What if I wanna take a photograph of a building?
Does the building have copyright?
Well, the answer is, it may.
Under sec- >> That's usually the answer.
>> It's usually the answer.
Either it depends or it may.
In this case, under Section 120 of the US Copyright Act, any building that was
created after December 1st, 1990, is protected by copyright.
However, if the building is in a public place, you can take a photograph of that
building and not infringe on the copyright for the architect of the building.
However, if the building was created after December 1st, 1990, and
is not viewable from a public space, this exception does not apply.
>> And just let me ask, this applies to the building itself-
>> The building itself.
>> As well as the architectural plans?
>> Yes, the archi- >> Before 1990,
the plans were protected but not the buildings.
>> The plans were protected but not the buildings.
>> Thank you.
>> After December 1, 1990, the building is protected.
And that includes the interior of the building as well.
So if you're taking photos within a building, you may need to get
permission if the building was built after December 1st, 1990.
And in all cases,
you wanna be aware of potential invasion of privacy concerns if you're in
the interior of a building where someone may have an expectation of privacy.
Another consideration is whether or
not the building itself is also protected by trademark.
So while this is very unusual, it is possible.
And if so,
the concern would be that your use of the picture of the building is commercial and
is used for similar goods or services, so may cause confusion in the marketplace.
Or may given appearance that the owner of that trademark of that
building is in some way promoting a product or a service.
So for example, the Transamerica building has been used by
Transamerica to promote their products and their services.
And so that building actually does have some trademark protection and
its shape is very unique and distinctive.
>> Right, that's something you wouldn't ordinarily think about.
It's also possible that a building will have a sculpture or other artwork that is
either a part of the building or a part of the grounds in front of the building.
These works are separable.
They're separable from the building and from any copyright in the building, and
they need to be treated as such.
So, let's talk a little bit more about sculpture.
A sculpture is protected by a copyright,
unless it has fallen into the public domain.
If I take a photograph of a copyright protected sculpture like this picture
of the three of us in front of a well-known sculpture on the Duke campus,
I've created a derivative work.
That is,
I've made a two dimensional representation of a three dimensional work.
And so I've derived one work from the other.
If I take that picture of a building that has a sculpture out front,
there are potentially two underlying copyrights.
The copyright in the building, assuming it was constructed after 1990,
and the copyright in the sculpture.
Now, my photograph may be fair use, which we'll delve into in another lecture.
But a photograph may capture several underlying copyrighted works.
And so we need to think about that and do the analysis for each one.