Natural causes: When author meets nature in copyright law and art. Some observations inspired by Kelley v Chicago Park District

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article considers the interplay between author and nature in United States copyright law, using Kelley v Chicago Park District as a catalyst. In Kelley, the Seventh Circuit repudiated Chapman Kelley’s authorship of his enormous wildflower garden, Wildflower Works, partly on the basis that natural forces, rather than Kelley, were primarily responsible for the form of the work. The article has two broad purposes. The first is to critique the Seventh Circuit’s denial of Kelley’s authorship. The article argues that the Seventh Circuit misconceived Wildflower Works by conflating the work with the plants constituting it. This skewed its assessment of Kelley’s authorship, failing to give sufficient weight to his selection and arrangement effort. The second, and primary, purpose of the article is to explore the ramifications of Kelley for other contemporary art employing natural materials and natural forces, and to more deeply examine authorship doctrine in this context. Using a number of examples of artists who collaborate with nature, the article explains how natural forces can disturb authorship, but may not defeat it. The aims of the article are to fuel discussion, prompt reflection, and question some deeper assumptions about the relationship between nature and authorship in copyright law.
Original languageEnglish
Article number6
Number of pages35
JournalUniversity of Cincinnati Law Review
Volume86
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

district
art
cause
Law
contemporary art
artist
doctrine

Cite this

@article{971b1ff808f7453f83c17744a27c0cc3,
title = "Natural causes: When author meets nature in copyright law and art. Some observations inspired by Kelley v Chicago Park District",
abstract = "This article considers the interplay between author and nature in United States copyright law, using Kelley v Chicago Park District as a catalyst. In Kelley, the Seventh Circuit repudiated Chapman Kelley’s authorship of his enormous wildflower garden, Wildflower Works, partly on the basis that natural forces, rather than Kelley, were primarily responsible for the form of the work. The article has two broad purposes. The first is to critique the Seventh Circuit’s denial of Kelley’s authorship. The article argues that the Seventh Circuit misconceived Wildflower Works by conflating the work with the plants constituting it. This skewed its assessment of Kelley’s authorship, failing to give sufficient weight to his selection and arrangement effort. The second, and primary, purpose of the article is to explore the ramifications of Kelley for other contemporary art employing natural materials and natural forces, and to more deeply examine authorship doctrine in this context. Using a number of examples of artists who collaborate with nature, the article explains how natural forces can disturb authorship, but may not defeat it. The aims of the article are to fuel discussion, prompt reflection, and question some deeper assumptions about the relationship between nature and authorship in copyright law.",
author = "Janice McCutcheon",
year = "2018",
language = "English",
volume = "86",
journal = "University of Cincinnati Law Review",
issn = "0009-6881",
publisher = "University of Cincinnati College of Law",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Natural causes

T2 - When author meets nature in copyright law and art. Some observations inspired by Kelley v Chicago Park District

AU - McCutcheon, Janice

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - This article considers the interplay between author and nature in United States copyright law, using Kelley v Chicago Park District as a catalyst. In Kelley, the Seventh Circuit repudiated Chapman Kelley’s authorship of his enormous wildflower garden, Wildflower Works, partly on the basis that natural forces, rather than Kelley, were primarily responsible for the form of the work. The article has two broad purposes. The first is to critique the Seventh Circuit’s denial of Kelley’s authorship. The article argues that the Seventh Circuit misconceived Wildflower Works by conflating the work with the plants constituting it. This skewed its assessment of Kelley’s authorship, failing to give sufficient weight to his selection and arrangement effort. The second, and primary, purpose of the article is to explore the ramifications of Kelley for other contemporary art employing natural materials and natural forces, and to more deeply examine authorship doctrine in this context. Using a number of examples of artists who collaborate with nature, the article explains how natural forces can disturb authorship, but may not defeat it. The aims of the article are to fuel discussion, prompt reflection, and question some deeper assumptions about the relationship between nature and authorship in copyright law.

AB - This article considers the interplay between author and nature in United States copyright law, using Kelley v Chicago Park District as a catalyst. In Kelley, the Seventh Circuit repudiated Chapman Kelley’s authorship of his enormous wildflower garden, Wildflower Works, partly on the basis that natural forces, rather than Kelley, were primarily responsible for the form of the work. The article has two broad purposes. The first is to critique the Seventh Circuit’s denial of Kelley’s authorship. The article argues that the Seventh Circuit misconceived Wildflower Works by conflating the work with the plants constituting it. This skewed its assessment of Kelley’s authorship, failing to give sufficient weight to his selection and arrangement effort. The second, and primary, purpose of the article is to explore the ramifications of Kelley for other contemporary art employing natural materials and natural forces, and to more deeply examine authorship doctrine in this context. Using a number of examples of artists who collaborate with nature, the article explains how natural forces can disturb authorship, but may not defeat it. The aims of the article are to fuel discussion, prompt reflection, and question some deeper assumptions about the relationship between nature and authorship in copyright law.

M3 - Article

VL - 86

JO - University of Cincinnati Law Review

JF - University of Cincinnati Law Review

SN - 0009-6881

IS - 2

M1 - 6

ER -