Does anybody really know (I mean REALLY know, not received wisdom from the stock sites) if building copyright really applies to photos taken from public places, or if any architect has ever sued over a photograph of his building being used in an advert?
No? Yes? (this is USA, I don't have anything for the rest of the world)
We know of no case that has ever settled those kinds of questions. ASMP advises that property releases be acquired whenever possible because we don’t want to see you be the test case.Using property releases - ASMP Their view is CYA, don't become the test case. Probably what the stock sites are advocating. But it's not really the law.
OK that's a no, but here's something interesting from a law site:
Architectural Works
(Note: Architectural plans and drawings may also be protected as textual/graphics works)
Date of Design - Prior to 1 Dec. 1990
Date of Construction - Not constructed by 31 Dec. 2002
Copyright Status -
Protected only as plans or drawingsPrior to 1 Dec. 1990 - Constructed by 1 Dec. 1990
Protected only as plans or drawingsPrior to 1 Dec. 1990 - Constructed between 30 Nov. 1990 and 31 Dec. 2002
Building is protected for 70 years after death of author, or if work of corporate authorship, the shorter of 95 years from publication, or 120 years from creation
From 1 Dec. 1990 - Immaterial
Building is protected for 70 years after death of author, or if work of corporate authorship, the shorter of 95 years from publication, or 120 years from creation
(emphasis is mine) But the point is, prior to 1 Dec 1990, only protected as plans or drawings. The buildings aren't. Seems pretty clear?
Another one of my favorite sites and good reading. Basically the same as photos, books and music now, but it wasn't that way until Dec. 1990.
Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States
- Cornell University
