Re: Photographs of Public Sculpture

My understanding of copyright is that the artist holds the copyright for their piece for life, unless he/she has signed over copyright to a museum or gallery and this is rarely the case in the art world. In addition the artists estate holds the copyright  for 50 years after the artists death (at least in Canada).

Taking a photograph of a work of art does not create a new work - see the Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel ruling. The copyright still rests with the artist.

All that said, taking a picture of a work of art does not break copyright, but what you are proposing, mounting it on your site would, in my opinion, without the approval of the artist, do so.

Christine Sammon
Librarian (not a lawyer!)

Ann Mayo wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> Forgive me if this sort of question has been asked before but...have any of you had experience with posting photographs of "public" sculptures on the web? Our museum would like to add some images of public art to our web site. These objects are all i
n areas that are either outdoors or inside but in a public space. Some of them are in the museum's collection and some are not. Some are most likely in the public domain but some are not.
>
> Does taking a photograph of such a work make a the photo a derivative work? Do we need to get permission from the original works copyright holder anyway?...or since the work is in a public space can it legally be photographed? The purpose of the publi
c art portion of our web site would be to make people aware of art that is already in their daily lives and give brief information about each piece. Thank you for your time and thoughts.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Ann Mayo
> Smith College Museum of Art
> 32 Round Hill Rd.
> Northampton, MA 01063
> amayo[_at_]email.smith.edu
> (413)585-2774
> FAX (413)585-2782