The United States Supreme Court released its opinion today in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith. While it’s hard to predict the full ramifications of this decision at this point, our initial opinion is that this decision is not ideal, but also not the death knell for transformative fair use that many feared it could have been. We address three points below.

What use is fair?

First, the Court’s focus on Warhol’s specific “use” of Lynn Goldsmith’s photograph of Prince provides clarification on what the word “use” means as part of the fair use analysis, and narrows the scope of the opinion in ways that will allow for many future fair uses.

Fair use analysis in the United States depends on a four-factor test, where courts must consider all four factors and decide how to balance each one. The Goldsmith case focuses entirely on factor 1: the “purpose and character of the use.” (In particular, it was argued that Warhol’s Orange Prince was a “transformative” use: where the original work served one function, but has a different purpose and character because it has been “transformed” by changing the context of the use.) The copyright statute does not specify what “use” means in this context, and indeed there are many different ways to interpret it. For example, in this case, “use” could mean:

• Andy Warhol’s use of Lynn Goldsmith’s photograph of Prince Rogers Nelson to create a series of silk screen prints called The Prince Series;
• Warhol’s use of the photograph to create Orange Prince without it ever appearing on a magazine cover;
• The use of Orange Prince as a portrait of Prince for a magazine cover/profile piece.

Here, the Court narrowly focuses on this third meaning: The commercial “use” of Orange Prince as a published magazine portrait of Prince. The Court found the “purpose” of these two images of Prince to be identical: Both featured in magazines as portraits of the same musician. This narrow similarity will enable later would-be transformative users to distinguish their use from the original in a way that makes it different from the fact pattern in this case, suggesting that the fair use analysis of this factor would be different. That is, if a use does not serve the exact same function as the original, then this decision leaves the door open to argue that it has a different “purpose” from the original. The decision’s distinctions between these different kinds of uses suggest that a case over this very same work used for another purpose might have had a different outcome.

Additionally, the Court’s particular focus on the commerciality of this use is not ideal. While commercial purpose is part of the analysis of this factor, it is common for commercial uses to still be fair uses. As the Court itself notes, Campbell v. Acuff-Rose (perhaps the most famous fair use case) found an explicitly commercial use to be fair, and was clear about commercial use not barring a finding of fair use. We hope that this case is not read to walk back those statements, harming users who want to make transformative commercial uses of a work.

Derivative v. transformative

Second, the Court’s attempt to draw a line between a derivative work and a fair use does not provide much clarity to guide future uses.

Much of the confusion over distinguishing a derivative work and a fair use involves what it means to “transform” a work, and the degree of that transformation. Under U.S. law, one of the rights that authors have over their works is the right to create or authorize the creation of “derivative works.” As defined by statute, a derivative work is “a work based upon one or more preexisting works” that is “recast, transformed or adapted.” (emphasis added). At the same time, however, since Campbell, one of the most important parts of the fair use analysis has been whether a secondary work is “transformative.” Because of this, there is a tension between what is a transformation in the context of a derivative work and what is a transformative fair use. (This is often one of the most difficult points for users of CC-licensed works to navigate, as well, especially where the license is one that places conditions upon derivative works.)

Unfortunately, the Court does not successfully relieve this tension. While we agree with the Court that “overbroad concept of transformative use, one that includes any further purpose, or any different character, would narrow the copyright owner’s exclusive right to create derivative works” and that “the degree of transformation required to make ‘transformative’ use of an original must go beyond that required to qualify as a derivative,” the decision does not provide clear guidance on what this actually means.

Fair use: An engine of creativity

Third, as Justice Kagan writes in a dissent joined by Chief Justice Roberts, the majority seems to undervalue the importance of transformation in the fair use inquiry, and indeed, may undervalue fair use more broadly. Justice Kagan writes: “Why do we have ‘fair use’ anyway? The majority responds that while copyrights encourage the making of creative works, fair use promotes their ‘public availability.’ … But that description sells fair use far short. Beyond promoting ‘availability,’ fair use itself advances creativity and artistic progress.” Moreover, “when a transformation of the original work has occurred, the user of the work has made the kind of creative contribution that copyright law has as its object.” By failing to focus on how Warhol’s piece transformed the original photograph and added a new meaning and message to the original, the Court’s opinion may influence future decisions to also undervalue this point and undermine the purpose of fair use itself.

