Buildings Are Works Too: Architectural Copyright, Technical Drawings, and the Sightline Exception
By Casey Scott McKay ·
A building is protected by copyright and a photograph of it from the street is not an infringement, which is the oddest pairing in the statute and the one architects most often misunderstand. This article works both halves. It covers what the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act added in 1990, why an architect holds two separate copyrights - one in the drawings and one in the building - and how thin the protection turns out to be once functional elements, code requirements, and design conventions are filtered out under Zalewski. It then works section 120, which permits photographs of buildings visible from public places and permits owners to alter or destroy them, before turning to ownership across employees and consultants, licence scope in construction contracts, trade dress, and infringement comparison.
IP and Technology > Copyright | Article | Published 20 February 2026 - Updated 12 May 2026 | Casey Scott McKay - marksy.us
Summary. A building is protected by copyright and a photograph of it from the street is not an infringement, which is the oddest pairing in the statute and the one architects most often misunderstand. This article works both halves. It covers what the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act added in 1990, why an architect holds two separate copyrights — one in the drawings and one in the building — and how thin the protection turns out to be once functional elements, code requirements, and design conventions are filtered out under Zalewski. It then works section 120, which permits photographs of buildings visible from public places and permits owners to alter or destroy them, before turning to ownership across employees and consultants, licence scope in construction contracts, trade dress, and infringement comparison.
Keywords: architectural works copyright · Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act · technical drawings · two copyrights problem · Zalewski v Cicero · thin protection · functional elements · scenes a faire in design · section 120 sightline exception · owner alteration right · instruments of service · work made for hire in design practice · licence scope · VARA and site specific art · building trade dress · design patents on components · registration deposits · infringement comparison · photography of buildings · BIM ownership
This is premium Marksy content — the full document is available to subscribers.