for commercial or non-commercial purposes.
The report suggests that one key reason for artists’ using CC is that they perceive standard copyright as too complex and costly. CC licences are an effective and practical tool for new media artists, who adapt existing work. Artists are also using CC to exploit network effects and to better market their creative work. CC is still used by an avant-garde of mainly rather young artists; more than 140,000 websites in the UK make use of such licences.
The survey points towards a possible confusion between evolving working practices that involve re-use and remix and an individual caution about their own work. In general it can be summarised that artists are in need of simpler and more appropriate guidelines, which might be provided not only by the law, but also through funding and policy bodies such as Arts Council England.
9 Responses to “Release of Report on ‘UK Artists, Copyright and Creative Commons'”
Add yours.
Great to see ACE engaging with this work more, but I still don’t see much help from organisations in fostering CC-enabled work. Indeed, my experience is that while artists are clued in, it is often the funders, or gatekeepers to funding that need educating about the process and bringing up to speed on the benefits.
I believe some type of event that highlighted CC works, or the best, most progressive examples of these would be exceptionally beneficial. Definitely something I feel ACE or NESTA should be supporting in the UK.
[...] The Arts Council England und OpenBusiness.cc haben einen gemeinsamen Report zum Thema “UK Artists, Copyright and Creative Commons” (PDF) veröffentlicht. The focus of the report is twofold: [...]
[...] OpenBusiness.cc, with the Arts Council of England, released a report today on how and how much artists in the United Kingdom are taking advantage of the many perks of Creative Commons licenses. The results? A pleasant surprise. The report suggests that one key reason for artists’ using CC is that they perceive standard copyright as too complex and costly. CC licenses are an effective and practical tool for new media artists, who adapt existing work. Artists are also using CC to exploit network effects and to better market their creative work. CC is still used by an avant-garde of mainly rather young artists; more than 140,000 websites in the UK make use of such licenses. [...]
[...] OpenBusiness » Blog Archive » Release of Report on ‘UK Artists, Copyright and Creative Commons’ “The Arts Council England and OpenBusiness.cc announce the release of a report, which represents the results of a six-month study into artists’ attitudes towards copyright, creativity and alternative licensing practises, in particular Creative Commons ( (tags: creative-commons report art uk) [...]
[...] Release of Report on ‘UK Artists, Copyright and Creative Commons’ – “The report suggests that one key reason for artists’ using CC is that they perceive standard copyright as too complex and costly. CC licences are an effective and practical tool for new media artists, who adapt existing work.” are UK artists smarter than the rest of the worlds? [...]
[...] Diese Studie gibt es bei Open Business zum Download. Es wurden 83 Künstler [...]
Creative use of Creative Commons licenses…
OpenBusiness has published a report by the Arts Council England titled "UK Artists – Their Approach To Copyright and Creative Commons" which makes for interesting reading. The focus of the report is twofold: to investigate how artists working…
[...] Creative Commons and copyright preception in the UK A while ago, I received an email from M. David regarding a report that had been issued on OpenBusiness.cc by the Art Council England. This report draws a picture of the copyright status among artists in the UK. A survey was carried over a few months on 83 artists [1] from the UK. The results of the survey showed that among the panel: Current copyright laws and mechanisms are too complicated and seen as protecting the powerful rather than the artist.
Recent copyright status provided by the Creative Commons are actually fitting well the spirit of those artists.The first statement was fairly predictable. Copyrights are complicated to apprehend, understand, apply and respect for the common person. This is rather an issue considering that the last decades have brought to the fellow the means by which he or she could exercise his or her art. In fact I would dare say that the vast majority of people can become an apprentice of any art for little money.
However the capacity of protecting a piece of work through copyright is virtually impossible if we only consider the existing yet outdated mechanisms. The report said: Responses varied from ‘copyright helps the rich’ to more ambivalent arguments, such as copyright is a ‘double edged sword,’ recognising its intention to protect but also noting the debilitating results of this protection interms of disabling re-use of existing images or other creative content. All the artists surveyed also used conventional copyright licences. Of the 45 artists completing the online survey, not one subscribed to the view that copyright was a spur to creativity or was helpful in securing income.The second point the report shown was that the use of alternative (read not mainstream) licenses such as those provided by the Creative Commons (CC).
The CC licenses are based on copyright. When you use one of the CC license you inform in what terms your work can be used, shared, distributed and exploited. The idea is to offer a simple way to achieve the right level of protection you require for your work via copyright while, and this point is critical, informing the level of access others can have to and on your work. CC licenses must be seen as much as a protection as a mean to share and collaborate with anyone.CC licenses are fairly widely spread within the UK if we believe the review which reports around 170,000 websites using it throughout the country.
Interestingly what comes out of the survey showed that the main reason for those artists to use CC licenses was primarly practical but also a powerful tool to market their work by surfing the network of people claiming to use a CC license. As the report shows the use is not really for political or philisophical beliefs that the System is wrong and the CC movement could change it. However considering this movement has started only five years ago I would acknowledge that this could change in the next five years.
In fact the report clearly demonstrates that the idea of sharing and collaboration is not yet fluently integrated by artists when it says: Only two respondents who search online for CC licensed material for incorporation in to their own work described this act as collaboration. This demonstrates that thinking about this concept has not kept up with the reality of creating online. Perhaps this indicates that the imagined community lacks the coherence required for participants to see this mode of sharing as a form of collaboration and so conceptions of the meaning of collaboration have not grown to meet the networked digital environment.
This question is central towards the spreading of work based on CC licenses. It shows how impregnated with decades of copyrighting as a form of lock-in we are and it can be difficult for us not to see even a CC license as solely a way to control our work. Re-using in any shape or form a piece of work controlled by a CC license means collaborating with the original author. The nuance brought by the CC scheme is hard to grasp but fundamental to its success in improving the way art (or any work fitting the license context) is broadcasted and viable in the coming years.
Overall this report is very interesting snapshot of the status of copyright among the common people nowadays. Exciting times lie ahead of us.I will conclude by a rather long excerpt from the report which summarizes entirely the root problem I think: Purporting to balance the competing interests of artists, publishers and the general public, copyright is supposed to regulate the market in creative expression. This scheme of regulation has recently faced intense scrutiny,particularly with reference to digital technologies and the rise of online distribution for creative work. The legal tensions may be partially explained by the Romantic notion of the single creator, whose work is original and not dependent on context, inspiration and copying.
It can be argued that creativity lacks a representative, contemporary model of creative production. Under this model, ‘original’ works are characterised as discrete, free-standing objects, generated by artists who exist in isolation from their social, political andcultural surroundings. The post-modern paradigm of creativity is incongruous with this model; artists today typically and self-consciously use, process and re-use their information environment in producing new works, whether in an explicit dialogue or as part of a more subtle or perhaps even hidden critique.
[1] The survey was made online, by phone and in meetings. It appears that most of those artists were either computer literates or at least were browsing the Internet on a daily basis. Published Thursday, December 07, 2006 12:00 PM by Sylvain [...]
[...] I’m still thinking my first system was also really good where I’d make an original and a remix of another song once a month. After I finish concentrating on the current projects, I may end up reverting to that old system. I’m also considering trying to find CC licensed works that allow remixing more though. It was a bit inspiring when I read in a British study that many artists would be thrilled to have their work remix. I won’t make any predictions, but that’s what I hope to do for future remix projects. [...]