Ultimately, this decision is disappointing to champions of fair use, but does not appear to change much about judgments on fair use from what we’ve seen before. Transformative fair use has always been difficult to rely on, with the possibility of a court’s judgment differing from the artist’s as to when a fair use was made. It is promising to note how much of what we believe to be fair use the Court also holds up as examples to distinguish — Warhol’s own soup cans, for example, which don’t occupy the same place in the market as the product on supermarket shelves. Moreover, the Court’s narrow focus on a single, very specific, use — the commercial use of one portrait to serve as another portrait — continues to leave a lot of room for more easily distinguished transformative uses like remixes and other forms of appropriation art.

CC continues to believe that fair use is essential to creativity and culture. Justice Kagan’s dissent aligns well with CC’s views on transformation and creativity; in particular, that “artists don’t create all on their own; they cannot do what they do without borrowing from or otherwise making use of the work of others.” All art incorporates and transforms what came before it, and depends on the ability to reuse and reinterpret previous works, and the exclusivity of copyright should block that only as far as necessary to support an environment where artists can continue to create. This was a case with a particularly challenging set of facts, where there was a great deal of similarity to consider in the fair use analysis, and we believe that even after this decision, fair use continues to be alive and well in the United States, and that the Court’s narrow decision changes little about that.

It’s International Museum Day today, and at Creative Commons (CC), we are thrilled to celebrate museums under this year’s theme of Museums, Sustainability and Well-being. 

Museums play an important role in sustainable development — they are in fact instrumental in achieving the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) — and in supporting the well-being of the communities that they serve. As ICOM states, “museums are an important means of cultural exchange, enrichment of cultures, and development of mutual understanding, cooperation and peace among peoples.”

At CC, we believe in the transformational power of better sharing through open access to knowledge and culture to achieve sustainability and support well-being. By making the collections that they hold as openly accessible as possible for use and reuse, museums can contribute to fostering global collaboration to solve the world’s most pressing problems and enable people to lead richer, more meaningful lives. 

As just one example of the power of open sharing, last year, the UK’s Natural History Museum shared that over 125,000 of the Museum’s digitized Butterfly collection — released to the public domain using the CC public domain dedication tool (CC0) — were analyzed by scientists to understand how animals may respond to climate change. The Museum stated: “…open access digitized collections … allows scientists from all over the globe to be able to more easily use collections, can accelerate research in a more collaborative way than ever before.” This example is emblematic of the immense benefit for society of making information held in museums as openly accessible as possible to the public. It really embodies the mission of museums: preserving heritage, of course, but also enabling members of the public to access and use that heritage in furtherance of the public good. 

Openness is key to achieving global goals, like fighting climate change, because it helps us to collaborate in the face of common challenges. Museums hold the keys to unlocking fresh solutions through global collaboration, and with collaboration comes increased pace, efficiency and efficacy of research, so that more communities have the opportunity to build upon research. 

Museums also serve as peaceful spaces to come together, reduce social isolation, gain better understanding of each other, and improve people’s mental health. Both on site and online, museums can support the well-being of communities around them by providing a public space for cultural exchange and discourse. When it comes to sharing potentially sensitive materials, museums must also account for important ethical considerations. The CC Open Culture Platform working group on the “Ethics of Open Sharing” has identified some of the thorny ethical considerations regarding the opening up of cultural heritage. The working group developed a gamified approach to dealing with some of these to ensure well-informed and balanced decisions. 

Museums educate, entertain, inspire, and bring joy to visitors — they are close to levers that can spark wide-ranging, positive change. By “opening up”, by better sharing their collections with the public, disseminating information, and working together to serve as public forums to hold society-wide debates, museums can empower people, generation after generation, in offering them the resources to engage and participate in civic life, increase the speed of innovation and scientific discovery, and strengthen community bonds for a sustainable future. 

 

Want to get involved? Join us!

• Become a member of the CC Global Network
• Become a member of the CC Open Culture Platform
• Sign up for our Open Culture Matters newsletter 
• Join the #cc-openglam Slack channel
• Participate in CC Open Culture Platform calls — they are announced in the Slack channel and on the mailing list

Earlier this year, the European Commission started a new consultation on “The future of the electronic communications sector and its infrastructure.” On the one hand, it’s good that policymakers are examining how to expand broadband access and ensure the capacity of networks continues to expand and support helpful innovation. On the other hand, the consultation is anchored on one particular, problematic policy idea — a new legal right for telecom companies to require bonus payments from content and application providers, imposing new tolls for sending and “generating” traffic. Content and application providers would not just pay for their connection to the Internet (as they already do today), but then have to pay again in order to reach a consumer when the consumer requests data from them.

