VIRTUAL London.

Abstract

From an interdisciplinary perspective, much has been made of the connections and similarities between the disciplines of art, architecture and music. Reflections on commonalities in the creative employment of texture, proportion, scale and rhythm abound – Goethe stated that “music is liquid architecture and architecture is frozen music’ – but it is perhaps the shared foundation of creativity and originality that most clearly underlies all three. However, a more significant characteristic that is shared by art, architecture and music is their unlikely relationship with the discipline of law, not usually considered one of the creative arts. It is particularly apparent in the field of copyright law, which ostensibly protects authors’ rights of ownership of their ideas and work, but which also has been proven to cause demonstrable limitations on the originality of new ideas and their manifestation. In three copyright cases involving the trio of disciplines, similar judgments in their resolution have indicated the limitations that may be imposed upon creative practice. This leads to some troubling conclusions as to the future freedom of expression of artists, architects and musicians and potential limitations on original exploration of ideas.