Docsity
Log inSign up
Docsity
Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips
Sell on Docsity
Sell on Docsity
Docsity AI
Docsity AI
Log inSign up

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Find documents

Prepare for your exams with the study notes shared by other students like you on Docsity

Search for your university

Find the specific documents for your university's exams

Docsity AINEW

Summarize your documents, ask them questions, convert them into quizzes and concept maps

Explore questions

Clear up your doubts by reading the answers to questions asked by your fellow students

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Share documents
download point icon20 Points

For each uploaded document

Answer questions
download point icon5 Points

For each given answer (max 1 per day)

All the ways to get free points
Get points immediately

Choose a premium plan with all the points you need

Study Opportunities

Choose your next study program

Get in touch with the best universities in the world. Search through thousands of universities and official partners

Community

Ask the community

Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts

Free resources

Our save-the-student-ebooks!

Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors

Understanding Derivative Works in Copyright Law: Batlin, Utilitarian Articles, Reconciliat, Slides of Law

Aligarh Muslim UniversityLaw

The concept of derivative works in copyright law, focusing on the batlin test, utilitarian articles, and reconciliation of inconsistent 2nd circuit cases. Topics include the definition of pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works, the distinction between useful articles and copyrightable works, and specific cases such as ets-hokin v. Skyy spirits and shl imaging v. Artisan house inc. Questions addressed include the difference between substantial and trivial variations, the impact of dimensional shifts on copyrightability, and the role of functionality and aesthetics in determining copyright protection.

Typology: Slides

2012/2013

Uploaded on 01/26/2013

sajeev
sajeev 🇮🇳

3.5

(2)

48 documents

1 / 19

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
TEST FOR ORIGINALITY FOR
DERIVATIVE WORK
•Batlin: the additional material injected
added to a prior work must constitute
“some substantial variation, not merely a
trivial variation such as might occur in the
translation to a different medium.”
Docsity.com
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe
pff
pf12
pf13

Partial preview of the text

Download Understanding Derivative Works in Copyright Law: Batlin, Utilitarian Articles, Reconciliat and more Slides Law in PDF only on Docsity!

TEST FOR ORIGINALITY FOR

DERIVATIVE WORK

  • Batlin: the additional material injected added to a prior work must constitute “some substantial variation, not merely a trivial variation such as might occur in the translation to a different medium.”

Derivative Works: Harassment

Fears

  • Batlin majority: “To extend copyrightability to miniscule variations would simply put a weapon for harassment in the hands of mischievous copiers intent on appropriating and monopolizing public domain works.”

TWO SUGGESTIONS FOR

RECONCILING 2d CIRCUIT

CASES

• 1. Are differences immediately

discernible?

• 2. What is the purpose of

making the changes --

functionality or aesthetics?

PROBLEM OF DIMENSIONAL

SHIFTS

  • A 3D work is adapted to 2D (e.g. photographs of objects)
  • OR A 2D work is adapted to 3D (e.g. sculptures based on 2D painting
  • Or a 3D work is converted to a different scale of 3D

SHL Imaging v. Artisan House Inc.

(SDNY 2000)

MALJACK PRODUCTIONS: A DIFFERENT

TEST FOR DERIV. WORKS IN THE 9th CIRCUIT?

  • Would you affirm this decision?

PICTORIAL, GRAPHIC AND

SCULPTURAL WORKS

  • What is a pictorial, graphic or sculptural work, according to the Copyright Act of 1976?
  • What are some examples of such a work?

PICTORIAL GRAPHIC AND

SCULPTURAL WORKS

  • “.. .include two-dimensional and three- dimensional works of fine, graphic, and applied art, photographs, prints and art reproductions, maps, globes, charts, diagrams, models and technical drawings, including architectural plans. Such works shall include works of artistic craftsmanship insofar as their form but not their mechnical or utilitarian aspects are concerned.” 17 U.S.C. § 101.

Does It Matter If A Work is

Useful? (Applied Art)

  • Can a doll be copyrightable?
  • Can a bank in the shape of a dog be copyrightable?
  • Can a Christmas decoration be copyrightable?

PICTORIAL GRAPHIC AND

SCULPTURAL WORKS

  • “the design of a useful article, as defined in this section, shall be considered a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work only if, and only to the extent that, such design incorporates pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article.” - from definition of pictorial, graphic and sculptural works in

USEFUL ARTICLES

  • What’s a useful article?
  • Section 101 - a “useful article” is an article having an intrinsic utilitarian function that is not merely to portray the appearance of the article or to convey information. An article that is normally a part of a useful article is considered a “useful article.”
  • Is that a circular definition?

A LITTLE HISTORY ON COPYRIGHTABILITY OF USEFUL ARTICLES

  • Long protected by design patents
  • Until 1954 assumption was that design patent was ONLY way to protect the design of a useful article
  • Much criticism of this situation - why was there criticism?
  • Why has copyright law traditionally been hostile to protecting the design of a useful articles?

MAZER v. STEIN (1954)

  • Involved dancer lamp not dissimilar to one on left
  • What is the holding of this case?
  • How was this case a “radical change”?
  • Is it constitutional?