This sort of approach has long been advanced by incumbent telecom companies, opposed by virtually every other relevant constituency, and rejected repeatedly around the world. It would undermine open Internet access — sometimes called “net neutrality” — and replace today’s well-functioning system of payments with a regulated morass, where consumers will ultimately pay the price. Content and application providers (in particular smaller players) will either be impeded from delivering their traffic at all due to costs, or will pass the costs on to consumers themselves.

CC was pleased to join with the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions and Europeana Foundation in a submission opposing this misguided approach (read the full submission). We highlight the particular the impacts on knowledge and cultural heritage institutions:

“For the institutions and communities we support, these new tolls pose particular concerns. Knowledge and cultural institutions act as repositories for large amounts of data — we are responsible for collecting, storing, and making available all sorts of media and information to Europeans, often under public mandates. While an individual user may not make use of the entire catalog of information, collectively serving our communities can mean serving large amounts of data. Moreover, knowledge and cultural institutions serve academics and researchers who do require access to large amounts of the corpus for their public-interest activities.

We fear that, under this proposal, such institutions could be considered “large traffic generators” and forced to pay new fees. As public serving institutions, they already face significant budget strains, and new fees would inevitably mean limiting the services we provide, and using our resources to bolster the turnover of telecom operators rather than to deliver on our missions.

Yet it is important to note here that a simple carve-out for such institutions would not be sufficient. For one thing, the fees would still frustrate knowledge and cultural production and dissemination in ways that would run counter to the goal of encouraging artistic and expressive freedom, as well as having knock-on effects on us. What’s more, knowledge and cultural institutions may rely on commercial services to host and serve our traffic, and thus to the extent those providers would face new fees and pass those costs on, we would still be impacted.”

As we note in our submission, there are a wide variety of other ways to support open, robust, affordable internet access, including expanding access to spectrum for wireless services and community networks, modernization of universal service funding, and collaborating with knowledge and cultural institutions, which in some cases already work to provide Internet access to surrounding residents. We hope these and other ideas will become the focus as this consultation moves forward.

 

“If you’re considering opening up, start small” says Michal Čudrnák, the Head of Digital Collections at the Slovak National Gallery. When you open up just a small part first you will see what unfolds and can learn in the process what works for your community and what they interested in and how your community wants to use the cultural heritage in your collection. This episode dives into issues of legislation as well as the unique ways public domain material is re-used.

Open Culture VOICES is a series of short videos that highlight the benefits and barriers of open culture as well as inspiration and advice on the subject of opening up cultural heritage. Michal works in the Slovak National Gallery on all the digital projects including the catalog of public domain works and other collections in Slovakia, and the main project “web-of-art” which comprises the entire collection.

Michal responds to the following questions:

1. What are the main benefits of open GLAM?
2. What are the barriers?
3. Could you share something someone else told you that opened up your eyes and mind about open GLAM?
4. Do you have a personal message to those hesitating to open up collections?

Closed captions are available for this video, you can turn them on by clicking the CC icon at the bottom of the video. A red line will appear under the icon when closed captions have been enabled. Closed captions may be affected by Internet connectivity — if you experience a lag, we recommend watching the videos directly on YouTube.

Want to hear more insights from Open Culture experts from around the world? Watch more episodes of Open Culture VOICES here >>

At Creative Commons, we vehemently condemn the extensive violations of trans rights that are occurring across the world, and the current climate of fear and violence directed at trans individuals. We stand firmly against any and all forms of transphobia, including but not limited to bigotry, violence or persecution based on gender identity, and we affirm that trans rights are human rights ?️‍.

As an international nonprofit organization, with a diverse global community that believes in democratic values and free culture, the protection and affirmation of all human rights — including trans rights — are central to our core value of global inclusivity and our mission of promoting openness and providing access to knowledge and culture. We believe much of the hate and discrimination that trans communities are facing is connected to misinformation and myths, highlighting the need for greater global access to and better sharing of information, culture and knowledge — and there is no better way to achieve this than to open them up: open science, open culture and open education are the keys to unlocking essential information and upholding trans rights.

