Has copyright destroyed art Discuss with reference to the digital avant-garde and remix culture.

Has copyright destroyed art? Discuss with reference to the digital avant-garde and remix culture.

The dawn of the digital age ushered in a period of profound transformation in regard to the manner in which emerging artists presented their work to the general audience, including the digital avant-garde. Controversy is often associated with avant-garde artists and the artworks they create because of the radical character of the avant-garde and the fact that it questions established concepts, procedures, and forms (Druker, 2008). There is a large number of online art communities, galleries, and markets, all of which assist artists in establishing a reputation for themselves and bringing their work to the attention of fascinating people from all over the globe. Online art gallery viewings that include 360-degree views of the actual gallery space are being made available by a growing number of prominent art venues for visitors who are unable to visit the physical place. Now that new artists may communicate instantaneously with other artists all over the globe, avant-garde art is far more receptive to inspirations from other fields than it was in the past. Before the advent of the Internet, fashion remained mostly unchanged for a number of years, or even decades. Now more than ever, Jaskot (2019) express that the styles in art are constantly evolving, modifying, and adopting new concepts. Now, street painters are mimicking the processes that digital art creation applications like Adobe Photoshop employ to create works of art. One individual may upload street art to the internet through social pipelines such as Reddit, Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter, and the word can spread one thousand times more quickly than it could have done so before the existence of these programs (Boyd, 2010). Because of this, avant-garde art, which is characterized by the use of novel concepts, has evolved to conform to the requirements of these programs by becoming less difficult to locate, particularly in regions that have vibrant local art scenes. The audience is eager to organize social media campaigns in favor of new artists and galleries. For example, 3D printing, which is entering the digital era and has a lot of opportunity for new avant-garde experimentation, is yet another way that the digital avant-garde does not kill art. Lyubchenko (2022) writes that young artists, many of whom are already familiar with how to utilize the design tools available on computers, have enthusiastically embraced 3D printing. Initially, the idea was conceived as a means by which a decentralized manufacturing sector might be established on the basis of information obtained through computer software. With its acceptability and advancement, digital avant-garde is changing the definition of art for the younger generations.

To summarize, it is quite evident that copyright will not result in the destruction of art. When an artwork is fixed in a physical form, it is protected by copyright in the same way that other things that may be protected by copyright are protected (for example, paintings, sculptures, or drawings). This may lead to yet another important transformation in the way that art is made and taught in the future. It is not necessary for an artwork to have aesthetic worth in order for it to be protected by copyright.


Boyd, D. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In A networked self (pp. 39-58). Routledge.

Druker, E. (2008). From Avant-garde to Digital Images: Collage in Nordic Picturebooks. Bookbird: A Journal of International Children’s Literature, 46(3), 45-51.

Jaskot, P. B. (2019). Digital art history as the social history of art: Towards the disciplinary relevance of digital methods. Visual Resources, 35(1-2), 21-33.

Lyubchenko, I. (2022). NFTs and Digital Art: 21st Century Avant-Garde Impulse?. M/C Journal, 25(2).