COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 CLASS 11 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA September 27, 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
COPYRIGHT LAW 2002: CLASS 4 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America January 23, 2002.
Advertisements

Copyright Law Ronald W. Staudt Class 9 September 26, 2013.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2008 CLASS 10 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA September
The term minimalism is used to describe a trend in design and architecture where in the subject is reduced to its necessary elements. Minimalist design.
What is it and why should I care?
Copyright Law Boston College Law School January 22, 2003 Works of Authorship (cont’d)
Useful Articles, Works for Hire
Intellectual Property
© 2002 Regents of the University of Michigan For questions or permission requests, contact Jack Bernard,
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School January 21, 2009 Copyright – Exclusions.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School January 17, 2007 Copyright – Useful Article, Works.
Useful Articles, Works for Hire Intro to IP – Prof Merges
© 2002 Steven J. McDonald What do these have in common? The Mona Lisa The Starr report What I am saying Your idea for a web page The Wexner Center for.
Copyright vs. trademark
COPYRIGHT LAW 2002: CLASS 9 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY 11, 2002.
Copyright Basics. What is Copyright? Copyright allows authors, musicians, artists, etc. to make money off of their labor. Copyright allows authors, musicians,
A2 Technology Product Design Systems and Control Notes DT4 - Exam.
Copyright. US Constitution Article I – Section 8 Congress shall have the power to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited.
© 2001 Steven J. McDonald What do these have in common? The Mona Lisa The Starr report What I am saying Your idea for a web page The Guggenheim Musuem.
Decompilation 1 Software Copyright Oren Bracha, Summer 2015.
A RCHITECTURAL W ORKS Prior to 1990, architectural plans were protected as graphic works, but finished buildings were not protected due to their inherent.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 copyrightability of characters PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA October 2, 2006.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2002: CLASS 8 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY 6, 2002.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2003: CLASS 5 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA JANUARY 22, 2003.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 CLASS 10 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA September 25, 2006.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2006 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer March
COPYRIGHT LAW 2006 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer April 10, 2006.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2008 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA Sept
AMIA/IASA 2010 OPENING THE ARCHIVES FOR ACCESS: UNDERSTANDING COPYRIGHT BARRIERS Jay Fialkov WGBH Educational Foundation Boston, Massachusetts.
COPYRIGHT IS A FORM OF PROTECTION GROUNDED IN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND GRANTED BY LAW FOR ORIGINAL WORKS OF AUTHORSHIP FIXED IN A TANGIBLE MEDIUM OF EXPRESSION.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2004 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer March 29, 2004.
LUDWIG MIES VAN DER ROHE
Copyright Law Ronald W. Staudt Class 10 February 23, 2009.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2008: CLASS 2 Professor Fischer Introduction to Copyright 2: Historical Background AUGUST 20, 2008.
WHAT EVERY EDUCATORY SHOULD KNOW Copyright. What is Copyright? According to the US Copyright Office, copyright is a form of protection grounded in the.
Class Seven: Intellectual Property Patents, Trademarks and Copyrights.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2002: CLASS 7 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY 1, 2003.
Intellectual Property Laws and Fair Use Guidelines for Educational Multimedia.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2002: CLASS 7 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY 4, 2002.
Copyright III Class 5 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner Copyright © R. Polk Wagner Last updated: 6/3/2016 2:47:50 AM.
T HE D ISTRIBUTION R IGHT The distribution right is the exclusive right “to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by.
Copyright II Class 4 Notes Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2004 Professor Wagner Copyright © R. Polk Wagner Last updated: 11/19/2015 1:12:27 AM.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA Class 5 September
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 Class 5 September 11, 2006 Idea/Expression Dichotomy Functionality Professor Fischer.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA Class 7: September 13, 2006.
From Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution: “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors.
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2008 THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA Class 6: September Idea-Expression Dichotomy.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2004 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY 23, 2004.
Becky Albitz Electronic Resources Librarian
COPYRIGHT LAW 2001 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer Class 19 (MARCH 26, 2002)
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer November 13, 2006.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2002: CLASS 10 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY 13, 2002.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2004: CLASS 10 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY 9, 2006.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2003 Professor Fischer CLASS of April : PREEMPTION.
© 2015 Saqib Haroon Chishti. May be reproduced, distributed or adapted for educational purposes only.
Copyright Fundamentals Copyrightability Victor H. Bouganim WCL, American University.
INTRO TO IP LAW FALL 2009: CLASS 3 Professor Fischer Copyrightability: The Idea- Expression Dichotomy, Protection for Factual Works AUGUST 27, 2009.
BY KAYLA WEIDENBACH COPYRIGHT AND FAIR USE WHAT IS COPYRIGHT? Copyright- Exclusive rights granted by law to copyright owners for protection of their.
Copyright Fundamentals Copyright Subject Matter Victor H. Bouganim WCL, American University.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2006 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY 14, 2006.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2003 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer March 19, 2003.
COPYRIGHT LAW 2004: CLASS 10 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY
COPYRIGHT LAW 2004: CLASS 8 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA FEBRUARY
Intellectual property (IP) refers to creations of the mind: inventions, literary and artistic works, music, movies, symbols, names, images, and designs.
6/18/2016 COPYRIGHT AND Fair Use Guidelines “Respect Copyright, Celebrate Creativity”
COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America Prof. Fischer November 15, 2006.
Law 507 | Intellectual Property | Spring 2003
Class 7 Copyright, Autumn, 2016 Functional Works: Useful Articles
Principal Deputy County Counsel
ART & ARCHITECTURE By M. Ahmed Ismail
Presentation transcript:

COPYRIGHT LAW FALL 2006 CLASS 11 PROFESSOR FISCHER THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA September 27, 2006

Wrap-Up: Copyrightability of PGS Step One –Is it a PGS? If Yes, Step Two – Is it a Useful Article? If Yes, Step Three – Is it Physically or Conceptually Separable? If Yes, Step Four – Is it Sufficiently Original? If Yes, Copyrightable!