Recently, we witnessed [1] book bans and educational restrictions on content related to trans rights and experiences, along with other bans of books related to other marginalized identities. These acts of censorship limit public access to important information, perpetuating misinformation, prejudice and discrimination.

As an employer of a small team of diverse individuals, and a steward of a global community of open advocates, CC is committed to equity, diversity, and inclusion. Trans individuals are an important part of our community, and we affirm our commitment to providing a safe, supportive, and welcoming environment for trans people within the workplace and the broader CC community. We also acknowledge the unique challenges that trans individuals may face in areas such as access to health care, housing and employment, and we commit to advocating for policies that address these issues. We recognize that these attacks on human rights also impact or prevent access to open knowledge and open culture. Unjust laws and acts of censorship and bigotry limit peoples’ ability to share knowledge, partake in our shared commons, and learn — these run counter to our mission.

We understand that language and terminology around gender and identity may be complex and constantly evolving. As such, we are committed to educating ourselves and others to ensure we use language that is inclusive and affirming. We also recognize the importance of legal protections for trans people, and support legislation that upholds the rights of trans individuals to live free from discrimination, harassment, and violence.

As part of this commitment, CC is working to update the codes of conduct to help shape experiences in our community and our team, so they explicitly cover trans rights, are consistent across and surfaced in all CC contexts, are clear in their language and processes, and are adopted by all community and team members.

By reflecting on our actions and prioritizing a culture of understanding and empathy, collectively we have the power to create a world where everyone is treated with dignity, respect, and equity no matter their gender identity or expression.

[1] “Book Bans LGBTQ+ Reading.” The 19th, 2023, https://19thnews.org/2023/02/book-bans-lgbtq-reading/

Laksmi says that “open access…makes it possible to collaborate and reconstruct cultural heritage.” In this episode we learn about cultural heritage in Indonesia and how open access has made it possible for organisations to work together and build out data sets and information about historical collections across the country.

Open Culture VOICES is a series of short videos that highlight the benefits and barriers of open culture as well as inspiration and advice on the subject of opening up cultural heritage. Laksmi is a project manager at Museum Pasifika where she has worked with Wikipedia to develop an open access and open data project for the collections.

Laksmi responds to the following questions:

1. What are the main benefits of open GLAM?
2. What are the barriers?
3. Could you share something someone else told you that opened up your eyes and mind about open GLAM?
4. Do you have a personal message to those hesitating to open up collections?

Closed captions are available for this video, you can turn them on by clicking the CC icon at the bottom of the video. A red line will appear under the icon when closed captions have been enabled. Closed captions may be affected by Internet connectivity — if you experience a lag, we recommend watching the videos directly on YouTube.

Want to hear more insights from Open Culture experts from around the world? Watch more episodes of Open Culture VOICES here >>

Shanna shares  how “keeping content locked up and isolated keeps us separate from one another” so opening up collections brings people together and bridges our shared humanity, across cultures and continents. In this episode we learn about how publicly funded institutions should provide online access to the public which is funding it and held accountable to maintaining that access.

Open Culture VOICES is a series of short videos that highlight the benefits and barriers of open culture as well as inspiration and advice on the subject of opening up cultural heritage. Shanna is the Library Director and Copyright Consultant at the Guthrie Memorial Library. They also work on global copyright policy advocacy together with Creative Common and other organisations.

Shanna responds to the following questions:

1. What are the main benefits of open GLAM?
2. What are the barriers?
3. Could you share something someone else told you that opened up your eyes and mind about open GLAM?
4. Do you have a personal message to those hesitating to open up collections?

Closed captions are available for this video, you can turn them on by clicking the CC icon at the bottom of the video. A red line will appear under the icon when closed captions have been enabled. Closed captions may be affected by Internet connectivity — if you experience a lag, we recommend watching the videos directly on YouTube.

Want to hear more insights from Open Culture experts from around the world? Watch more episodes of Open Culture VOICES here >>

CC has been exploring what artificial intelligence means for our strategy to support better sharing and the public interest commons that we help steward. In March, we joined with our partners in the Movement for a Better Internet to discuss generative AI with the MozFest 2023 community: What opportunities does AI offer? What are its risks? And where might we work to address them?

Known as a “premiere gathering for activists in diverse global movements fighting for a more humane digital world,” MozFest provided a great opportunity to bring together over 50 people to generate insights into what we should be thinking about generative AI as we work to help shape policy to build a better internet.

