Copyright Law

Product Photos: Derivative Under Copyright Act §101?

, New York Law Journal

Robert J. Bernstein and Robert W. Clarida write that three district courts have recently considered whether a work should be considered to be "derivative" within the meaning of §101 of the 1976 Copyright Act. Although in each case the issue was raised in the context of photographs of three dimensional objects, the determination of whether a work is "derivative" and the consequences of that determination are broadly applicable across the spectrum of copyrightable subject matter.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com