>>2620062There is no fixed definition of “original”, but a work will normally pass the test if it is the result of a reasonable degree of “labour and skill or judgment” and if it is not merely copied from another source.
The amount of “labour and skill or judgment” required is modest. For example, technical drawings of simple parts for a loom, including a rivet, a screw and a stud, have been held to qualify as original works (1). Some things however are just too rudimentary. In a case involving rock band Adam and the Ants, three stripes of greasepaint applied to the face of a member of the band were held not to be a painting, and moreover to fail the originality test (2).
Mere copying is not always easy to assess in the context of an artistic work. In the Bridgeman Art Library case, in 1998, a US court decided that photographs of paintings were not original, as they were mere copies of the paintings (3). This case has not been followed in the UK, where it is generally believed that photography of painting is a skilled task and meets the requirements of originality, even though the purpose of the photographer is to produce a faithful copy.
Ideas and Principles
Note that ideas and principles underlying a work are not protected. While Christo would be entitled to prevent someone from reproducing his wrapped chairs, he could not prevent another artist from makingother wrapped works. The idea of wrapping objects is not capable of protection. It is only the unique expression of the idea that is protected.
Derivative Works
It is possible for a derivative work to enjoy protection. By employing sufficient labour and skill or judgment in transforming an existing work into something new, a fresh copyright can be obtained in the new work. It is necessary however to obtain the permission of the creator of the original piece, unless it is out of copyright. Sean Hillen’s Irelantis Suite provides some excellent examples of derivative work.
