Millennium Park Garden Deemed Not Copyrightable, Because Gardens Are Not Authored
from the fixed-how? dept
Eric Goldman points us to a fascinating ruling concerning whether or not an artistic garden can be covered by copyright (pdf). The ruling itself (embedded below) is interesting for a variety of reasons. It goes over the basics of "moral rights" in US copyright in great detail. As most people know, for the most part, the US does not recognize moral rights -- even though the Berne Convention (which the US has tragically signed on to) requires it. Partly to get around this, the US did put in extremely limited moral rights for a very small subset of works, and part of this case revolves around that.An artist by the name of Chapman Kelley created an artistic wildflower garden in Chicago's Millennium Park, which he often described as a "living painting." Years later, after the wildflowers (which had been maintained by others) started to die off, the city of Chicago reduced the size of the garden and reconfigured it. In response, Kelley sued, claiming a violation of his "right of integrity."
The court goes through a nice discussion on the history of moral rights and copyright in the US and then overrules, partly, the lower court decision that found the garden to be a painting or statue, but not copyrightable because it lacked originality. The court agrees that the work should not qualify for such protections and is uncopyrightable, but not due to the originality argument (which the court says makes little sense). Instead, the appeals court points out something rather basic: copyright only applies to works that are "fixed in a tangible medium of expression." And here it sees a big problem: a garden is not fixed:
We fully accept that the artistic community might classify Kelley's garden as a work of postmodern conceptual art. We acknowledge as well that copyright's prerequisites of authorship and fixation are broadly defined. But the law must have some limits; not all conceptual art may be copyrighted. In the ordinary copyright case, authorship and fixation are not contested; most works presented for copyright are unambiguously authored and unambiguously fixed. But this is not an ordinary case. A living garden like Wildflower Works is neither "authored" nor "fixed" in the senses required for copyright....Seems like an excellent ruling all around, though it is a symptom of our "ownership society" that people believed something like a garden might be copyrightable.
Simply put, gardens are planted and cultivated, not authored. A garden's constituent elements are alive and inherently changeable, not fixed. Most of what we see and experience in a garden--the colors, shapes, textures, and scents of the plants--originates in nature, not in the mind of the gardener. At any given moment in time, a garden owes most of its form and appearance to natural forces, though the gardener who plants and tends it obviously assists. All this is true of Wildflower Works, even though it was designed and planted by an artist.
Of course, a human "author"--whether an artist, a professional landscape designer, or an amateur backyard gardener--determines the initial arrangement of the plants in a garden. This is not the kind of authorship required for copyright. To the extent that seeds or seedlings can be considered a "medium of expression," they originate in nature, and natural forces--not the intellect of the gardener--determine their form, growth, and appearance. Moreover, a garden is simply too changeable to satisfy the primary purpose of fixation; its appearance is too inherently variable to supply a baseline for determining questions of copyright creation and infringement. If a garden can qualify as a "work of authorship" sufficiently "embodied in a copy," at what point has fixation occurred? When the garden is newly planted? When its first blossoms appear? When it is in full bloom? How--and at what point in time--is a court to determine whether infringing copying has occurred?
On a separate note, this is not the first time that Chicago's Millennium Park has run into copyright issues over "artwork" installed in the park. Back in 2005 there was a big controversy over the metallic bean-shaped sculpture in the park, which most people call "The Bean," but which is technically called "Cloud Gate." It really makes you wonder why parks don't require any artists providing artwork for such public displays to relinquish any copyright claims.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Oh Noes!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
*Strum*
It is not your plant.
From the be-gonias,
To the tiger lilies.
From the leafy hedges,
To the Chry-San-The-Mums,
These plants were grown for only me!
Now just the Girls!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Possible Digital Corollary?
The vast majority of digital memory is not really a fixed medium either. The bits themselves are "constituent elements" of digital intellectual property that are "inherently changeable." Though, the pattern supposedly being claimed as protected intellectual property is logically a fixed arrangement of said "inherently changeable" "constituent elements." Perhaps this could be used as precedent for strengthening fair use? It would be nice to have the substantive mutability of the digital medium critically considered when it comes to attempts to legislate its use.
As for the gardener, wouldn't copyrighting a garden arrangement be a moot action? The natural variance of plant growth makes the arrangement itself a high order abstraction of the tangible layout. To me, that would seem to be more of an idea in practice rather than a fixed form of expression. I guess that's what the judge was (succinctly) pointing out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A Possible Digital Corollary?
Leave a flower and a memory stick alone in a dark closet. See which one changes...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pppbbbtttt!
Hell, that entire park project was a joke from the beginning. Sorry, we can't hire more police or fireman, we have to build gazillion dollar parks!
Thanks, Daley. Can't wait until you're gone....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You silly humans...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
My God's better than yours,
My God's better 'cause he's got super powers,
My God's better than yours.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
but... but!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
patents and copyrighting of plants
I don't know how eager you are to get into the Rumsfeld WMD activity : NWO plans without a doubt, enabled by the USDA.
Try this : no promises. It was changed to Monsanto HQ's URL at http://opitslinkfest.blogspot.com/2009/07/corporate-farming.html!
The World According to Monsanto - YouTube Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvGddgHRQyg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Word Play
The court here is simply playing with words by finding a word different from "authored" to use. I can do the exact same thing with books: "Books are written, not authored." So, does that mean that copyright does not apply to books simply because I can find a different word for "authored"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Word Play
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Word Play
Sure it is, if it creates a work of art.
What you're saying is similar to "arranging words is not an artistic endeavor", or "putting paint on something is not an artistic endeavor." I'd say that it is, if it produces a work of art.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Word Play
Technically, books are written and authored. I don't think the distinction between cultivated and authored is the point, as much as the distinction between cultivated and written, painted and recorded. For your point to hold you'd have to ignore the rest of the judgement, which further clarifies the point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Word Play
The gardens were cultivated and authored. The plants were cultivated and the layout was authored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Word Play
You missed my point. I agree with your statement, which is a fair summary of my first point. Then I went on to explain why it doesn't matter because they clarify the issue in the rest of the judgement. So, really you've made that point too, by failing to acknowledge the second half of my comment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's inconsistent
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is inconsistent
But, my point is this: The ruling pisses me off for reasons other than my wanting gardens copyrighted. What pisses me off is that this proves that most of the other cases, where the courts, the congress and even damn diplomats are pushing to sue and pull people off the internet are only viable because they are backed by the strong-arms of the RIAA and MPAA.
If the laws were consistent and set precedent, this guy should have won. Perhaps, if it got to that point, people would pay more attention and demand better laws.
I don't know, but I'd guess if landscapers had a huge lobby behind them, the situation would be a whole lot different.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It is inconsistent
How so? Do you believe that a garden is a fixed medium?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It is inconsistent
This judgement is just represents a total lack of understanding about designing and creating gardens. I imagine the judge had strong motivation of some kind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks,
Andrea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]