Copyright when photgraphing buildings

[theword]

Hi all

Can anyone offer any advice regarding copyright when taking pictures of buildings in the UK for commercial use ?

Basicaly we want to take some photographs of some buildings in London to be used as part of of a Web site but someone mentioned buildings can be copyrighted.

Can anyone shed any light on this ?

Thanks in advance,

James

[Sheila]

Hi James

As far as I am aware (and I work for a large law firm in Australia) there is no copyright owned by the building in photographs. I suggest you check with the equivalent of the Copyright Council in the UK. I am sure you can find something on the Net.

Cheers
Sheila

[theword]

Hi Sheila

Many thanks for your reply.

Ive since found out that, according to the UK patent office, copyright protects:

"original artistic works, e.g. paintings, engravings, photographs, sculptures, collages, works of architecture, technical drawings, diagrams, maps, logos"

Its the 'works of architecture' that I think could catch us out - but I have no idea what would define infringement.

Im still looking in to it, but if anyone can explain how we stand under UK law it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

James

[Roger_Cavanagh]

James,

I can't give a definitive answer, but I would think that "works of architecture" clause would mean that you're not allowed to build another building that looks the same. :) and (more seriously) you probably can't make money from the images without permission - like all those plastic Princess Diana's.

I would write whoever does the building management and ask, if it's OK.

Regards,

[dgoodfellow]

This was an issue in the USA a few years back when a photographer was selling pictures he had taken of the RocknRoll Hall of fame. The Hall of fame claimed they had a copy write on the buildings image and tried to take him to court. They failed. The ruleing was that the building was a part of the environment in the public domain. The photographer was alowed to continue to sell his photos. i'm sure someone could look up the case in the public record some where.

I only know of the case as I saw a piece on it on TV.

[dtrayers]

This seems to be a regular topic on photo.net. Here's one discussion:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0038px

[Yance]

It is probably best to talk directly with a lawyer as a first step. Another possibility is to try to get in touch with the building owner and see if they would be willing to sign a release form.

[slejhamer]

dgoodfellow wrote:
The ruleing was that the building was a part of the environment in the public domain.


Interestingly, the R&R HoF won the case initially, but the ruling was overturned on appeal.
http://www.jurisnotes.com/trademark_blues.htm

The final judgment rested on certain factors that were very specific to the case and the HoF's use of the image as a trademark. These factors would not necessarily apply in every situation.

In other words, DO NOT rely on the referenced case as a precedent if you intend to sell or publish photographs of a building. Also keep in mind that international copyright law may differ from US law.

Cheers,

[dgoodfellow]

That was a cool write up. Interesting twists the law puts on things.