Copyright in architecture
Well, the situation is. You are an architect working for a company, preparing all necessary engineering documentation to build 5 storied residential premises, building in a very nice neighbourhood. That’s the moment you say: ‘I’m done’ and the company starts to build it. Then the company decides that 5 stores is not quite enough (actually, the neighbourhood is too good) they apply to you with request: ‘Hey, could you please add another five stores to our building?’. You just say: ‘Well, it’s a little bit unsafe. I can’t risk with my reputation...’.
The company says “O.K.” and goes to another architect without your permission. The architect B says “Easy, guys” and changes the documentation. You find it out one day in a conversation with a buddy from anoter architect’s agency.
“That’s not fair!” - you cry. And you go to the court. The case became for unknown reasons so difficult to judges that they couldn’t decide it solely. The decision changes from the court to court. The courts argued what is protected by the copyright. They even couldn’t decide which contract form should be used by the parties in such a case.
And then, that day came.
Several years ago, on a very pleasant day of 27th of Sepember 2011, the Highest Arbitrazh Court stated that only part of construction plans and technical specifications referring to the architectural decision is protected by the copyright. And monetary compensation could be claimed only in part referring to the architectural solution.
P.S. Famous buildings could be registered as trademarsks (three-dimensional configuration of buildings)! For example, New York’s Empire State Building is a trademarked name. WOW.
