...and it's still pretty vague. I asked if you could copyright the designs on cakes or cookies, and they referred me to the publication about Works of the Visual Arts http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ40.pdf . In different places it says:

1. You can't copyright familiar images (I'd assume that this would include something like a picture of a cat or a basket of fruit.)

2. You can't copyright something that you've changed a little bit if it's based on someone else's design ("Mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring"). I would assume that this could be used to argue that you can't copyright a cake design, since you can probably find any number of designs that came before the one you're trying to copyright that are similar to what you've done.

And this:
3. "Copyright is a form of protection provided by the laws of the United States to the authors of original works of authorship, including pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works. The owner of copyright in a work has the exclusive right to make copies, to prepare derivative works, to sell or distribute copies, and to display the work publicly. Anyone else wishing to use the work in these ways must have the permission of the author or someone who has derived rights through the author"

There's also an interesting section on Moral Rights, which says this: "The right of integrity allows artists to protect their
works against modifications and destructions that are prejudicial
to the artists honor or reputation", (which would probably be used to prevent people from making a comic book with Mickey mugging people and stealing their money. That would harm Disney's reputation, so that section would likely be used to argue that you can't do reproductions of copyrighted items in case it damages the reputation of the copyright holder.)

I think that you could find a lawyer to tell you whatever you want to believe, based on this. Unless it's a truly original work of art, it's doubtful that you could really get a copyright that would hold up under the terms they've listed. But read it for yourself, I'm not an attorney who's charging anyone by the hour, so I don't mind how long you take to read the whole publication

Thanks for the follow-up.

Sounds like some of us were right.

Thank you - very interesting stuff.

I was just discussing this with my husband (like he really cared, he thinks its silly how much I'm on here). It was nice to see an update, although still left for interpretation Which was my point in the last posts, anyone can think anything, its all how YOU read it

Sounds like someone may be paying a lot of money for some very subjective advice. And to that end, all I can say is that it must be nice to have that kind of money.

Pretty much what I thought. Hearts, turkeys, etc. have been around for a long time so who knows who invented/designed them.

Interesting. I think someone would have a very hard time defending copyright on a cookie or cake or design based on that information.

I don't have a problem with copyright on photos of cakes or cookies. It's just plain wrong to take someone else's work and make out that it's yours - not because of design issues, but because you are stealing their skill level, the quality of their work, their talent - if you have the skill to reproduce the cookie/cake, then prove it and take your own photo of your own cookie.

What irks me the most about copyright on cakes/cookies is that it implies that it's okay for the copyright holder to use other people's designs to create a cake/cookie (and let's face it, the copyrighted designs out there are not truly unique, just small variations on existing themes and styles), but nobody can use theirs. That's not playing fair.

Cris.

I still want to know whether or not a C&D has ever been issued because of a cookie.

I seem to remember that was a well-publicized bakery in the UK. I may be wrong.

Either way, I know if I were paying a lawyer to be at my beckon call, I would want that lawyer to earn every dollar. And to me, that would mean C&Ds all over the place!

I like to get my money's worth.

But.........What about the themed shaped cake pans you can buy. If you weren't supposed to recreate spiderman then why would they sell a pan in that shape knowing you were going to make a cake look just like spiderman??

I'd love to see God (or whoever you think created the universe) copywrite the Grand Canyon, or Angel Falls, or Dolphins. You know, all of the "Nature" that people photograph, and sell for huge amounts of money (Ansel Adams). Or scenery that painters have copied (Monet, for one). THAT would be HI-larious!!!!!

I would like to point out in the particular thread from before, her copyright was on her graphics that she was putting ON the cookie, not the cookie itself Just to clarify, not the shape the actual graphic. HOWEVER, the pumpkin pie, was just colors, so that was the one I thought the copyright would be vague on.

I just want to say that by the time they prove that you copyrighted, the evidence has been...well eaten.

This is a question I have been thinking about since the last thread about this. Does anyone know the process of getting your image or "design concept" copyrighted? Who approves of it? Only the specific attorney? Because what I found confusing with the topic discussed in the previous thread was that just because a person had never seen a similar (or in some cases almost identical) design before does not give somebody the right to copyright, right?

So all I can say later is that I have never seen a Santa's Sleigh with presents before and that makes it ok? There has to be a process to get an image approved. Another example is how in the world was Tracy able to put a copyright on the shark that looks just like an already copyrighted character? How is that possible? Can you just copyright images left and right and then say I did not know?

If it can be backed, then no, it's not okay. Tthe thing is can you back your claim to copyright in a cout of law. As far as the shark goes, Disney just doesn't know. And when I explained to her that it was no mistaking it was Bruce and Disney would probably would have a problem with her claim, she removed it from her site. Go figure.

She took all the photos down from flickr.

I don't think you could copyright a cookie design if you could I think there wouldn't be chocolate sandwich cookies and only oreos. Plus they have the money to back their claim ( or whoever came up with that design first)

I doubted the whole copyright issue would stand if challenged. You wouldn't know unless it was challenged. I was thinking that the lawyer was just doing the work for payroll. So then wouldn't the lawyer also make more money representing the case. This is heart breaking to see someone so talented and so passionate about her work possible being taken advantage of like this. I really and most sincerely hope she isn't getting taken for a ride on the money maker.