Newsletter
INFRINGEMENT BY TRANSFORMING TWO-DIMENSIONAL ARTISTIC OR PICTORIAL WORKS INTO THREE-DIMENSIONAL OBJECTS
Court opinions have diverged on whether producing a three-dimensional object from a two-dimensional artistic or pictorial work constitutes reproduction or adaptation under the Copyright Law or whether it is merely an act of implementation that would fall outside the scope of that law. The Supreme Court held in 1997 as follows: The standard of differentiation should not be based on whether the final manifestation after reproduction is in two-dimensional or three-dimensional form. It should instead be based on a comparison of the content of the two-dimensional artistic or pictorial work and that of the three-dimensional object after transformation. If the three-dimensional object re-manifests the content of the pictorial or artistic work, it is a reproduction; if not, it is an implementation. However, if, in addition to re-manifesting the content of the work, the three-dimensional object also manifests new creativity, and the object moreover is a work protected by the Copyright Law, then it should be considered an adaptation.