There is also risk in venturing into uncharted territory. Public art is changing the rules on liability and copyrights. An artist does not typically have to maintain the expensive liability insurance required of design professionals by agencies and the judicial system. Yet an architect who implements the artist idea takes on full liability by producing the drawings that result in fabrication or site design. As cities begin to require this of artists, they venture into unfamiliar legal and insurance ramifications.
Copyrights are also dramatically different.
Typically, architects and engineers did not have a means to copyright their built product, but had contractual arrangements that protected their rights to the design. Yet, in California, the California Art Preservation Act states that art has to be maintained in the manner in which it was originally conceived and executed by the artist. If it results in an obvious art piece, then the definition is clear. Art administrators and those wise to the industry are debating this on a regular basis. Legal experts are saying that it may not be to the artist advantage to collaborate to this degree as artists could loose protection.