http___www.ted.com_talks_johanna_blakley_lessons_from_fashion_s_free_culture_transcript_language_hr_1.xml
1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.12 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 5.1 5.2 5.3 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 8.1 8.2 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.10 10.1 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.9 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9 13.10 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 15.1 15.2 15.3 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 17.1 17.2 17.3 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 19.6 19.7 20.1 20.2 20.3 20.4 20.5 20.6 20.7 21.1 21.2 21.3 21.4 21.5 21.6 21.7 21.8 21.9 21.10 21.11 21.12 21.13 21.14 21.15 21.16 21.17 21.18 22.1 23.1 23.2 23.3 23.4 23.5 23.6 24.1 24.2 24.3 24.4 24.5 24.6 24.7 24.8 24.9 24.10 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 25.5 25.6 25.7 25.8 25.9 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.4 26.5 26.6 26.7 27.1 27.2 28.1 28.2
Transcript 0:16 I heard this amazing story about Miuccia Prada. She's an Italian fashion designer. She goes to this vintage store in Paris with a friend of hers. She's rooting around, she finds this one jacket by Balenciaga -- she loves it. She's turning it inside out. She's looking at the seams. She's looking at the construction. Her friend says, "Buy it already." She said, "I'll buy it, but I'm also going to replicate it." Now, the academics in this audience may think, "Well, that sounds like plagiarism." But to a fashionista, what it really is is a sign of Prada's genius: that she can root through the history of fashion and pick the one jacket that doesn't need to be changed by one iota, and to be current and to be now. 1:00 You might also be asking whether it's possible that this is illegal for her to do this. Well, it turns out that it's actually not illegal. In the fashion industry, there's very little intellectual property protection. They have trademark protection, but no copyright protection and no patent protection to speak of. All they have, really, is trademark protection, and so it means that anybody could copy any garment on any person in this room and sell it as their own design. The only thing that they can't copy is the actual trademark label within that piece of apparel. That's one reason that you see logos splattered all over these products. It's because it's a lot harder for knock-off artists to knock off these designs because they can't knock off the logo. But if you go to Santee Alley, yeah. (Laughter) Well, yeah. Canal Street, I know. And sometimes these are fun, right? 1:57 Now, the reason for this, the reason that the fashion industry doesn't have any copyright protection is because the courts decided long ago that apparel is too utilitarian to qualify for copyright protection. They didn't want a handful of designers owning the seminal building blocks of our clothing. And then everybody else would have to license this cuff or this sleeve because Joe Blow owns it. But too utilitarian? I mean is that the way you think of fashion? This is Vivienne Westwood. We think of it as maybe too silly, too unnecessary. 2:31 Now, those of you who are familiar with the logic behind copyright protection -- which is that without ownership, there is no incentive to innovate -- might be really surprised by both the critical success of the fashion industry and the economic success of this industry. What I'm going to argue today is that because there's no copyright protection in the fashion industry, fashion designers have actually been able to elevate utilitarian design, things to cover our naked bodies, into something that we consider art. Because there's no copyright protection in this industry, there's a very open and creative ecology of creativity. 3:09 Unlike their creative brothers and sisters, who are sculptors or photographers or filmmakers or musicians, fashion designers can sample from all their peers' designs. They can take any element from any garment from the history of fashion and incorporate it into their own design. They're also notorious for riffing off of the zeitgeist. And here, I suspect, they were influenced by the costumes in Avatar. Maybe just a little. Can't copyright a costume either. 