Re: Coipyright in the Hollywood Sign

A Google search turned up this interesting tidbit: the Hollywood sign has it's own website, complete with webcam, virtual tour, illustrated history, etc. The website informs us that the The Sign has it's own Trust, with a Board of Directors, tax info posted on-line, the works.

The website also provides tips for spots from which The Sign can best be photographed: "We've assembled a list of suggestions for safe, legal spots where you can go to get that perfect shot. So print out this page, grab some film, and make a day of it – the Hollywood Sign is always ready for its close-up!"

No mention of a copyright, a trademark, or the Chamber of Commerce here. www.hollywoodsign.com.

However, exploring the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce site, www.hollywoodchamber.net, one finds that one can link through to The Sign's website, above, with its helpful photo tips, as well as to a FAQ which helpfully if confusingly answers the question: "I’d like to use the Hollywood Sign and the Hollywood Walk of Fame. Do I need to get permission to do this? Yes. Please contact Global Icons at (310) 820-5300."

So, take lots of pictures but if you want to "use" them pay us $5000?

Amalyah Keshet

At 22:00 16/06/2005, you wrote:
>This made me kind of curious. According to Hollywood Chamber of Commerce
>website, the sign arrived in a magic year: 1923, and it said
>“Hollywoodland.” In 1948, they repaired the sign and dropped the
>“land”. Even assuming that the sign is subject to copyright (something I
>have my doubts about), it’s an open question whether (a) that copyright
>protection was forfeited via publication without notice; (b) the copyright
>was properly renewed and (c) the copyright has expired even if it was (I
>don’t have the exact words of Sonny Bono in front of me). The fact that
>the Chamber of Commerce -claims- rights in the sign does not necessarily
>mean that they have any. They may be claiming some sort of trademark
>right, but I doubt that anyone would think that the Hollywood Chamber of
>Commerce sponsored your web site.
>
>More importantly, copyright laws are territorial so the UK law is a lot
>more important than the U.S. law. I would ask yourself (or your general
>counsel) whether or not you have enough business contacts with the States
>that you would even have to worry about being sued here. The fact that a
>web site can be accessed in the states is not, in and of itself, enough.
>
>U.S. law would certainly “permit” licensing of this kind. Whether or not
>you’d have to pay for it is a different question.
>
>
>
>----------
>From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
>[mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org] On Behalf Of Laura Young Bost
>Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 6:06 PM
>To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
>Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Coipyright in the Hollywood Sign
>
>I know that the movie SHREK 2 uses a similar sign and the credits
>acknowledge the Chamber of Commerce for the use.
>--
>Laura Young Bost, Rights Manager
>University of Texas Press
>P.O. Box 7819, Austin, TX 78713-7819
>tel:512/232-7625; fax:512/232-7178
>email: laura[_at_]utpress.ppb.utexas.edu
>Please visit our NEW website at http://www.utexaspress.com
>*************************************************************
>
>On Wednesday, June 15, 2005 10:05 AM, R.G.McCracken
><R.G.Mccracken[_at_]open.ac.uk> wrote:
> > st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
> >
> >I57;m hoping that US colleagues on the list may be able to help
> >with advice on a recent request to pay licensing fees for use
> >of a photograph of the Hollywood sign.
> >
> >My university is a distance teaching university in the UK and
> >we host an open web site on which we place educational and
> >general interest content for access by members of the public.
> >One of the activities featured on the site contains a
> >photograph of the Hollywood sign, taken by one of our own staff.
> >We57;ve received a request to pay licensing fees for use of the
> >photograph from the Hollywood Chamber of Commerc, claiming that
> >the sign itself is protected by copyright.
> >
> >Is this the case, and does US legislation permit licensing of
> >this kind? Under UK copyright law works of art displayed
> >openly in public places may be photographed freely and a
> >similar photograph in the UK could be used without licence.
> >
> >Many thanks
> >
> >Richard McCracken
> >Head of Intellectual Property
> >The Open University
Received on Mon Jun 20 2005 - 20:05:01 GMT