Mazer v. Stein

Background

Respondents are partners who designed and sold small sculpted dancing figures and marketed them largely as table-lamp bases. One partner modeled the figures in clay, made production molds, and manufactured semivitreous-china statuettes. The statuettes were registered with the Copyright Office as "works of art" after the fully equipped lamps had already been sold, and respondents sued other lamp makers who copied the figures and sold the copies as lamps. Lower courts had split on whether such registrations were valid, so the case reached this Court.

Reasoning

The central question was whether an original statuette may be copyrighted even though it was intended to be and was used as a part of a manufactured lamp sold in quantity. The Court looked at the statutory language, the legislative history, and long-standing Copyright Office practice and concluded that "works of art" and "reproductions of works of art" may include such statuettes. The Court stressed that copyright protects the author's original expression — the sculptural form — but not the mechanical or utilitarian aspects of an article. It rejected the argument that the availability of design patents means such artistic articles cannot be copyrighted, and it upheld the registrations and the right to prevent copying of the sculptural expression.

Real world impact

As a practical result, creators of original sculptural lamp bases can register and enforce copyrights in the artistic form of those bases. Competitors remain free to use similar functional ideas, but they may not sell copies that reproduce the protected statuette without permission. The Court did not decide whether the same designs could also receive patent protection.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Douglas, joined by Justice Black, concurred in the result but urged further consideration of a constitutional question: whether a sculptor is an "author" and a statue a "writing" under the Copyright Clause, and suggested reargument to address that issue.