| 요약2 |
The definition and extents of architectural works vary from country to country. For instance, Korea, Japan and the US regard architectural works as an independent category of copyright while the UK, Australia, Canada and most European countries do as a sub-category of artistic works. Besides, architectural works include a building and its plans in the US; a building and a building model in the UK; a building only in Japan; and a building, plans and a model in Korea. Moreover, not a single country clearly codifies the definition and extents of architectural works in its copyright legislation. Therefore legal disputes concerning architectural copyright are proceeded without norms and their results are volatile depending upon judges to a great extent. This specific problem is more severe in Korea, where the definition of architectural works is overly brief and vague as it is stated as "a building, models, plans and similar architectural works." In this study, the definition and extents of architectural plans in terms of copyright are analyzed to set their copyrightable norms. In doing so, a prevailing design process was examined and worldwide legal cases concerning architectural copyright were scrutinized. Finally, it is proposed to limit architectural works only to architectural plans (including design sketches) which show the overall form and internal layout. By contrast, construction documents including technical drawings, plans and specifications, with their functional and illustrative nature, should be treated as graphic or literary works rather than architectural works. |