image: File:Patent, Mechanical Fan, 1830.png (wikipedia.org)

There is a debate going on the last days in relation to the idea of patenting geometric forms or the means used to produce them. The discussion started with this post on the Digital Morphogenesis blog. The post was triggered by a small note on the latest Kangaroo release:

As is turns out, there are actually two patents owned by evolute, Helmut Pottmann and RFR regarding (in simple words) the panelization of free-form surfaces with flat panels. To be more precise: they are not patenting the algorithm, they are not patenting the geometry per se, but "the physical architectural building solution". In other words, you can re-invent the algorithm, you can create a different algorithm that offers the same solution and you can play as much as you want with such forms in your computer. But if you decide to build the form, then you have to pay 1% of the construction cost. Really?

The blog post mentioned before points out the insanity of the situation. You can read evolution's answer here, and the answer of the creator of Kangaroo here. Better read for yourselves so you can draw conclusions, but here is how I see it:

Patenting of algorithms, geometrical forms, their constructed version or whatever else you can think of in this line, is fundamentally against any idea of intellectual or creative freedom. I don't really care if someone is a patent troll or not, the problem begins with the patent itself. If someone wants to capitalize on the research he is doing on architectural geometry, he can very well do so by selling the software (which is very much true for evolute), or by selling his services as an expert. Now, if he thinks that this is not enough there is a simple answer: do not conduct the research. Somebody else will. I am afraid that it is a rather important issue, and it is in the hands of all the people that are part of this community to give a strong answer: by voicing our opinion, by not supporting in any way those that follow such practices, by creating open source, freely available software and (equally important) by appropriately crediting the work of others that has helped us in our work. Let's just use the power of bottom-up processes.

update Sep 07: A new blog post from evolute on the subject here.
Looks like they are trying to make sure that we understand that they do have the patent. And no, by adding a little bit of torsion, you can not escape, they are going to get you!

 

This August I will be part of the Sens[e-Res]ponsive Architecture Workshop. The workshop will take place during 22-29.08.2011 at the Department of Architecture at the Technical University of Crete in Chania, Greece.

The overall discourse of the workshop revolves around the contextual and material frameworks of mediums, tools and techniques to create sensponsive environments that extend from useful to collaborative, developing a "sense" of their own. This year’s theme involves the design of an intriguing space for children with responsive partitions, utilizing rhino3D grasshopper with firefly and arduino. A detailed description of the theme can be found here.

The workshop will be taught by an interdisciplinary team of designers and theorists from Harvard, MIT, TU Delft, University of East London (UEL), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTh) and the Technical University of Crete (TUC). More information can be found here.

The Sens[e-Res]ponsive Architecture Workshop is now open to applications. Anyone interested in participating can fill-in an application form and submit the necessary material here.

On Wednesday (14:00) I will be at the School of Architecture of the University of Patras, where I will be giving a lecture under the title "Protocol Architecture / Beyond Representation". The subject is somewhere between encoded architectural protocols and the architectural drawing as a generative tool. The lecture will be part of the course 'Architectural Design and Digital Media'. Many thanks to Yannis Zavoleas for the invitation.