This appeals court document shows the opinion of congress on the
ability of copyright security. Get this; the main point:
It will, so long as the statute remains in its present form,
always be necessary to determine whether in a given case there is a
physically or conceptually separable artistic sculpture or carving
capable of existing independently as a work of art.
… permitting copyright to extend only to ornamental or
superfluous designs contained within useful objects while denying it
to artistically designed functional components of useful objects.
Generally they have favored representational art as opposed to
non-representation artistic forms
[ Added section: Hanuman]
BARRY KIESELSTEIN-CORD v. ACCESSORIES BY PEARL, INC.
OPINION (Judge Oakes): 1. This case is on a razor’s edge of
copyright law. It involves belt buckles, utilitarian objects which
as such are not copyrightable. But these are not ordinary buckles;
they are sculptured designs cast in precious metals-decorative in
nature and used as jewelry is, principally for ornamentation. We say
"on a razor’s edge" because the case requires us to draw a fine
line under applicable copyright law and regulations. Drawing the
line in favor of the appellant designer, we uphold the copyrights
granted to him by the Copyright Office and reverse the district
court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the appellee, the
copier of appellant’s designs