TESTS FOR CONCEPTUAL SEPARABILITY Paul Goldstein: Of the many fine lines that run through the Copyright Act, none is more troublesome than the line between protectable pictorial, graphic and sculptural works and unprotectable elements of industrial design.” See Pivot Point (7 th Cir. 2004) CB p. 234

Pivot Point Comprehensive review of different tests for conceptual separability Prefers Brandir test (as suggested by Denicola): was the form of the product the result of a creative process unfettered by functional concerns? If so, conceptual separability exists. If the design is the result of utilitarian pressures, no conceptual separability.

Pivot Point Sets out other tests for conceptual separability

Other tests for conceptual separability (c.s.) Majority (Oakes,J.) in Kieselstein-Cord: if artistic features are primary and utilitarian secondary, c.s. exists Nimmer: suggests “likelihood of marketability” test (c.s. if work would be marketable based on aesthetic qualities alone) Maj in Carol Barnhart were the artistic features required by their functions? Judge Newman’s dissent in Carol Barnhart: mind of the ordinary observer test. Paul Goldstein: The artistic features can stand alone as a work of art traditionally conceived and the useful article in which it is embodied would be equally useful without it. Patry: artistic features are not utilitarian

TAXIDERMY FORMS Are taxidermy forms copyrightable? Should they be treated similarly to human mannequins?

TAXIDERMY FORMS Hart v. Dan Chase, 86 F.3d 320 (2d Cir. 1996), Superior Form Builders v. Dan Chase, 74F.3d 488 *4 th Cir. 1996) – fish mannequins not useful articles because they just portray the appearance of an article – not glorified coat racks like Carol Barnhart.

Extent of Protection for Useful Articles Copyright Act s. 113 has a limitation, inspired by Baker v. Selden, for the reproduction right in pictorial graphic and sculptural works in the context of useful articles. What is this limitation?

TYPEFACE DESIGNS To what extent are these copyrightable?

COPYRIGHTABILITY OF ARCHITECTURE Seagram Building (Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and Philip Johnson – ) 375 Park Avenue (between 52/53d) New York City)

ARCHITECTURAL WORKS PRE AWPA AMENDMENTS BUILDINGS PGS – useful articles – separability requirement

COPYRIGHTABILITY OF BLUEPRINTS PRE-1990

ARCHITECTURAL WORKS COPYRIGHT PROTECTION ACT OF 1990 Amended definition of PGS in s. 101 to include “diagrams, models, and technical drawings, including architectural plans.” Useful articles?

Demetriades v. Kaufman, 689 F.Supp. 658 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) Allegedly infringed home Allegedly infringing

ARCHITECTURAL WORKS COPYRIGHT PROTECTION ACT OF 1990 Law amended due to U.S. ratification of Berne Convention Applies to...

ARCHITECTURAL WORKS COPYRIGHT PROTECTION ACT OF (a)(8) AWCPA s. 706 (n. a. Supp. p. 9) Applies to architectural works created (substantially constructed) on or after Dec. 1, Also to unconstructed buildings if embodied in unpublished plans or drawings if constructed by Dec 31, 2002

What’s an “Architectural Work”

Definition in s. 101? - “the design of a building as embodied in any tangible medium of expression, including a building, architectural plans, or drawings. The work includes the overall form as well as the arrangement and composition of spaces and elements in the design, but does not include individual standard features.”

Architectural Works: Analyzing Copyrightability How should the Copyright Office or the courts assess copyrightability for an architectural work built on or after 12/1/90 ?

Is this copyrightable if built after 12/1/90?

2 STEP TEST FOR COPYRIGHTABILITY (of architectural works) 1. Are there original design elements present - including overall shape, interior architecture? 2. If such elements present, are these functionally required? If not, then protectable.

Is a church copyrightable?

Is a bridge copyrightable?

Michael Graves Garden Pavilions: Copyrightable?

WHAT STRUCTURES ARE COVERED? House Report (CB p. 230) Houses, office buildings, malls (not individual units in malls: must be free- standing) Habitable structures, garden structures like gazebos, churches, garden pavilions NOT pedestrian walkways, interstate highway bridges, bridges, canals, dams, cloverleafs

WHAT STRUCTURES ARE COVERED? House Report (CB p. 230): C.O. Regulation (b)(2) – a building is humanly habitable structures that are intended to be both permanent and stationary, such as houses and office buildlings, and other permanent and stationary structures designed for human occupancy, including but not limited to churches, museums, gazebos, and garden pavilions.”

Kiosks?

LIMITATIONS What other limitations are in ACPA?

LIMITATIONS What other limitations are in ACPA? 1. State common laws and statutes relating to zoning, historic preservation, building codes (s. 301(b)(4))

LIMITATIONS Right to alter or destroy building (120(b)) – applies to building embodying an architectural work Does this apply to pre 1990 structures built from copyrighted plans, like the Superdome? Curtis v. Benson, 959 F. Supp. 348 (E.D. La. 1997)

Section 120(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of s. 106(2), the owners of a building embodying an architectural work may, without the consent of the author or copyright owner of the copyrightable work, make or authorize the making of alterations to such building and destroy or authorize the destruction of such buildin

Another limitation: 120(a) The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing, or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place.

Zanja Madre: Batman Forever

Zanja Madre

Michael Graves: Portland Public Services Building 1980

Portland Building