3:39 Now, fashion designers have the broadest palette imaginable in this creative industry. This wedding dress here is actually made of sporks, and this dress is actually made of aluminum. I've heard this dress actually sort of sounds like wind chimes as they walk through. So, one of the magical side effects of having a culture of copying, which is really what it is, is the establishment of trends. People think this is a magical thing. How does it happen? Well, it's because it's legal for people to copy one another. 4:10 Some people believe that there are a few people at the top of the fashion food chain who sort of dictate to us what we're all going to wear, but if you talk to any designer at any level, including these high-end designers, they always say their main inspiration comes from the street: where people like you and me remix and match our own fashion looks. And that's where they really get a lot of their creative inspiration, so it's both a top-down and a bottom-up kind of industry. 4:39 Now, the fast fashion giants have probably benefited the most from the lack of copyright protection in the fashion industry. They are notorious for knocking off high-end designs and selling them at very low prices. And they've been faced with a lot of lawsuits, but those lawsuits are usually not won by fashion designers. The courts have said over and over again, "You don't need any more intellectual property protection." When you look at copies like this, you wonder: How do the luxury high-end brands remain in business? If you can get it for 200 bucks, why pay a thousand? Well, that's one reason we had a conference here at USC a few years ago. We invited Tom Ford to come -- the conference was called, "Ready to Share: Fashion and the Ownership of Creativity" -- and we asked him exactly this question. Here's what he had to say. He had just come off a successful stint as the lead designer at Gucci, in case you didn't know. 5:31 Tom Ford: And we found after much research that -- actually not much research, quite simple research -- that the counterfeit customer was not our customer. 5:39 Johanna Blakley: Imagine that. The people on Santee Alley are not the ones who shop at Gucci. (Laughter) This is a very different demographic. And, you know, a knock-off is never the same as an original high-end design, at least in terms of the materials; they're always made of cheaper materials. But even sometimes a cheaper version can actually have some charming aspects, can breathe a little extra life into a dying trend. There's lots of virtues of copying. One that a lot of cultural critics have pointed to is that we now have a much broader palette of design choices to choose from than we ever have before, and this is mainly because of the fast fashion industry, actually. And this is a good thing. We need lots of options. 6:27 Fashion, whether you like it or not, helps you project who you are to the world. Because of fast fashion, global trends actually get established much more quickly than they used to. And this, actually, is good news to trendsetters; they want trends to be set so that they can move product. For fashionistas, they want to stay ahead of the curve. They don't want to be wearing what everybody else is wearing. And so, they want to move on to the next trend as soon as possible. 6:58 I tell you, there is no rest for the fashionable. Every season, these designers have to struggle to come up with the new fabulous idea that everybody's going to love. And this, let me tell you, is very good for the bottom line. Now of course, there's a bunch of effects that this culture of copying has on the creative process. And Stuart Weitzman is a very successful shoe designer. He has complained a lot about people copying him, but in one interview I read, he said it has really forced him to up his game. He had to come up with new ideas, new things that would be hard to copy. He came up with this Bowden-wedge heel that has to be made out of steel or titanium; if you make it from some sort of cheaper material, it'll actually crack in two. It forced him to be a little more innovative. (Music) 7:43 And that actually reminded me of jazz great, Charlie Parker. I don't know if you've heard this anecdote, but I have. He said that one of the reasons he invented bebop was that he was pretty sure that white musicians wouldn't be able to replicate the sound. (Laughter) He wanted to make it too difficult to copy, and that's what fashion designers are doing all the time. They're trying to put together a signature look, an aesthetic that reflects who they are. When people knock it off, everybody knows because they've put that look out on the runway, and it's a coherent aesthetic. 