RE: Re: Coipyright in the Hollywood Sign

From: Anne Marie Hawkins <AHawkins[_at_]lucasarts.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 17:53:30 -0400

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Terry Carroll wrote:

> I think I pointed out that it wouldn't fall under that exception.
120(a)
> applies to architectural works, and I don't see the sign as an
> architectural work, which is defined as a design of a building. I
don't
> see the sign qualifying as a "building."

My bad. In reading your original note more closely, you did state this point clearly the first time. I wrote too quickly off the cuff. The Hollywood sign would most likely not fall under the definition of architectural works. Thanks for setting this straight. Sorry about that.

While we're on this topic, would the Golden Gate Bridge qualify as an architectural work?

Sincerely,
Anne Marie

-----Original Message-----
From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property [mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org] On Behalf Of Terry Carroll Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 2:05 PM
To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Coipyright in the Hollywood Sign

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, Anne Marie Hawkins wrote:

> Also, as Terry has pointed out, if the photograph was taken
> independently by a member of the University's staff from an open
public
> place, wouldn't that fall under the Section 120(a) Copyright Act
> exemption?

I think I pointed out that it wouldn't fall under that exception. 120(a)
applies to architectural works, and I don't see the sign as an architectural work, which is defined as a design of a building. I don't see the sign qualifying as a "building."

"Building" is not further definied in the 1976 Act, but I vaguely remember
the congressional report that accompanied the Architectural Works Copyright Act (to the extent that you're comfortable relying on such resources to construe a statute) as explaining that a "building" was something like any sort of structure that is ordinarily used (even temporarily) as shelter for humans. As I recall, in included examples of things like gazebos and other things that a human beingwould normally walk into; but would be a stretch to extend to a sign on a hillside.

If I was unclear and implied otherwise, that wasn't my intent.

#############################################################

This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to   the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>

Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>. Received on Sat Jun 18 2005 - 01:53:30 GMT