Cc-uk mailing list

[Stuart Yeates <stuart.yeates AT oucs.ox.ac.uk>]

Ben Dembroski wrote:

> Indeed, sculpture is automatically covered by copyright law. In 
> my experience, when dealing with something as overwhelmingly
> physical as sculpture, copyright enforcement tends to come into
> play when dealing with pictorial representation of the work,
> rather than derivative physical objects. It seems to me that any
> derivative sculptural works would be considered fair-use, as
> what is actually happening is that one artist is re-interpreting
> the others through sculptural expression. So, if you are talking
> about making other physical works, the CC is kind of a non-issue.

One needs to be careful of the case in which a derivative physical
object is made exclusively to generate pictorial representations of.

There are also situations one could imagine, such as a sculpture
with a painting painted/projected/transferred onto it. Are the
copyrights of the painting and the sculpture distinct?

> Does any one know of any other cases of non-pictorial copyright 
> infringement involving a scuplture?

The lighting scheme on the lighthouse in Paris may fall under your
definition of sculpture:

http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/007251.html

cheers
stuart
-- 
Stuart Yeates                          stuart.yeates AT oucs.ox.ac.uk
OSS Watch                              http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/
Work Blog                   http://blog.educause.edu/StuartYeates/