What Exactly Makes A Pop-Up Mall A Pop-Up Mall? On Second Thought, Who Cares?

from the ownership-culture-gone-mad dept

One of the pernicious effects of once-obscure legal issues surrounding copyright and patents seeping into everyday life is the belief that even the vaguest ideas can be owned, and that such ownership is a thing worth fighting over. Here, for example, is a sorry tale from Christchurch in New Zealand, which suffered a massive earthquake in which 181 people died back in February of this year:
The City Mall Restart project is being threatened with legal action after being accused of copying a "pop-up mall" in London.

Director of the London Boxpark development Roger Wade emailed City Mall Restart organisers accusing them of a "blatant breach of the Boxpark intellectual property rights".

"Boxpark has now instructed legal action against the owners of City Mall Pop Up Mall for intellectual property rights infringement," he said.

But City Mall organisers have hit back, claiming Boxpark was being "precious" and there were no similarities between the projects.

The threat could not have come at worse time for Christchurch organisers, with City Mall scheduled to reopen on Saturday, marking the first return of retail to central Christchurch since the February 22 earthquake.
And if, like me, you're wondering what exactly a "pop-up mall" might be does it leap out of the earth as you approach, perhaps? - here's the basic idea:
The temporary shopping centre has been described as a "pop-up mall" made out of 60 shipping containers converted into 27 shops, including two cafes
> But the people behind the New Zealand pop-up mall claim there are key differences between this and the London pop-up mall:
However, he denied similarities between the projects, with the City Mall development divided into two horseshoe precincts while Boxpark was essentially a giant box with a cafe on the top.

"It will be very hard to say it's a copy because it doesn't look anything like Boxpark. The only thing that aligns these things together is they both use containers."
So the deep philosophical questions come down to these. Wherein lies the Platonic essence of a pop-up mall? Is the use of containers enough to generate the mall's pop-upness, or is their arrangement important too? And finally, and perhaps most importantly, is a world in which a city devastated by an earthquake has to worry about such things still sane in any meaningful sense?

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    Killercool (profile), 31 Oct 2011 @ 2:53pm

    Re: Christchurch City Mall Lawsuit

    An actual shill... You're going up in the world, Glyn!

    @Boxpark (in order of your points)

    1. Unless they do something you don't like.

    2. It was never said you did. Just that you threatened it.

    3. That's what you get from a lawsuit. Money.

    4. I can't believe it took you ten years to stack some shipping containers. And less than a single year for someone to stack them differently, and you to sue. Moot anyways. How long you took to enact your idea has no bearing on whether you deserve "protection." This drawing I made on a notepad? That's just as "protected," except I don't have a lotta lawyers.

    5. To the order of, "Play by my rules, or we'll take your ball, and go home."

    6. No reply after 1 day & a weekend, no big deal. Just saying.

    Lesson: Think with your brain, not with your lawyer...

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Techdirt Logo Gear
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.