Intellectual property protection

Copyright in artistic works – Australian law

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

What is an artistic work?

  • paintings and drawings;
  • sculptures;
  • craft work;
  • architectural plans and buildings; and
  • photographs; and maps and plans.

Section 31 of the Act provides that the copyright owner (Owner) has the exclusive right to reproduce, publish and communicate to the public.  Copyright subsists from the time an artistic work is first reduced to writing or recorded in some way pursuant to section 22(1).

Who owns the copyright in an artistic work?

The creator of the artistic work (Author) is the first Owner of copyright pursuant to section 35(2) of the Act.  There is no general definition of an Author under the Act but cases such as Donoghue v Allied Newspaper Ltd [1938] Ch 106 have interpreted an Author as the person who created the work by putting it into a form that is protected by copyright.  Exceptions to this include:

  • employees – if the work is created as part of their employment, then the employer will usually own copyright;
  • commissioned works – it is possible for a person to own copyright for works created by someone else where the creation of those works are commissioned by them;
  • and governmental works – if works are created for the Government, the Government will generally be the copyright owner.

Copyright continues to subsist for seventy (70) years after the death of the Author as provided by section 33 of the Act.

What happens when the Owner sells the work?

Ownership of copyright is separate from ownership of the physical work itself.  This means that unless there is a written agreement to the contrary, copyright will not transfer from the Owner to the purchaser if the work is sold.  The fact that the purchaser bought the work does not mean they purchased the copyright.  Therefore, the purchaser will not obtain the right to reproduce or make copies of the work.

What if the artistic work is commissioned?

According to section 35(5) of the Act, the person who commissioned the work will own copyright for the following types of artistic works: photos taken for a private or domestic purpose, such as a family portrait or wedding photos; and paintings or drawings of a portrait.  For all other commissioned artistic works, the Author of the artistic works will be the Owner of copyright.  This is unless a written agreement to the contrary exists.  The commissioning person will generally have the right to use the work for the purpose it was commissioned for.

Can artistic works be reproduced?

It is an infringement for a person who is not the Owner to reproduce a work protected by copyright under section 36 of the Act.  If permission from the Owner is obtained, then the works may be reproduced.  Alternatively, it is possible for the Owner to assign or licence copyright pursuant to section 196(1) of the Act.

If copyright is assigned to someone else, then that person will become the new owner and will be able to reproduce the works.  If copyright is licenced, the licensee can only use the works in the way covered by the licence agreement.  A licensee may reproduce the works if the licence agreement allows them to do so.

Can similar works be created?

Copyright can be infringed if the works are reproduced or a “substantial” part of the works are used without permission.  There is no statutory definition of “substantial”.  Finklestein J in the case of TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd & Ors v Network Ten Pty Ltd (No 2) noted that

‘there is no fixed rule for determining how much of a copyright work must be taken for it to be a substantial part of the work’.

As a guide cases such as IceTV Pty Ltd v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd [2009] HCA 14 have defined “substantial part” as part of a work that is an important, distinctive or essential part.

If an individual has created works similar to those of another, the individual will not have infringed the other person’s copyright if it was a mere coincidence.  For a similar work to infringe another person’s copyright, it must been shown that: there is a similarity between the two (2) works; and evidence that the similarity is a result of copying, either directly or indirectly.

What if the author creates a similar work?

If an Author sells their work, the Author is still entitled to reproduce their work as they still own the copyright.  This is because the purchaser does not own copyright in the work they purchased, unless the copyright was assigned to them by express written agreement.

Section 72 of the Act refers to reproduction of part of a work in later works.  It provides that the copyright in an artistic work is not infringed by the making of a later artistic work by the same author if the author does not repeat or imitate the main design of the earlier work.

Further information

If you need advice on whether your copyright has been infringed, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:


Related insights about copyright protection and copyright infringement

  • Proposed changes to copyright for orphan works

    Proposed changes to copyright for orphan works

    On 5 November 2025, the Copyright Amendment Bill 2025 (Cth)(Bill) was introduced to the Federal Parliament to amend the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)(Copyright Act).  The media release to the Bill explained that it proposed two (2) reforms to the Copyright Act by establishing Australia’s first statutory “orphan works” scheme and clarifying the permitted use of…

    Read more …

  • Federal Gov rules out copyright text and data mining exception for AI

    Federal Gov rules out copyright text and data mining exception for AI

    On 26 October 2025, the Attorney-General, Hon Michelle Rowland MP, published a media release reiterating that the current Federal Government will not introduce a text and data mining (TDM) exception to copyright infringement in the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (Copyright Act).  The Attorney-General’s Department will instead engage in further consultations with members of the Copyright…

    Read more …

  • Malcolm Burrows on ABC’s “Legal Eagles” segment – copyright law and the Anthropic case

    Malcolm Burrows on ABC’s “Legal Eagles” segment – copyright law and the Anthropic case

    On 10 September 2025, Malcolm Burrows appeared live on Katherine Feeney’s ABC Radio program, “Legal Eagles” as the Technology and Intellectual Property Lawyer to discuss legal issues associated with copyright subsisting in artificial intelligence (AI) training data.

    Read more …

  • Canva – who owns the artwork created by users?

    Canva – who owns the artwork created by users?

    The general rule about ownership of copyright in a literary or artistic work is that copyright vests in the ‘original author’, as per section 35(2) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (Copyright Act).  From there, ownership depends on whether or not the original author is doing the work within the scope of their employment, in…

    Read more …

  • Software developer obtains Court order – names behind IP addresses

    Software developer obtains Court order – names behind IP addresses

    Justice Burley of the Federal Court of Australia in the case of Siemens Industry Software Inc v Telstra Corporation Limited [2020] FCA 901 ordered that Telstra, within fourteen (14) days, provide to Siemens all documents in its control relating to the identity of certain Telstra Account holders.  Those account holders were suspected by Siemens of…

    Read more …

  • The © (copyright) symbol in use

    The © (copyright) symbol in use

    It is something that is often overlooked, however it is considered best practice to add a copyright statement and the little © symbol (Copyright Statement) on any literary or artistic works (Works) that a business publishes and asserts that it owns.  Under Australian law, the “material form” of all original Works is automatically protected by…

    Read more …

  • “User principle” damages in copyright breach cases

    “User principle” damages in copyright breach cases

    The usual position in intellectual property infringement matters is that the successful applicant can elect between an account of profits or damages.  However, what if the applicant has not suffered any direct loss as a result of the actions of the respondent that is held to have infringed its copyright?

    Read more …

  • Ed Sheeran wins “Shape of You” copyright case

    Ed Sheeran wins “Shape of You” copyright case

    This article examines the legal test for copyright infringement in Australia, using Ed Sheeran’s Court case in the UK as an example. Find out how the Courts determine when a song is a copy of another and what the implications are for musicians.

    Read more …

  • Hermès sues artist over NFT “Birkin” bags

    Hermès sues artist over NFT “Birkin” bags

    Explore the implications of virtual artworks created with the help of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and how this has caused a legal battle between a renowned fashion house and an American artist. Learn more about the copyright and trade mark infringement issues, and the implications of this case for the future of digital art.

    Read more …

Send this to a friend