The overall design (such as the shape and cut) of a garment, bag or shoe is not protectable under current U.S. Copyright law because such items are considered “useful articles.” However, Section 101 of the Copyright Act provides protection for the “pictorial, graphic or sculptural features [of a useful article] that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the [useful] article.”[1]

In the fashion world, this provision of the Copyright Act allows companies to protect original pictorial, graphic or sculptural features that are applied to garments, bags and other accessories.  Examples include: fabric designs like a floral pattern; graphic art like an artistic rendition of a snake or tiger; and sculptural 3-D hardware adornments like belt buckles or buttons.  Copyright protection only covers the artwork itself, not the overall configuration of the garment or other product to which it is applied.[2]

For decades, courts and commentators have struggled to fashion a suitable test to determine when a pictorial, graphic or sculptural feature of a useful article (such as a garment) is protectable under § 101 of the U.S. Copyright Act.  On March 22, 2017, in a 6-2 decision written by Justice Thomas, the Supreme Court provided long-awaited clarificationMuch to the relief of the fashion industry, the Court adopted a test that preserves copyright protection for applied art to apparel and fashion accessories.


Continue Reading V-I-C-T-O-R-Y for the Fashion Industry: SCOTUS Establishes Uniform Test for Protection of Artistic Works Applied to Apparel

In 2014, Anheuser-Busch ran a contest on Facebook in which consumers were invited to submit photos of themselves “acting natural.” The contest rules stated that entrants could only submit their original works, and that the photos could not infringe anyone else’s copyrights, privacy rights, publicity rights, or other rights. Moreover, the rules stated that entrants

If your website allows users to post content, you’re probably already familiar with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Among Copyright Image on Keyboardother things, the DMCA provides online service providers a “safe harbor” from potential liability arising from publishing content that infringes a third party’s copyrights, if that content was posted by another person. In order to take

Yesterday, a suspected “patent troll” filed suit in Texas federal court against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleging that the FTC unlawfully interfered with its constitutional right to identify and seek redress for patent infringement. Just last month, the FTC sent MPHJ Technology Investments LLC (MPHJ) a draft complaint accusing the company of engaging in

Facebook has agreed to pay $10 million and make various changes to its terms in order to settle a lawsuit alleging that the company’s Sponsored Stories violates members’ rights of publicity.

With Sponsored Stories, when a Facebook member "likes" a company, checks-in at one of its stores, or performs certain other actions, that member’s profile

In working with brand owners large and small, I find a surprising number of instances where independent contractors are hired to create content without a proper work for hire or other agreement to protect the company. In the rush to complete projects, get product to market and move on to the next task, even sophisticated