Re: Re: Night Lighting

From: Steven Jamar <stevenjamar[_at_]gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:15:30 -0500


On 1/31/06, tja[_at_]mds.rmit.edu.au <tja[_at_]mds.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
> Steven Jamar wrote:

[snip]
> > But, even if one had a copyright, it would be a very thin copyright and
> > would not, it seems to me, enforceable against the right of a
> > photographer standing in a public place to take a picture of the building
> > as lit.
>
> Doesn't the US copyright law provide that photographing architectural
> works in public places is not an infringement?

Yes. Hence my comment. But it does seem that one could make the bad and losing argument that no one can take the photo of the building because to do so would then necessarily be making a copy of the work of art "painted" on it which could possibly be something other than an architectural work (e.g., a two dimensional graphic work or sculptural work).

In the interest of completeness on the fixation point (I was indeed being too loose there. Thanks.) -- the international treaties (Berne, TRIPS, and WIPO) leave the decision on fixation to the individual states.

Steve

--
Prof. Steven Jamar
Howard University School of Law
Received on Wed Feb 01 2006 - 02:15:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:56 GMT