8:22 I love these Gallianos. Okay, we'll move on. (Laughter) 8:26 This is not unlike the world of comedy. I don't know if you know that jokes also can't be copyright protected. So when one-liners were really popular, everybody stole them from one another. But now, we have a different kind of comic. They develop a persona, a signature style, much like fashion designers. And their jokes, much like the fashion designs by a fashion designer, really only work within that aesthetic. If somebody steals a joke from Larry David, for instance, it's not as funny. 8:57 Now, the other thing that fashion designers have done to survive in this culture of copying is they've learned how to copy themselves. They knock themselves off. They make deals with the fast fashion giants and they come up with a way to sell their product to a whole new demographic: the Santee Alley demographic. 9:14 Now, some fashion designers will say, "It's only in the United States that we don't have any respect. In other countries there is protection for our artful designs." But if you take a look at the two other biggest markets in the world, it turns out that the protection that's offered is really ineffectual. In Japan, for instance, which I think is the third largest market, they have a design law; it protects apparel, but the novelty standard is so high, you have to prove that your garment has never existed before, it's totally unique. And that's sort of like the novelty standard for a U.S. patent, which fashion designers never get -- rarely get here in the states. 9:53 In the European Union, they went in the other direction. Very low novelty standard, anybody can register anything. But even though it's the home of the fast fashion industry and you have a lot of luxury designers there, they don't register their garments, generally, and there's not a lot of litigation. It turns out it's because the novelty standard is too low. A person can come in and take somebody else's gown, cut off three inches from the bottom, go to the E.U. and register it as a new, original design. So, that does not stop the knock-off artists. If you look at the registry, actually, a lot of the registered things in the E.U. are Nike T-shirts that are almost identical to one another. 10:32 But this has not stopped Diane von Furstenberg. She is the head of the Council of Fashion Designers of America, and she has told her constituency that she is going to get copyright protection for fashion designs. The retailers have kind of quashed this notion though. I don't think the legislation is going anywhere, because they realized it is so hard to tell the difference between a pirated design and something that's just part of a global trend. Who owns a look? That is a very difficult question to answer. It takes lots of lawyers and lots of court time, and the retailers decided that would be way too expensive. 11:10 You know, it's not just the fashion industry that doesn't have copyright protection. There's a bunch of other industries that don't have copyright protection, including the food industry. You cannot copyright a recipe because it's a set of instructions, it's fact, and you cannot copyright the look and feel of even the most unique dish. Same with automobiles. It doesn't matter how wacky they look or how cool they look, you cannot copyright the sculptural design. It's a utilitarian article, that's why. Same with furniture, it's too utilitarian. Magic tricks, I think they're instructions, sort of like recipes: no copyright protection. Hairdos, no copyright protection. Open source software, these guys decided they didn't want copyright protection. They thought it'd be more innovative without it. It's really hard to get copyright for databases. Tattoo artists, they don't want it; it's not cool. They share their designs. Jokes, no copyright protection. Fireworks displays, the rules of games, the smell of perfume: no. And some of these industries may seem sort of marginal to you, but these are the gross sales for low I.P. industries, industries with very little copyright protection, and there's the gross sales of films and books. (Applause) It ain't pretty. 