Overall, our session participants saw substantial opportunities in generative AI, including how it could enhance human creativity and efficiency, democratize creative expression, and offer new insights to difficult problems. But they also had several concerns: AI is moving too fast and it’s not clear what impacts it will have. Generative AI could have negative economic impacts, may be developed or implemented in harmful or biased ways, and raises concerns about intellectual property.

Imagining how their concerns could be addressed, our participants looked at both big picture solutions — systemic changes in society and economy — and more specific solutions — public investment in AI for all, policy and regulation, practices to help ensure ethical development, and education about generative AI.

Last, but not least, participants explored the idea that we might change how we think about AI: Rather than seeing AI as either an unparalleled revolution or a world-ending crisis, we might instead see it as a collection of varied technologies and practices with risks and benefits that are within our power to shape and control. As a part of our work to support better sharing and a better internet, that’s exactly what we’ll be focused on at CC.

As part of the Open Culture Platform’s work this year, we accepted proposals and invited the community to vote on community funded activities. Here are the six proposals that have been funded. We look forward to sharing more about the projects when they are complete. 

Archiving History of Ghana: Case Study of Forts and Castles

       

Francis Quasie

Ghana attained its independence in 1957, prior to that the country was colonized by a number of European countries like the Portuguese, Danish, British and others.

Most of them built forts and castles that are still existent in today’s Ghana. Unfortunately, stories about the history of these structures are not well digitally represented on the internet, specifically Wikimedia Commons. It is important that our history and heritage is preserved and documented well enough for the next generation to be connected to their roots. Forts such as Fort Ruychaver, Fort Saint Anthony and Fort Elize Carthago have no images attached to their Wikipedia articles and this is because there are no images of these forts on Wikimedia Commons either.

Fortunately with the current age of Open and Creative Commons, we have the opportunity to capture all these historical monuments with the right use of licensing. Most of these forts and castles were the final destinations of our forefathers who were taken ashore.

This project seeks to tell and archive the stories of our heritage, the toils of our forefathers through photos and videos of that part of our history that contributed to the liberation of Ghana.

This will be done through two main ways.

First off, uploading them on Wikimedia Commons with the right CC license and linking these images to their respective articles on Wikipedia to be made openly available.

Secondly, engaging institutions under GLAM in Ghana like the National Museum of Ghana and some libraries with the aim of archiving these images that will be taken to tell our heritage stories now and in the future.

 

Building a sustainable social, technical & legal infrastructure for Open GLAM in Pakistan; the quantitative analyses for the development of open heritage science for Pakistani heritage

           

Muhammad Imtiaz Subhani, PhD.          

Amber Osman

This study will be an attempt to develop and build a sustainable social, technical & legal infrastructure for Open GLAMs in Pakistan while deploying the quantitative method and analyses for the development of framework for open GLAMs of Pakistan and open heritage science for Pakistani heritage.

The project will work to develop the sustainable social, technical and legal infrastructure for Open GLAMs of Pakistan through providing an easy-to-use platform for GLAMs to share their collections and resources, thus this infrastructure will be an attempt to promote the CC agenda of preservation and sustainability of heritage with the open accessibility for commons.The quantitative method will be used, and qualitative analyses will be done for developing the framework for open GLAMs of Pakistan and for the development of open heritage science for Pakistani heritage.

The key outcomes of this project will be to develop sustainable social, technical and legal infrastructures and frameworks for open GLAMs of Pakistan for the better sharing of heritage and culture of the region; to serve a quantifiable approach for the better share of heritage content will be served; and to develop he open heritage science for Pakistani heritage.

GLAM institutions in Colombia open to their citizens

Viviana Rangel

Libraries, galleries, museums and houses of culture are the spaces that guarantee cultural rights for the majority of society in Colombia, a country where the scarcity of economic resources means that the investment that the population can make to access culture and knowledge is quite restricted. In addition, delays in copyright legislation do not allow the opening of many contents necessary to guarantee the public interest. With this project we seek to understand the needs of GLAM institutions through a collaborative dialogue with involved actors, expose tools that can strengthen their management and create a roadmap to integrate the needs and perspectives of institutions, users and decision makers. 

With this project we will bring together the GLAM community of four cultural centers in the country, will create methodologies to strengthen its management based on the documents previously developed by the members of Creative Commons.  With the identified needs we will cooperate and formulate an action path for the GLAM community and a series of recommendations to strengthen the capacities of decision makers. 

