Legal protection of architectural works: international experience

Abstract

Traditionally, the construction of buildings and structures is carried out in accordance with previously prepared project documentation, the basis of which is made up of works of architecture. However, it should be noted that the legal nature of these objects has not been fully investigated. In particular, it is necessary to answer the question of what is the essence of such works and how their creative nature is manifested as a necessary element of legal protection. Traditionally, the very concept of "architecture" is associated with the creation of a new, beautiful, original and unique building. This is achieved by using previously developed structural elements, the set of which forms the architectural style. Hence, on the one hand, the difficulty lies in how to distinguish between a simple set of elements within one architectural style and a created, creatively completed object. It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that we are talking about works as a set of ideas, thoughts and images that have received, as a result of the author's creative activity, their expression in a form accessible to human perception. Thus, in terms of content, a work is an intangible good that is the result of creativity and has an objective form of expression. It is the creative nature of the work and the objective form of expression that should be considered as its features, which subsequently provide conditions for the protection of the author's rights. The main task of this article is to find out what is the creative nature and the objective form of expression in works of architecture. It is rather difficult to determine the creative nature of a work of architecture, since we are talking about a set of features that are characteristic only of a work. In addition, it is necessary to find out what the minimum level of creativity must be in order for a work of architecture to be protected by copyright rules. With regard to works of architecture, we can talk about the ability, characteristic only of the author of this work, to select architectural or structural elements. In addition, one can point to the individual author's layout and the ratio of space-planning solutions, expressed in the location of various rooms, decorating the facades of buildings with elements borrowed from various architectural styles. It is due to this kind of combinatorics of structural elements carried out by the author that the novelty, uniqueness and individuality of the work of architecture are achieved. Works of architecture cannot be completely equated with design results. For the emergence of copyright, it is necessary to have creative principles in the design object. The presence of creative principles is typical only for architectural and planning solutions. The construction project consists of working drawings, which, in fact, display architectural and planning solutions as a creative idea of ​​the author, and an explanatory note. It seems that copyright norms should protect only that part of the design object that contains architectural and planning solutions. Works of architecture must have an objective form of expression. It seems that the form of expression of this kind of works is the project. A building (structure) constructed according to the project cannot be a work of architecture or an object of copyright. The constructed building can only be considered as the second form of displaying the work of architecture, since the first is the project. Thus, from the moment of the creation of an architectural project, we can say that the work already exists, and therefore, it is the project that should be considered as a form of objective expression of the work of architecture.