12:37 (Applause) 12:39 So you talk to people in the fashion industry and they're like, "Shhh! Don't tell anybody we can actually steal from each other's designs. It's embarrassing." But you know what? It's revolutionary, and it's a model that a lot of other industries -- like the ones we just saw with the really small bars -- they might have to think about this. Because right now, those industries with a lot of copyright protection are operating in an atmosphere where it's as if they don't have any protection, and they don't know what to do. 13:11 When I found out that there are a whole bunch of industries that didn't have copyright protection, I thought, "What exactly is the underlying logic? I want a picture." And the lawyers do not provide a picture, so I made one. These are the two main sort of binary oppositions within the logic of copyright law. It is more complex than this, but this will do. First: Is something an artistic object? Then it deserves protection. Is it a utilitarian object? Then no, it does not deserve protection. This is a difficult, unstable binary. 13:45 The other one is: Is it an idea? Is it something that needs to freely circulate in a free society? No protection. Or is it a physically fixed expression of an idea: something that somebody made and they deserve to own it for a while and make money from it? The problem is that digital technology has completely subverted the logic of this physically fixed, expression versus idea concept. Nowadays, we don't really recognize a book as something that sits on our shelf or music as something that is a physical object that we can hold. It's a digital file. It is barely tethered to any sort of physical reality in our minds. And these things, because we can copy and transmit them so easily, actually circulate within our culture a lot more like ideas than like physically instantiated objects. 14:39 Now, the conceptual issues are truly profound when you talk about creativity and ownership and, let me tell you, we don't want to leave this just to lawyers to figure out. They're smart. I'm with one. He's my boyfriend, he's okay. He's smart, he's smart. But you want an interdisciplinary team of people hashing this out, trying to figure out: What is the kind of ownership model, in a digital world, that's going to lead to the most innovation? And my suggestion is that fashion might be a really good place to start looking for a model for creative industries in the future. 15:16 If you want more information about this research project, please visit our website: it's ReadyToShare.org. And I really want to thank Veronica Jauriqui for making this very fashionable presentation. 15:27 Thank you so much. (Applause)
1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 8.1 8.2 8.3 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 11.1 11.2 11.3 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 12.8 12.9 12.10 12.11 13.1 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 14.7 14.8 14.9 14.10 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 15.7 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 16.8 16.9 16.10 16.11 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.7 18.1 19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4 19.5 19.6 19.7 20.1 20.2 20.3 21.1 21.2 21.3 21.4 21.5 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 22.5 22.6 22.7 23.1 23.2 23.3 23.4 23.5 23.6 23.7 23.8 23.9 24.1 24.2 24.3 24.4 24.5 24.6 24.7 24.8 24.9 24.10 24.11 24.12 24.13 24.14 24.15 24.16 24.17 24.18 24.19 24.20 24.21 24.22 24.23 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.4 26.5 27.1 27.2 27.3 27.4 27.5 27.6 27.7 27.8 27.9 27.10 28.1 28.2 28.3 28.4 28.5 28.6 28.7 28.8 28.9 29.1 29.2 29.3 29.4 29.5 29.6 29.7 29.8 29.9 30.1 30.2 31.1
Transcript Translated by Senzos Osijek Reviewed by Romana Perković 0:12 Čula sam ovu nevjerojatnu priču o Miuccii Prada. Ona je talijanska modna dizajnerica. Ona ode sa svojom prijateljicom u neku trgovinu sa starim stvarima u Parizu. Švrlja naokolo. Pronađe jednu Balenciaginu jaknu. Svidi joj se. Okrene ju naopačke. Gleda šavove. Gleda konstrukciju. Prijateljica joj kaže: „Daj ju već jednom kupi.“ Ona kaže: „Kupit ću ju, ali ću također napraviti i kopiju.“ Sada bi profesori u ovoj publici mogli pomisliti: „Pa to zvuči kao plagijat.