Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice Advance Access originally published online on July 1, 2008
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2008 3(8):524-529; doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpn114
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved
Architecture and copyright: a quick survey of the law
Legal context: Architecture has a special place within the law of copyright. The law does not restrict the development of architectural ideas and concepts; it does, however, prevent the copying of plans.
Key points: The test is whether the plan or building was a copy of the concept or style and therefore legitimate or a copy of the author's original manifestations of that concept or style and therefore an infringement. Another interesting aspect of architectural works is that they usually take the form of a professional commission.
Practical significance: The copyright owner can grant a licence either explicitly or implicitly to a third party to reproduce his work. Architects tend to be reluctant to assign their copyright, preferring to license it. If an architect is retained without a written agreement or on an agreement which does not expressly address copyright, a licence is implied. It would be difficult to give an agreement between an architect and his client commercial efficacy if the client was not entitled to use the architect's designs.
Key Words: Unique designs contained in architectural drawings are capable of copyright protection. • Architectural ideas and concepts may be developed but not copied. • Architects should ensure that their contracts with clients define any express permission to use the plans and state which, if any, rights are assignable to third parties.
* Attorney-at-Law, Louisiana; Solicitor, England, and Wales. Email: attorneyangel{at}hotmail.com