Copyright issues on the protection of architectural works and designs

Architects and engineers depend on copyright law to protect their original works. Copyright protection is automatic once a tangible medium of expression in any form of an innovative material, conforming the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, is created. In terms of architectural works, they are protected as literary works (design drawings and plans) and as artistic works (the building or model of the building). The case law on the concept of “originality” however discloses that it may be difficult for certain artistic works of architecture to achieve copyright protection. Although copyright law provides automatic protection to all original architectural plans, the limitation is that it only protects the expression of ideas but not the ideas themselves. The purpose of this research is to explore how effective the UK’s copyright law regime is for protecting the rights and interests of architects in their works. In addition, the United States system of copyright law will be analysed to determine whether it provides more effective protection for architects and engineers with regard to architectural works. The key objective in carrying out this comparison is to compare and contrast the extent to which the two systems protect the rights and interests of architects against copyright infringement. This comparative analysis concludes by considering the possibility of copyright law reform in the UK.

Who owns the copyright of architectural works and designs?

Copyright protects the rights and interests of authors on their original works of authorship such as literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and certain other intellectual works including architectural works and designs. It is automatic once a tangible medium of expression in any form of an innovative material, which conforms the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988), is created. This includes the building, the architectural plans and drawings. There is no official copyright registry, no requirements on any fees need to be paid and they can be published or unpublished materials. Copyrights owners have the rights to control the reproduction, display, publication, and even derivation of the design. However, there are limitations on the rights of the copyright owners concerning copyrights infringements. Infringement of copyright is an unauthorised violation of the exclusive rights of the copyright author. Architects and engineers depend on copyright law to protect their works and design. Copyrights are protected on the arrangements of spaces and elements as well as the overall form of the architectural design. However, it does not cover the design of functional elements and standard features. Although copyright law provides automatic protection to all original architectural plans, the limitation is that copyright only protects the expression of ideas but not the ideas themselves. It can be argued that architectural drawings and design, including models are recognised categories of artistic works which are protected under the copyright law. This research investigates to what extent copyrights protect the rights and interests of the designers on architectural works and design.

Statistical modeling suggests that antiandrogens in effluents from wastewater treatment works contribute to widespread sexual disruption in fish living in English rivers.

BACKGROUND: The widespread occurrence of feminized male fish downstream of some wastewater treatment works has led to substantial interest from ecologists and public health professionals. This concern stems from the view that the effects observed have a parallel in humans, and that both phenomena are caused by exposure to mixtures of contaminants that interfere with reproductive development. The evidence for a "wildlife-human connection" is, however, weak: Testicular dysgenesis syndrome, seen in human males, is most easily reproduced in rodent models by exposure to mixtures of antiandrogenic chemicals. In contrast, the accepted explanation for feminization of wild male fish is that it results mainly from exposure to steroidal estrogens originating primarily from human excretion. OBJECTIVES: We sought to further explore the hypothesis that endocrine disruption in fish is multi-causal, resulting from exposure to mixtures of chemicals with both estrogenic and antiandrogenic properties. METHODS: We used hierarchical generalized linear and generalized additive statistical modeling to explore the associations between modeled concentrations and activities of estrogenic and antiandrogenic chemicals in 30 U.K. rivers and feminized responses seen in wild fish living in these rivers. RESULTS: In addition to the estrogenic substances, antiandrogenic activity was prevalent in almost all treated sewage effluents tested. Further, the results of the modeling demonstrated that feminizing effects in wild fish could be best modeled as a function of their predicted exposure to both anti-androgens and estrogens or to antiandrogens alone. CONCLUSION: The results provide a strong argument for a multicausal etiology of widespread feminization of wild fish in U.K. rivers involving contributions from both steroidal estrogens and xeno-estrogens and from other (as yet unknown) contaminants with antiandrogenic properties. These results may add farther credence to the hypothesis that endocrine-disrupting effects seen in wild fish and in humans are caused by similar combinations of endocrine-disrupting chemical cocktails.