Architecturecompetitions Reviews 

Statement of Concern regarding the Sculpture Competition

The organisers advertised the event explicitly as a sculpture competition. The promotional materials targeted sculptors and visual artists, particularly through social media campaigns directed at the artistic community. A substantial entry fee was required, which created the clear expectation of a legitimate and fair competition.

However, the announced results are in direct contradiction to the published terms. The winning entries are not sculptures in any recognised sense of the word, but architectural pavilion projects. This means that the organisers either changed the criteria during the process or never intended to evaluate sculptures at all. Genuine sculptors who submitted works in accordance with the stated rules were thereby excluded from any fair chance of recognition.

Potential legal breaches under English law

Fraud by false representation (Fraud Act 2006, s.2) – The organisers induced artists to pay significant entry fees by falsely representing the nature of the competition as a “sculpture” contest. This constitutes a misrepresentation made with intent to gain financially at the expense of participants.

Fraud by failing to disclose information (Fraud Act 2006, s.3) – If the organisers knew that only architectural designs would be considered but failed to disclose this, such omission is criminally fraudulent.

Unfair commercial practices – Under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, misleading actions and omissions that cause a consumer (here: an artist paying an entry fee) to make a transactional decision they would not otherwise make are unlawful.

Breach of contract and unjust enrichment – By collecting entry fees under the pretext of a sculpture competition but in practice running an architectural pavilion contest, the organisers are in breach of the contract with participants. The retention of fees in such circumstances constitutes unjust enrichment at the expense of entrants.

Consequences

The conduct may amount to criminal fraud, prosecutable under the Fraud Act 2006.

Civilly, entrants would be entitled to restitution and damages for breach of contract and misrepresentation.

The matter could be referred to Trading Standards and the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) as an example of misleading and unfair trading practice.

A coordinated group of affected artists could pursue a class action (group litigation) against the organisers for recovery of fees and reputational damage.

Conclusion

What has occurred is not a trivial misstep but a serious breach of trust and potentially a criminal act. The organisers appear to have operated under false pretences, extracting money from artists on the basis of deception. This practice not only undermines the integrity of professional competitions but may amount to fraudulent misrepresentation under English law.

like everyone else has claimed, it is a pure scam.

SCAM!

At first they ask you to pay €130 to enter the competition. What it doesn't say is the amount of fees required after you pay the entry fee in order to be eligible. One example is the €5 monthly fee to verify you account. If you are a group, it will be €5 per month per member.

The website is a scam. Noone ever responds to emails.

This is the real deal. Not only are they fleecing you for a 130 Euro entry fee, but then by submitting you are surrendering all your Intellectual Property Rights to them, so they can sell it as food for AI developers then churn out your ideas, as their Machine's own generated product. Now that is pretty sleazy. Where is a professional Ethics organization when you need it?

Burried deep in the Competition Terms agreement on another page, this says it all.

12.2. Upon providing the Submission to a Competition, the Participant and/or each member of the Participant Team grants to Organizer an unrestricted, worldwide, irrevocable and royalty-free, full license to the Intellectual Property Rights of the Submission and/or any part thereof as follows: publicly display by any means and in
any media; to copy, modify, translate and/or adapt, archive and distribute for publicity purposes and use Submission and all information contained therein in any other ways (including for commercial purposes) without any further notice or remuneration to the Participant.

12.3. By transferring all Intellectual Property Rights of the Submission and/or any part thereof to the Organizer, the Participant (including each team member) agrees that the Organizer has the right to use the Submission and all information contained therein (including the solutions, designs, concepts and other creative results) in machine
learning processes (Artificial Intelligence learning processes) or transfer it to third parties who will use the Submission and all information contained therein these processes.The Participant (including each team member) agrees that as a result of machine learning processes (Artificial Intelligence learning processes), the Submission
or the information contained in it (including the solutions, designs, concepts and other creative results) may be partially or fully reproduced, copied and modified, and these results (including visual materials, designs) will be considered the result of a machine creation, which the Organizer or any other third party will be entitled to use for
commercial purposes. The Participant (including each team member) waives all claims, demands and objections against the Organizer or any
other third party in this regard.

ETHICAL? Not in the least.

This is an architecture competition site that shouldn't be trusted. As much as Buildner like to give themselves a positive view, it is not true.

I have recently entered a competition and paid 130€ entry fee. On top of this, you are allowed to submit your presentation boards for review by the Buildner 'experts'. This will cost you either 60€ for the express review, which allows to get feedback within 24 hours. Or the standard review which is 40€ for feedback within 72 hours. I opted for the 72 hour feedback, which I submitted and paid for on the 6th May. A full week later and there still hasn't been any feedback given, which is well over the promised 72 hour mark. After 2 emails expressing my concern, there still has been no response. On top of this, I didn't even receive an invoice of the payment I made. I have also expressed my concern on that matter, but no response. The money has even come out of my bank, so as it stands it is a definite waste of money and a scam.

Even if they end up providing feedback, at this point it doesn't add up to what is promised in writing and on their website.

I would not recommend people pay for using Buildner to enter competitions. Especially not the presentation Review. It is a huge lie.