“ Ali modno osviještenoj osobi to je znak Pradinih genijalaca, da mogu prošvrljati kroz povijest mode i odabrati jednu jaknu na kojoj ne treba mijenjati ni mrvicu i da može biti aktualna i da može biti upravo sada. 0:56 Također biste se mogli zapitati je li moguće da je sve to što ona radi ilegalno. Pa, izgleda da zapravo nije ilegalno. U modnoj industriji postoji vrlo slaba zaštita umne imovine. Imaju zaštitu zaštitnog znaka, ali nemaju zaštitu autorskih prava i nema zaštite patenta o kojoj bi se govorilo. Sve što zapravo imaju je zaštita zaštitnog znaka. A to znači da bilo tko može kopirati bilo koji odjevni predmet na bilo kojoj osobi u ovoj prostoriji i prodati ga kao svoj vlastiti dizajn. Jedina stvar koju ne mogu kopirati je zapravo etiketa sa zaštitnim znakom unutar tog komada odjeće. To je jedan od razloga zašto vidite logo nabacan posvuda po tim proizvodima. To je stoga što je mnogo teže onima koji kopiraju kopirati te dizajne zato što ne mogu kopirati logo. Ali ako idete u Santee Alley, mogu. Pa, da. Canal Street, znam. I ponekad su zabavni, istina. 1:53 A sad, razlog za to, razlog zbog kojega modna industrija nema nikakvu zaštitu autorskih prava je zato što su sudovi davno odlučili da je odjeća preutilitarina da bi se kvalificirala za zaštitu autorskih prava. Nisu željeli da nekolicina dizajnera posjeduje monopol u izradi naše odjeće. I onda bi svi ostali morali imati dozvolu za ovu manžetu ili ovaj rukav jer ga posjeduje Joe Blow. Ali preutilitarno? Mislim, zar je to način na koji se misli o modi? Ovo je Vivienne Westwood. Mislimo o tome kao o nečemu što je presmiješno, previše nepotrebno. 2:27 A sada, oni od vas koji su upoznati s logikom iza zaštite autorskih prava, a to je da bez vlasništva nema poticaja za inovacijom, bi se mogli ugodno iznenaditi s ove dvije stvari – kritičkim uspjehom modne industrije i ekonomskim uspjehom te industrije. Ono o čemu ću raspravljati danas je to da su zbog nedostatka zaštite autorskih prava u modnoj industriji, modni dizajneri zapravo dobili mogućnost uzdignuti utilitarni dizajn, stvari koje pokrivaju naša gola tijela, u nešto što smatramo umjetnošću. Zbog nepostojanja zaštite autorskih prava u toj industriji postoji vrlo otvorena i kreativna ekologija kreativnosti. 3:05 Za razliku od svojih kreativnih braće i sestara koji su kipari ili fotografi ili redatelji ili glazbenici, modni dizajneri mogu uzimati uzorke od svojih kolega dizajnera. Mogu uzeti bilo koji dio sa bilo kojeg odjevnog predmeta iz modne povijesti i umetnuti ga u svoj vlastiti dizajn. Oni su također poznati po, znate, tome što „dorađuju“ duh vremena. I ovdje su pretpostavljam bili pod utjecajem kostima iz Avatara. Možda malo. Također ne možete zaštititi kostim autorskim pravom. 3:35 Modni dizajneri imaju široku imaginarnu paletu u ovoj kretivnoj industriji. Ova vjenčanica ovdje zapravo je napravljena od nečega između žlice i vilice. A ova haljina zapravo je napravljena od aluminija. Čula sam da ova haljina zvuči poput zvonaca na vjetru dok u njoj hodate. Dakle, jedna od magičnih nuspojava u kulturi kopiranja, što ovo zaista jest, je osnivanje trendova. Ljudi misle da je to magična stvar. Kako se događa? Pa, to je zato što je legalno da ljudi kopiraju jedni druge. 4:06 Neki ljudi vjeruju da postoji nekoliko ljudi na vrhu modnog hranidbenog lanca koji na neki način diktiraju što ćemo nositi. Ali ako porazgovarate s bilo kojim dizajnerom na bilo kojem nivou, uključujući ove poznate dizajnere, uvijek će vam reći da im glavna inspiracija dolazi s ulice gdje ljudi poput vas i mene miješaju i spajaju svoje modne izglede i to je ono gdje oni zaista dobiju mnogo vlastite kreativne inspiracije. Dakle, to je obostran način industrije – odozgora prema dolje i odozdol prema gore. 4:35 Ogromni lanci krivotvoritelja vjerojatno su najviše profitirali od manjka zaštite autorskih prava u modnoj industriji. Poznati su po kopiranju poznatih dizajna i prodaje istih po veoma niskim cijenama. I suočeni su s mnogo sudskih tužbi, ali u tim tužbama najčešće ne pobjeđuju modni dizajneri. Sudovi su stalno govorili: „Ne trebate nikakvu veću zaštitu intelektualne imovine.“ Kada pogledate kopije poput ovih, kao da se zapitate, kako luksuzni poznati brendovi uopće opstaju u poslu? Ako možete istu stvar nabaviti za 200 dolara, tko bi platio tisuću? Pa, iz tog razloga smo prije nekoliko godina ovdje na U.S.C.-u imali sjednicu. Pozvali smo Toma Forda. Sjednica se zvala „Spremni podijeliti: Moda i kreativnost vlasništva“. I pitali smo ga isto ovo pitanje. Evo što nam je rekao. Upravo se povukao s uspješnog mjesta vodećeg dizajnera u Gucci-ju, u slučaju da niste znali. 