Hi,

I am thinking of using landmarks in my game, and I'm just wondering are they copyrighted, considering that I am going to use my own artwork for textures and such? Say I wanted to use the GoldenGate bridge or the leaning tower of Pizza, would I be able to safely use the shapes and names of these landmarks in my game?

Thanks.

A tower of pizza is definitely not copyrighted. About that tower in the city of Pisa, I don't know for sure, but I guess they aren't - I'd bet landmarks can't be copyrighted. Of course, a specific 3D model or picture of a landmark can be, but not the landmark itself.

How do copyrights and trademarks work with photographs of public places?

If I go up to London and take a bunch of photographs, can I use them as backgrounds in a game? Do I need to crop out all people, or just make them unrecognisable? Do I need to remove all billboards or replace them with my own invented ads? What about names of business places? Do I need permission from landowners to take pictures of their property?

(I've wondered these things a lot when thinking about adventure games.)

A natural landmark cannot. However structural/architectural landmarks definitely can (see question 10 on this page: http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html), so it would depend on the individual landmarks you would like to use. Even then, I'm not sure how you could find out.

OK, Rereading my own link, I guess I missed an important part:

"Copyright protection extends to any architectural work created on or after Dec. 1, 1990....Architectural designs embodied in buildings constructed prior to Dec. 1, 1990, are not eligible for copyright protection. "

Of course, this is US specific. I'm not sure if there would be any international laws that would apply.

I don't think it's likely, but an organization can bring a suit against you whether they have any standing or not. They can harrass you to stop using their image.

Here's a suggestion:
Create a small independent company with no relationship to your primary venture. Then create a website that sells images of these landmarks for $1.00 each. Email anyone related to the landmarks a link to the website. Claim to have millions in sales.

Then wait to see who sues you.

Hehehe, Pizza--Pisa, what's the difference.

Come to think of it, If I draw my own textures, and model my own models of these structures, they will not be 100% look-a-likes, but enough to recognize what they are. This would be the same as GTA3, where their car models aren't 100% exact, so they don't have to purchase licenses from carmakers, but you can still guess what the car is.

One question: Is a specific landmark really so crucial to your game? Is there a reason a generic landmark could not be used in its place?

Originally posted by LordKronos
A natural landmark cannot.

Unfortunately it can and is... for example the lone cyprus (or some other tree) on the 17mile drive in California is copyrighted... has a big sign in front of it saying that you cannot take pictures and sell them or even use a symbol that resembles the cyprus.

I can't recall the specific restrictions, but I remember being quite stunned when I first read the sign.

Intellectual property claims have gone completely crazy... you now have companies claiming copyright on particular colours, people's blood and genes, ideas that have been in public use for decades, etc, etc, etc...

... but that's a topic for another day. ;)

I just want people to recognize the places that the game takes place and landmarks seem like the best way because they are popular and most people know them.

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ41.html#scope

Interesting, read this:

"Works Excluded

The following works cannot be registered:

• Structures other than buildings, such as bridges, cloverleafs, dams, walkways, tents, recreational vehicles, mobile homes, and boats.

• Standard configurations of spaces, and individual standard features, such as windows, doors, and other staple building components, as well as functional elements whose design or placement is dictated by utilitarian concerns.

• The designs of buildings where the plans or drawings of the building were published before December 1, 1990, or the buildings were constructed or otherwise published before December 1, 1990."

I am not a lawyer, but it appears that the Golden Gate bridge is specifically excluded due to the bridge mention in the first point. Also note that December 1, 1990 limitation, I have no clue what technically can or cannot qualify, but it appears most landmarks would be excempt just due to their age. I also remember reading that the government (at least in the US) cannot copyright their works or at least certain works (eg. there is no copyright on the US flag afaik). So an image of anything created by government should be safe to use (provided it's not top secret plans you found after an Area 51 raid ;)). Yet another point is that copyrights have expiration dates, so even if something you want to use can be copyrighted, if it's old you might want to see if the copyright is still enforcable. Like others said though, a lawsuit does not need to have any grounds to hurt you greatly so you might want to make sure you have a million dollar inheritance before you choose to test the validity of copyright.

Note that this is United States law. International copyright law is a whole different ball game I believe, something like the leaning tower might be subject to different laws. Lastly, I actually live in Canada not the US so excuse me if any of this sounds ignorant or is terribly wrong.

Copyrights on these types of things are just ridiculous. Thanks for the info everyone, I'm sure I'll think of something.

Originally posted by Midnight
Unfortunately it can and is... for example the lone cyprus Nope, you can't copywrite a natural creation. The case of the Lone Cyprus is a bit more sane than that. It's not actually copyrighted, but trademarked. It is used as a trademark of the Pebble Beach Company. Go to their website (http://www.pebblebeach.com/home.html) and you can see it is used as their logo. I suppose it makes sense, but it's another gotcha you gotta watch out for. :(

Just a quick note here, US government creations of any kind (so long as they are not classified) are always public domain. This is because they are paid for by the public and cannot therefore be rightfully claimed to be owned by any specific entity. Now there may be some security/fraud protectionary reasons why some exceptions exist. Like, for instance, you cannot reproduce the exact likeness of a US currency bill. And there could be similar restrictions on things like official seals or ID badges... I'm not sure. But buildings etc. are definitely okay. What's more, any kind of production of a US government agency, such as any photos taken by NASA, are also public domain. So pictures of the shuttle taken by NASA can be reproduced without a problem. The one exception to this is if a photo contains an individual who may have privacy concerns. In such a case, you'd have to obtain permission from that individual to reproduce their likeness.

Oh, and a note about the natural creation thing...

Sierra also uses a natural mountain formation for its logo... but I don't think that means you can't have pictures of that mountain. But it does mean you cannot reproduce that exact angle on the mountain in conjuction with any other unique traits that would indicate association with the Sierra software company.

So I would think that if it went to court, say an overhead shot of that cyprus would probably be okay since it does not create an image anything similar to the registered trademark of the company in question. That is, nobody would look at that overhead shot and mistake it as the logo for that company. And therein lies the key - if an average person would not mistake one for the other, a claim of ownership usually won't stand in a court of law. But then again you can always be sued, even if unsuccessfully.