Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart
Mini Article – Volume 23, Issue 12
Share on Social
Copyright and Fireworks
By Kristyn Webb
According to the US Copyright Office, a fireworks display is not eligible for copyright protection, but a photograph of a fireworks display may be protected. Under US copyright law, to receive protection, a work must be “fixed” which means that a work must be expressed or embodied in a material medium that lasts for more than a transitory period.
This means that a song you compose in your head and sing aloud would not be subject to copyright protection unless you write it down or record your performance and thus “fix” it. Ironically, if someone else recorded your performance—without your consent—and thus “fixed” it, that person may be liable to you for copyright infringement. However, this only applies in cases of musical performances. This is not the case with fireworks, where an unauthorized photograph would “fix” an otherwise “unfixed” fireworks display and give the person lighting the fuse a claim of copyright infringement against the person clicking the shutter button.
In France, however, copyright law does protect a fireworks display. In a court case from 1992, the French Supreme Court (the Cour de Cassation) held that a fireworks display with lighting effects from projectors was protected by copyright law, and the unauthorized sale of postcards showing a photograph of the fireworks display infringed the show designer’s copyright.
So, if you are a globetrotting fireworks tourist, check your local laws before taking any unauthorized photos or videos! And for insight into fireworks technology and patents, check out this Fish Tank article by Paul Ratzmann!
Kristyn Webb is the Group Leader of Fishman Stewart’s Copyright Practice Group, and is currently earning a Master’s Degree in Copyright Law at King’s College London.
Published June 30, 2023
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
Women’s sports are having a moment, and not a small one. And right alongside that rise: the business of women’s sports is heating up, including some surprisingly dramatic trademark battles.
The idea that someone might “own” a piece of DNA raises a slightly uncomfortable question: can you really patent something that exists inside all of us?
Forbes reported that more than 1.5 million bots on an AI agent-driven social network appear to have created a new religion for themselves, the Church of Molt, with congregants adopting the name of “Crustafarians.”
Every March, college basketball players get an opportunity to become household sensations overnight. In today’s NIL (Name Image Likeness) era, that moment can be a once-in-a-lifetime business opportunity.
Behind the shamrocks and celebrations of St. Patrick's Day lies a surprisingly rich intersection with intellectual property.
Last week, PEI Licensing, LLC., the owner of the ORIGINAL PENGUIN brand (also known simply as PENGUIN) sued Pudgy Penguins Inc. in federal court in Florida over their respective penguin trademarks.
Matthew McConaughey recently obtained several trademark registrations with the U.S. Trademark Office in an effort to digitally capture and protect his entire persona.
Patents enable others to learn from, build upon, and improve the disclosed invention effectively. However, some have questioned whether they still work in today’s artificial intelligence (AI) landscape.
As athletes chase Olympic glory, the International Olympic Committee (“IOC”) is fighting a different battle, one over public perception and trademark law.
Golf is entering a data driven era, and the 2026 PGA Show showed that the most important IP in the game is shifting.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
