Originality Of Works Of Architecture

With the development of the society,laws concerning intellectual property havebeen improved gradually and as we can see,more and more types of works have beenunder the protection of it.Though being a little kind special,architecture works containpeople’s intelligence and wisdom just like other kinds of works cause they come fromconstructive minds and can’t be avoid of being coped by other designers.So there isno doubt that it is of great importance to be protected like other works.Even though ithas already been taken into the protection ambit in the Chinese new promulgatedintellectual property law in2001,but up to the present,the attention paid on theprotection of the intellectual property of the architecture works is far from enough andstill the studies on it are pretty immature.The key factor what decide whetherarchitecture works can be protected by the law or not is the originality concealed in itwhich lacks of certain standard and practical method to judge.It seem hard to figurethat out but it is still necessary to explore all possible means by considering its owncharacteristics and all the theories on the originality of other works that is alreadyknew.This paper starts from the dispute over the works copyright between Porschecompany and Taike Yate company,and then compares common theories in China andoverseas focused on what is originality,methods to make a distinction and theapplication of them from which people can get to some kind of common sense of howto solve this kind of dispute or case.This paper is divided into four parts to talk about originality of architecturalworks.To put forward the problem,in the first part,it introduces the case briefly,conducts in-depth research at the trial, and then makes a simple value judgment to thepoints of view adopted and the reasons,though which it comes up with the commonproblems of judging if it is original or not that we are facing in the judicialpractice.The second part introduces the general theory of originality,its origin, itsconnotation and so on.From two representative countries of the Anglo-American lawsystem and continental legal system,it discusses how to set a criterion to help peoplemake a distinction.the most important part is the third one.By studying the features ofarchitectural works,it explores the connotation of originality of architectureworks,standard for judgment,method to use and its application etc..Lastly is the fourth part which analyzes the deficiencies of legislation and puts forward some suggestionsfor perfecting and reforming.Thus,providing realistic basis for the coming judicialwork of our country.It is believed that originality is the necessary part of creative works, but it shouldbe reconsidered when faced with different types of works.Because of its differentforms,such like its3D buildings or structures,building design drawing and buildingmodel of different forms,it must have its different criterion.By studying the originalityof architecture works,it is trying to call for a legislation on it.