When speaking of technological novelties, despite all positive aspects of the given innovation, sooner or later it turns out that according to law, the novelties might be problematic. Usually, these issues are regularly fixed by new models and various updates. But when speaking of Augmented Reality, an important question rises — is it legal for someone to place a virtual object on private property? Should virtual objects comply with legal limitations similarly to real ones? Given that they can’t be seen solely with a human eye, how should that exactly be justified?

当谈到技术新颖性时，尽管给定创新具有所有积极方面，但事实证明，依法，新颖性可能会出现问题。 通常，这些问题会通过新模型和各种更新定期解决。 但是，当谈到增强现实时，一个重要的问题浮出水面–有人在私有财产上放置虚拟物体是否合法？ 虚拟对象是否应该像真实对象一样遵守法律限制？ 鉴于不能仅凭肉眼就可以看到它们，那该如何合理地说明呢？

MOMA案例：虚拟围攻 (The case of MOMA: Virtual Siege)

In 2018, a group of artists created an entirely new experience for New York’s Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). Jackson Pollock gallery, which is situated on the fifth floor of MoMA , has been turned into an unofficial and unauthorised Augmented Reality experience. For those who downloaded the MoMAR Gallery app, Pollock’s paintings can be seen through smartphones as a remixed version of the original or even entirely replaced by the artists’ works.49 Unauthorized augmentations in museums are not a novelty. What I mean by “unauthorized augmentation” is creating some additional experience, that is not consulted with the authorities, such as the mentioned above MoMAR Gallery app, which presented different versions of pieces of art created with Augmented Reality.

2018年，一群艺术家为纽约现代艺术博物馆(MoMA)创造了全新的体验。 位于现代艺术博物馆(MoMA)五楼的杰克逊波洛克画廊(Jackson Pollock gallery)已变成非官方和未经授权的增强现实体验。 对于那些下载了MoMAR Gallery应用程序的人，可以通过智能手机将波洛克的画作看作是原始作品的重新混合版本，甚至完全被艺术家的作品所取代。49未经授权的博物馆扩建并不是新颖的。 我的意思是“未经授权的扩充”正在创造一些额外的经验，而没有征询当局的意见，例如上述提到的MoMAR Gallery应用程序，该应用程序展示了使用增强现实技术制作的艺术品的不同版本。

In 1991, cassettes with an alternative audio guide were distributed in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The project was called “Masterpieces Without the Director.” This guide was created by independent artists that did not consult the content of the project with museum authorities. Nowadays having such software as ARKit or ARCore, it’s fairly easy to build and distribute complex Augmented Reality applications that can be used in chosen places — parks, museums, but even someone’s private property. This possibility, of course, raises questions such as: who owns virtual space? Is it legal to place a virtual object on private property? Should the MoMA example be treated as trespassing on its virtual space? And more importantly — is this dubious character of AR an asset or flaw?

1991年，带有替代音频指南的卡带在大都会艺术博物馆分发。 该项目被称为“没有导演的杰作”。 本指南是由独立艺术家创建的，他们没有与博物馆主管部门协商项目的内容。 如今，有了ARKit或ARCore之类的软件，就可以轻松构建和分发可在选定场所(公园，博物馆，甚至某人的私有财产)使用的复杂的增强现实应用程序。 当然，这种可能性提出了以下问题：谁拥有虚拟空间？ 在私有财产上放置虚拟物体是否合法？ MoMA示例是否应被视为侵入其虚拟空间？ 更重要的是，AR的这种可疑特征是资产还是缺陷？

谁拥有虚拟空间？ (Who Owns Virtual Space?)

According to Alexia Bedat, “at the moment, there is no such thing as a recognised right to control the space or virtual augmentations of your work.” However, some existing laws may apply to this kind of cases. “Virtual trespassing” is a new concept that will probably begin a discussion on the limits of augmentation. Taking pictures in museums used to be prohibited, although it is nowadays pretty common for people to take out their smartphones and take photos in front of some famous works to have a souvenir or to share it on Facebook or Instagram. Museums could ban AR apps in their rules, but this brings us back to the question: will it pay off? Especially considering the fact, that some museums already encourage smartphone usage in order to engage the visitors. Augmented Reality could be an excellent benefit for museums, for example, by attracting a broader audience and expanding their interest in art. After all, the original exhibitions are not influenced by this technology, and people can still enjoy them. And, if they wish, they could experience a virtual bonus. As long as the augmentations do not cross any boundaries (ethical, religious, sexual, etc.) they might be treated as a beta version, a remix of the original works. And even though that might raise many voices of disagreement (as a profanation to fine art), it must be accepted and more importantly — controlled. There must be specific rules and legal limits for both the artists and space owners to function in order. Loic Tallon, the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s digital chief sums up the MoMA case as follows, “From my perspective, it’s not really worth fighting against it, because gravity is not working on our favor. (…) The museum’s mission is to collect, preserve, and study works of art. If someone is making an AR experience out of the collection, I see it as pure mission fulfillment.”

