347 U.S. 201 (1954), Supreme Court of the United States
Mazer v. Stein is a cornerstone of American copyright law that clarified whether aesthetic designs incorporated into useful articles are protectable under the Copyright Act.
Are sculptural works that are intended to be used as part of a utilitarian article, such as statuettes used as lamp bases, copyrightable as works of art under the Copyright Act of 1909, and may an employer hold the initial copyright in such works created by employees within the scope of their employment?
Under the Copyright Act of 1909, "works of art" (including works of artistic craftsmanship) are copyrightable even when intended for application to or incorporation in a useful article, so long as protection extends only to the expressive, nonfunctional aspects of the work and not to the article's utilitarian features. The fact that a work is commercially exploited in a product or serves a utilitarian function does not strip it of copyright protection. Additionally, under the 1909 Act's work-for-hire doctrine, an employer may be the initial proprietor of the copyright in works created by employees within the scope of their employment.
Yes. The statuettes were copyrightable as works of art notwithstanding their use as lamp bases, and the employer's registrations were valid under the work-for-hire doctrine. The judgment for respondents was affirmed.
Mazer v. Stein is foundational for the modern "useful article" doctrine and the concept of separability—the idea that copyright protects expressive elements of a design that can be identified separately from and are capable of existing independently of a utilitarian article. Its reasoning was later codified and elaborated in the 1976 Act's definition of pictorial, graphic, and sculptural (PGS) works and ultimately clarified by the Supreme Court in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands. Mazer also entrenched the work-for-hire doctrine under the 1909 Act, influencing how courts and practitioners analyze initial ownership. For students, the case illustrates statutory interpretation informed by legislative history and agency practice, as well as the delicate balance between incentivizing creativity and preserving free competition in functional product markets.