Hunt
Hunt v. Pasternack
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Schroeder, J.
Before us for the first time is a question regarding the validity of a copyright under the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act of 1990 (“the Act”). That statute amended 17 U.S.C. § 102 to add “architectural works” to the categories of works that can be copyrighted. See 17 U.S.C. § 102 (a)(8). It also defined an “architectural work” as “the design of a building as embodied in any tangible medium of ex *684 pression, including a building, architectural plans, or drawings.” 17 U.S.C. § 101 .
The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants in this infringement action on the ground that there could be no valid copyright in the design of a building that had not yet been constructed. The plaintiff had obtained a copyright by submitting his work as embodied in the plans. Because the statute provides that the copyright is in the design as embodied not only in a building, but alternatively in the architectural plans, we hold that construction of the actual building was not required. We remand for further proceedings.
The project involved in the litigation is an “Organ Stop Pizza” restaurant designed to hold a “Mighty Wurlitzer” organ and located in Mesa, Arizona.…