Теорія і практика інтелектуальної власності
№ 4 / 2025

ISSN (Print) 2308-0361
ISSN (Online) 2519-2744

PDF (Ukrainian)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33731/42025.346582

Submitted     2025-11-05
Accepted      2025-11-18
Published      2025-12-15

Some peculiarities of creation and use of architectural objects: distinction between a piece of architecture and a utilitarian structure

Vadym Khytruk
PhD student of the Intellectual Property Scientific Research Institute of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine
Ukraine
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2578-2036

Abstract
A comprehensive examination of the criteria for differentiating an architectural work from an architectural object as a utilitarian structure, with particular emphasis on Ukrainian legislation in comparison with international legal standards, is provided in this article. Using a doctrinal and comparative method, it analyses Ukrainian copyright law alongside international and foreign frameworks (EU, United Kingdom, United States, Canada) and relevant case law. The study argues that copyright safeguards only those features that embody the author’s free and creative choices, while elements dictated by building norms, functional necessity, market standards, or technical constraints fall outside protection. Methodologically, the study traces the creation process across stages — sketches, drawings, models, project documentation, and construction — showing how copyright becomes effective from the moment a design is fixed in an objective form, and clarifies the coexistence of copyright in the design and property rights in the built structure, including the tension between the owner’s needs (use, alteration, demolition) and the author’s moral right of integrity.

The article compares the criterion of the author’s own intellectual creation, the United Kingdom’s inclusion of buildings as artistic works subject to originality, and the US AWCPA’s recognition of architectural works while excluding standard components, alongside the treatment of scenes a faire and merger in plan-based disputes. It also proposes an operational two-step process for practice: identify original design elements and filter those that are functionally required. On that basis, it formulates practical guidance for licensing and re-use (including repeated construction), reconstruction and modifications, and digital exploitation (e.g., photorealistic models in games), translating abstract originality criteria into actionable contract clauses and risk screens for architects, developers, and rights holders. The contribution lies in a clear, practitioner-ready framework that protects expressive architectural form without monopolising functional solutions, thereby aligning incentives for creative design with the public interest in buildable, repeatable, and safe structures.

Keywords: copyright, piece of architecture, originality, case law

References

Бернська конвенція про охорону літературних і художніх творів. Паризький Акт від 24 липня 1971 року, змінений 2 жовтня 1979 року.
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_051#Text

Про авторське право і суміжні права : Закон України від 01 грудня 2022 року № 2811-ІХ. Офіційний вісник України. 2023. № 3. Ст. 196.

Judgment of the court in Case C-145/10 Eva-Maria Painer v Standard VerlagsGmbH.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62010CJ0145

Judgment of the court in Case C-683/17 Cofemel – Sociedade de Vestuário SA.
eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62017CJ0683

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents

Kerr-Wilson G., Boyd K., Architectural Designs: Are They Copyrightable?, 29 November 2023.
https://www.mondaq.com/canada/copyright/1395522/architectural-designs-are-they-copyrightable

Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act of 1990.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/101st-congress/house-bill/3990/text

17 U.S. Code § 102.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/102

Report on Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act of 1990.
https://www.copyright.gov/reports/copyright-amendments-act-of-1990.pdf

Договір Всесвітньої організації інтелектуальної власності про авторське право від 20 грудня 1996 року.
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_770#Text

Feeley Е. The Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act: Concerning the Originality of «Cookie-Cutter» Homes.
https://ucipclj.org/2021/04/28/the-architectural-works-copyright-protection-act-concerning-the-originality-of-cookie-cutter-homes/

Zalewski v. Cicero Builder Dev., Inc., No. 12-3448 (2d Cir. 2014).
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/12-3448/12-3448-2014-06-05.html

Intervest Construction v. Canterbury Estate Homes (11th Cir. 2008).
https://opencasebook.org/documents/513/