据Alexia Bedat所说，“目前，没有公认的权利来控制您的作品的空间或虚拟扩充。” 但是，某些现行法律可能适用于这种情况。 “虚拟侵入”是一个新概念，可能会开始讨论增强的局限性。 在博物馆里拍照通常是被禁止的，尽管如今人们拿出智能手机并在一些著名的作品前拍照留念或在Facebook或Instagram上分享这些照片很普遍。 博物馆可以在其规则中禁止使用AR应用程序，但这使我们回到了一个问题：它会有所回报吗？ 特别是考虑到事实，一些博物馆已经鼓励使用智能手机来吸引游客。 例如，增强现实可以通过吸引更多观众并扩大其对艺术的兴趣，为博物馆带来极大的好处。 毕竟，原始展览不受此技术的影响，人们仍然可以欣赏它们。 而且，如果他们愿意的话，他们可以体验到虚拟的奖励。 只要扩充内容不跨越任何界限(道德，宗教，性等)，它们就可以被视为Beta版，即原始作品的混音。 即使这可能引起许多不同意见(作为对美术的亵渎)，也必须予以接受，更重要的是要加以控制。 艺术家和空间所有者必须有特定的规则和法律限制，才能正常运转。 大都会艺术博物馆数字馆长Loic Tallon总结了MoMA案，“我认为，这并不值得与之抗争，因为引力并没有对我们有利。 (…)博物馆的任务是收集，保存和研究艺术品。 如果有人从集合中获得AR体验，我认为这是纯粹的任务实现。”

增强-资产还是问题？ (Augmentations — Asset or Problem?)

On 22nd of September 2018, the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum opened an exhibition which introduced an original tour of the Space Shuttle Enterprise. A hologram of Mae Jemison, the first woman of color to go into space, materialised before the eyes of visitors wearing HoloLens headsets and guided them through space exploration history. Jemison became digital with the help of 106 cameras that captured her image in 3D, which was then rendered as a hologram and viewed through the HoloLens. Implementation of AR components into apps is becoming a lot cheaper and more manageable. In the case of museums, the added interaction is a great possibility for engaging visitors and encouraging them to explore far more than the eye by itself can see. Mae Jemison is a lively hologram and part of the Intrepid exhibition, which creates the opportunity to experience the presence of an important figure from space history almost like in real life, face to face. Susan Marenoff-Zausner, President of the Intrepid Sea, Air, and Space Museum says, “We want to make sure that while our artifacts create this exciting and tactile opportunity, we want to make sure we’re capturing our current generation in the language they’re speaking.”

2018年9月22日，无畏号海空航天博物馆举办了一个展览，介绍了航天飞机企业的原创之旅。 梅·杰米森(Mae Jemison)的全息图，是第一个进入太空的有色女人，在戴着HoloLens头戴式耳机的访客眼前出现，并引导他们穿越了太空探索的历史。 杰米森(Jemison)在106台摄像机的帮助下实现了数字化，这些摄像机以3D形式捕获了她的图像，然后将其渲染为全息图并通过HoloLens进行了查看。 将AR组件实施到应用程序中变得越来越便宜和易于管理。 就博物馆而言，增加的互动性极有可能吸引参观者，并鼓励他们进行更多的探索，而其本身无法看到。 梅·杰米森(Mae Jemison)是一个生动的全息图，是《无畏号》展览的一部分，这使人们有机会像现实生活中那样面对面体验太空史上一个重要人物的身影。 无畏号海洋，太空和太空博物馆总裁Susan Marenoff-Zausner说：“我们希望确保在我们的文物创造出这种令人兴奋和触觉的机会的同时，我们希望确保以这种语言来捕捉我们这一代人他们在说话。”

In 2018, Microsoft created a tour for the London Natural History Museum that involved a hologram of David Attenborough who, similarly to Mae Jemison, shows the visitors around the exhibitions and shares information about the display. Microsoft also worked with the Kyoto National Museum and, with the use of HoloLens, created an exhibition where visitors could admire artifacts that are up to 400 years old. And of course, like in the previous examples, they were guided by a 3D hologram, which in this case was a Zen Buddhist monk.