 

Digitization and Protection of Specialized Heritage Institutions

Seyi Osunade

Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums (GLAMs) serve as educational resources for communities and also preserve the arts and culture. The patronage of GLAMs has reduced in recent times due to lack of information about their existence, poor physical state, lack of digital services to the mainly youth population and no photography rules. Content creation for social media purposes and the re-introduction of history into primary and secondary school curriculum has re-ignited interest in resources available in GLAMs. The University of Ibadan plays hosts to a number of specialized cultural heritage institutions that are not visible online but used for teaching and research. This project seeks to identify such centers across the three campuses, 16 faculties and numerous centers so as to encourage digitization and the use of Creative Commons (CC) licenses and tools. The project will produce a draft institutional policy and an e-book with available artifacts/displays/exhibits and location of the specialized cultural heritage institutions . 

 

A Public Domain Database of Digitized Creative Works in Nigeria

Isaac Oloruntimilehin

The Nigerian Public Domain Database being developed by Free Knowledge Africa is being built to facilitate knowledge sharing and transfer. The Public Domain is the material from which society derives knowledge and fashions new cultural works. Having a rich and thriving Public Domain is essential to the social-cultural and economic well-being of society.

In January 2022, we celebrated the Public Domain Day in Nigeria and also organized a mini contest where participants were trained to identify and document works that are in the Public Domain. At the end of the contest, we were able to document 1744 works in the database of which we are currently creating Wikidata items for. The major challenge was getting access to these works to digitize them, and because of the limited manpower and funding we couldn’t go ahead.

The proposed activity  continues the Nigerian Public Domain Database project. The goal is to document and digitize works that are in the public domain in the jurisdiction of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The expected outcome is to make these works easily accessible to the public, to promote the use of these materials in creating new knowledge and cultural works, and to educate the Nigerian public about the importance of the Public Domain. By doing so, we hope to contribute to the social-cultural and economic well-being of society by facilitating knowledge sharing and transfer.

Building Open GLAM Community for Sustainable Open Licensing Practices in Nigeria

Bukola James

In Nigeria, there is a low awareness of open practices in galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAMs), and this is a result of several factors such as skepticism, lack of awareness, bureaucratic bottlenecks, legal constraints, and technical support. Therefore, the project’s goal is to build a community of GLAMs for open licensing in Nigeria by promoting open access and open licensing of GLAM collections using Creative Commons licenses. This project aims to increase awareness and understanding of open practices, adoption of open access policies and practices, digitization of GLAM collections, and online visibility and accessibility of GLAM collections. The project activity will include online advocacy, establishment of a Network of Open GLAM advocates in Nigeria, 1 roundtable discussion, and 2 in-person and 3 online workshops/trainings among 50 Librarians in Nigeria.

As part of our #20CC anniversary, last year we joined forces with Fine Acts to spark a global dialogue on what better sharing looks like in action. Our #BetterSharing collection of illustrations was the result — we gathered insights from 12 prominent open advocates around the world and tasked 12 renowned artists who embrace openness with transforming these perspectives into captivating visual pieces available under a CC license.

Each month throughout 2023, we will be spotlighting a different CC-licensed illustration from the collection on our social media headers and the CC blog. For May, we’re excited to showcase “The Future Is Open” by Mumbai-based fashion and graphic designer, Preeti Singh. The piece, licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0, was inspired by a quote from Ebenezar Wikina, Founder, Policy Shapers, and Advocacy Coordinator, Foundation for Partnerships Initiatives in the Niger Delta (PIND Foundation):

“Better Sharing, Brighter Future means that as we continue to find better ways to share ideas, products and solutions on the internet, we’d directly be working towards a brighter future for ourselves and generations to come.”

Meet the artist:

Preeti Singh is a talented visual communication designer and passionate artist, known for her captivating artworks that convey compelling stories. Based in Mumbai, India, she has made a name for herself as a skilled fashion and graphic designer. Since she was a child, Preeti has been fascinated by art, culture, and history, and has always had a keen interest in illustration and literature. Her creative journey began with these interests, which have greatly influenced her work. Preeti’s pieces reflect her extensive searches in art, culture, history, and mythology.

Follow Preeti on Instagram: @preeeti____
Follow Preeti on Behance: @PreetiSingh__

The full #BetterSharing collection is available on TheGreats.co to be enjoyed, used and adapted, and then shared again, by anyone, forever. View the full collection >>