5:27 Tom Ford: I nakon mnogo istraživanja saznali smo da, zapravo ne nakon mnogo istraživanja, nakon jednostavnog istraživanja, da kupac koji kupuje falsifikat nije bio naš kupac. 5:35 Johanna Blakley: Zamislite. Ljudi koji kupuju u Santee Alley-u nisu oni koji kupuju u Gucci-ju. (Smijeh) To je drugo područje. I znate, kopija nikada nije ista poput originalnog poznatog dizajna, barem u smislu materijala, ovi su uvijek napravljeni od jeftinijih materijala. Ali ponekad čak u jeftinijoj verziji možete imati nekih šarmantnih gledišta, možete unijeti malo više života u umirući trend. Postoji mnogo vrlina u kopiranju. Jedna koju su mnogi kulturni kritičari istaknuli je da sada imamo mnogo širu paletu modnog odabira za izabrati nego što smo imali ikada prije. I to je uglavnom zbog brze modne industrije. A to je dobra stvar. Treba nam mnogo opcija. 6:23 Moda vam, voljeli je ili ne, pomaže da se prikažete svijetu onakvima kakvi jeste. Zbog brze mode, globalni su se trendovi uspostavili mnogo brže nego prije. I ovo su zapravo dobre vijesti za trendsetere. Oni žele da trendovi budu postavljeni tako da mogu micati proizvod. Za modno osviještenu osobu, oni žele biti ispred krivulje. Ne žele nositi ono što svi nose. I na taj način žele krenuti dalje na novi trend što je brže moguće. 6:54 Kažem vam, nema odmora za modno osviještene. Svake sezone ovi dizajneri moraju se boriti s novim fantastičnim idejama koje će svi voljeti. I ovo je, da vam kažem, veoma dobro za donju liniju. A sada naravno, postoji mnogo efekata koje ova kultura kopiranja ima u kreativnom procesu. I Stuart Weitzman je veoma uspješan dizajner obuće. Žalio se kako ga mnogo ljudi kopira. Ali u jednom intervjuu koji sam pročitala, rekao je, znate, to ga je zaista prisililo na ovu igru. Smislio je nove ideje, nove stvari koje će biti teško kopirati. Smislio je Bowden klinastu petu koja mora biti napravljena od čelika ili titana. Ako je napravite od nekog jeftinijeg materijala, zapravo će puknuti na dva dijela. To ga je prisililo da bude inovativniji. 7:39 I to me zapravo podsjetilo na velikana jazza Charlieja Parkera. Ne znam jeste li čuli za ovu anegdotu, ali ja jesam. Rekao je da je jedan od razloga što je izmislio bebop (inačica jazza) taj što je bio prilično siguran da glazbenici koji su bijelci neće biti u stanju replicirati zvuk. Želio je da zvuči preteško za kopiranje. I to je ono što modni dizajneri rade cijelo vrijeme. Pokušavaju smisliti izgled s potpisom, istančan, da pokazuje ono što jesu. Kada ljudi kopiraju, svi znaju da su ostavili trag na pisti, a to je dosljedna istančanost. 8:18 Volim ove Gallianice Ok, nastavimo. 8:22 To nije puno drukčije od svijeta komedije. Ne znam znate li da i šale također mogu biti zaštićene autorskim pravom. Kada su šale u obliku jedne rečenice bile veoma popularne svi su ih krali jedni od drugih. Ali sada imamo drugačiju vrstu komedije. Ona izgrađuje osobu, ima stilski potpis, poput modnih dizajnera. I njihove šale, poput modnih dizajna modnih dizajnera, zaista funkcioniraju samo unutar te istančanosti. Ako netko ukrade šalu na primjer od Larry-ja Davida-a, ona nije više tako smiješna. 8:53 A sad, druga stvar je ono što modni dizajneri rade da bi preživjeli u ovoj kulturi kopiranja, a to je da su naučili kopirati sami sebe. Sami sebe kopiraju. Naprave ugovore s krivotvoriteljima i smisle način na koji bi prodali proizvod na potpuno novom području, području Santee Alley. 9:10 Sada, neki modni dizajneri će reći: „Jedino u SAD-u nema poštovanja prema nama. U ostalim zemljama postoji zaštita za naše vješte dizjane.“ Ali ako pogledate ostala dva najveća tržišta na svijetu ispada da je ponuđena zaštita zaista neuspješna. Na primjer, u Japanu koji je, mislim, treće najveće tržište na svijetu, imaju zakon dizajna koji štiti odjevni predmet, ali je standard noviteta tako visok da morate dokazati da vaš odjevni predmet nikada prije nije postojao. To je totalno jedinstveno. I to je na neki način poput standarda noviteta za patent u SAD-u koji modni dizjaneri nikad ne dobiju ili veoma rijetko dobiju ovdje u SAD-u. 9:49 U Europskoj su Uniji otišli u drugom smjeru. Veoma je nizak standard noviteta, svatko može registrirati bilo što. Ali iako je to dom brze modne industrije i tamo imate mnogo luksuznih dizajnera, oni obično ne registriraju svoje odjevne predmete i nema mnogo sudskih parnica. Ispada da je to zato što je standard noviteta prenizak. Osoba može doći i uzeti nečiju haljinu, odrezati tri centimetra odozdo, otići u EU i registrirati to kao nov, originalan dizajn. Dakle, to ne zaustavlja umjetnike u kopiranju. Ako zapravo pogledate u registar, mnogo registriranih stvari u EU su Nike majice koje su gotovo identične jedna drugoj. 