2018年，微软为伦敦自然历史博物馆组织了一次巡回演出，其中涉及戴维·阿滕伯勒(David Attenborough)的全息照相，他与梅·杰米森(Mae Jemison)相似，向参观者展示展览并分享有关展览的信息。 微软还与京都国家博物馆(Kyoto National Museum)合作，并借助HoloLens创建了一个展览，游客可以欣赏到长达400年的文物。 当然，就像前面的示例一样，它们由3D全息图引导，在这种情况下，该全息图是禅宗和尚。

Augmented Reality creates a chance to show more layers of information. For example, some museums use AR to show damaged or broken artifacts in their original shape. However, AR in museums is not only about HoloLens; for instance, the Perez Art Museum Miami created AR installations which visitors could see using their smartphones. Similarly, an exhibition in the Smithsonian American Art Museum was translated in order to be solely devoted to smartphone AR experience.

增强现实技术提供了展示更多信息层的机会。 例如，一些博物馆使用AR展示原始形状的损坏或破碎的文物。 但是，博物馆中的AR不仅与HoloLens有关，而且与HoloLens有关。 例如，迈阿密佩雷斯艺术博物馆(Perez Art Museum Miami)创造了AR设备，访客可以使用智能手机观看。 同样，史密森尼美国艺术博物馆的展览也被翻译成专门致力于智能手机AR体验的翻译。

A new era of exhibitions is adding a bit of magic to the regular museum experience we are all used to. It still makes us interact with the real world, along with a virtual surprise. This creates a new level of engagement with art. Mae Jemison concludes, “If that gets one more kid curious about science and space, then it’s all worth it.” We might ask ourselves now: are new technologies like Augmented Reality an asset, or might it turn out to be a problem? The virtual siege in MoMA shows that new technologies come with new kinds of threats. It is easy to access any property using virtual components in just one app. But the real risk comes when authorities must deal with the problem — do they adapt to the changing world and allow augmentations or stick to the old rules? Given how accessible and easy it is to augment the reality in a chosen space, such projects and actions need legal control and regulations. On the other hand, if used for a useful purpose, it is a great way of developing new experiences, broadening knowledge, and helping people learn more about the surrounding world. There are many pros and cons to discuss in order to make the decision beneficiary for both sides.

展览的新时代为我们都已习惯的常规博物馆体验增添了魔力。 它仍然使我们与现实世界互动，并带来虚拟惊喜。 这创造了与艺术互动的新高度。 梅·杰米森(Mae Jemison)总结道：“如果让另一个孩子对科学和太空充满好奇，那一切都值得。” 我们现在可能会问自己：像增强现实这样的新技术是一项资产，还是可能会成为问题？ MoMA中的虚拟围攻表明，新技术伴随着新的威胁。 仅使用一个应用程序，即可使用虚拟组件轻松访问任何属性。 但是，当当局必须解决问题时，真正的风险就来了-它们是否适应了不断变化的世界并允许扩充或坚持旧规则？ 鉴于在选定的空间中增强现实是多么容易和容易，此类项目和行动需要法律控制和法规。 另一方面，如果将其用于有用的目的，则是一种开发新体验，扩展知识并帮助人们进一步了解周围世界的好方法。 为了使双方都能从中受益，有很多利弊可以讨论。

This writing was taking from Paulina Kowalska’s thesis How Technology Influences the Modern World: a Short Study on Augmented Reality, published in 2019 at the Polish-Japanese Academy of Information Technology in the New Media Arts Department. The work was overseen by dr hab. Ewa Satalecka, mgr inż. Marcin Wichrowski and dr. Paulina Duda.

本文摘自Paulina Kowalska的论文《技术如何影响现代世界：增强现实的简短研究》，该研究于2019年在波兰-日本信息技术学院新媒体艺术系出版。 这项工作由哈布博士监督。 伊娃·萨塔莱卡(Ewa Satalecka)，mgrinż。 Marcin Wichrowski和博士 宝琳娜·杜达(Paulina Duda)。

在此处注册我们的新闻通讯 (Sign up for our newsletter here)

Thank you to the designer Emilia Miękisz for her gifs, illustrations and time.

感谢设计师EmiliaMiękisz的GIF，插图和时间。