10:28 Ali to nije zaustavilo Dianu von Furstenberg. Ona je šefica Vijeća modnih dizajnera Amerike i rekla je svojoj izbornoj jedinici da planira nabaviti zaštitu autorskih prava za modne dizajnere. Prodavači na malo su nekako doduše poništili ovu ideju. Ne mislim da će zakonodavstvo igdje doći. Zato što uviđaju da je veoma teško naći razliku između kopiranog dizajna i nečega što je dio globalnog trenda. Tko posjeduje izgled? Na to je pitanje veoma teško odgovoriti. Potrebno je mnogo odvjetnika i mnogo sudskog vremena. A trgovci na malo odlučili su da bi to bilo preskupo. 11:06 Znate, nije samo modna industrija ta koja nema zaštitu autorskih prava. Postoji hrpa drugih industrija koje nemaju zaštitu autorskih prava uključujući i prehrambenu industriju. Ne možete zaštititi autorskim pravom recept zato što je to niz uputa, to je činjenica. I ne možete zaštititi autorskim pravom izgled i osjećaj čak ni najposebnijeg jela. Ista stvar je s automobilima. Nije bitno kako ludo ili super izgledaju, ne možete zaštititi autorsko pravo kiparskog dizajna. To je svakodnevni, sveprisutni artikl, eto zašto. Ista stvar je s namještajem. Preutilitaran je. Magični trikovi, mislim da su upute, poput recepata. Nema zaštite autorskih prava. Frizure, nemaju zaštitu autorskog prava. Softveri otvorenog dizajna su odlučili da ne žele zaštitu autorskih prava. Mislili su da će biti inovativniji bez toga. Veoma je teško dobiti zaštitu autorskih prava za bazu podataka. Tatoo majstori to ne žele, to nije cool. Oni dijele dizajnerske šale, bez zaštite autorskih prava. Vatrometi. Pravila igara. Miris parfema, ne. I neke od ovih industrija bi vam se mogle činiti rubne, ali imaju bruto prodaju za niske IP industrije, industrije s veoma malom zaštitom autorskih prava. A tu su bruto prodaje filmova i knjiga. (Pljesak) Nije li to divno. 12:35 Dakle, pričate s ljudima iz modne industrije i oni kažu: „Pssst! Nemoj nikom reći da zapravo krademo dizajne jedni drugima. To je sramotno.“ Ali znate što, to je revolucionarno. I to je model o kojemu mnoge druge industrije, poput onih koje smo vidjeli u veoma malim kafićima, možda moraju razmisliti o tome, zato što upravo sada te industrije s mnogo zaštite autorskih prava rade u atmosferi u kojoj kao da i nemaju zaštitu. I ne znaju što da učine. 13:07 Kada sam otkrila da postoji hrpa industrija koje nemaju zaštitu autorskih prava pomislila sam, što je točno osnovna logika? Želim sliku, a odvjetnici ne osiguravaju sliku. Pa sam je sama napravila. Ovo su dvije glavne vrste binarnih opozicija s logikom zakona zaštite autorskih prava. Mnogo je složenije od ovog, ali poslužit će. Prvo, je li nešto umjetnički predmet? Onda zaslužuje zaštitu. Je li utilitarni predmet? Onda ne, ne zaslužuje zaštitu. To je teška, nestabilna binarnost. 13:41 Druga je, je li ideja? Je li to nešto što treba slobodno kružiti u slobodnom društvu? Nema zaštite. Ili je fizički fiksirana ekspresija ideje, nešto što je netko napravio i zaslužuje posjedovati neko vrijeme i zaraditi novac od toga. Problem je to što je digitalna tehnologija potpuno oborila logiku ove prirodno fiksirane ekspresije napram idejnog koncepta. U današnje vrijeme, ne prepoznajemo knjigu kao nešto što stoji na našoj polici ili glazbu kao nešto što je prirodni predmet koji možemo držati. To je digitalna datoteka. Jedva da je povezano s bilo kakvom prirodnom realnošću u našim umovima. I te stvari, zato što ih tako lako možemo kopirati i prenositi zapravo cirkuliraju unutar naše kulture više poput ideja nego poput fizičkih predmeta. 14:35 Pojmovni problemi su se istinski utemeljili kada se priča o kreativnosti i vlasništvu i da vam kažem, ne želimo ovo samo ostaviti odvjetnicima da to riješe. Oni su pametni. Ja sam s jednim. Dečko mi je. Ok je. Pametan je. Pametan je. Ali želite interdisclipliniran tim ljudi da to iskopaju, shvate koji je način vlasničkog modela u digitalnom svijetu koji će voditi do najviše inovacija. I moj prijedlog je da bi moda zaista mogla biti dobro mjesto da se krene tražiti model za kreativnu industriju u budućnosti. 15:12 Ako želite više podataka o ovom istraživačkom projektu, molim vas posjetite našu internet stranicu, readytoshare.org. I zaista želim zahvaliti Veronici Jauriqui što je napravila ovu modnu prezentaciju. 15:23 Mnogo vam hvala.