## Facts

- A municipal commission arranged for Pablo Picasso to design a monumental outdoor sculpture for a civic plaza in Chicago (commonly known as “The Chicago Picasso”).
- Picasso completed a model of the sculpture, and an additional model was created to guide construction; Picasso approved an image of the later model before installation.
- The commission paid Picasso $100,000 to acquire all rights in the design, including copyright and renewals, and prepared documentation describing the finished work as a gift to the public.
- To publicize the project, the commission and its representatives authorized a broad publicity campaign that distributed photographs of the sculpture models to mass media.
- The photographs were widely disseminated and published without any copyright notice.
- A publisher sought to make and sell reproductions of the sculpture; the commission asserted a valid copyright and objected.
- The publisher sued for a declaratory judgment that the commission’s claimed copyright was invalid; both sides moved for summary judgment.

## Issues

1. Whether authorized, unrestricted dissemination and mass-media publication of photographs depicting the sculpture’s models, without copyright notice, constituted a general publication of the sculptural work under the 1909 Act regime.
2. Whether such a general publication without notice placed the work in the public domain, rendering later statutory copyright claims unenforceable.
3. Whether intent to donate the work to the public (or to retain control) could alter the legal effect of the parties’ objective acts of publication.

## Decision

- The court granted the publisher’s motion for summary judgment and denied the commission’s cross-motion.
- The court entered declaratory judgment that the commission’s asserted copyright in the sculpture was invalid.
- The court held that the authorized, widespread distribution and publication of photographs of the models without copyright notice amounted to a general publication of the work.
- Because the work was generally published without statutory notice, it entered the public domain and could not be reclaimed through later registration or assertion of rights.

## Legal Principles

- Under pre-1976 copyright law, a work generally published without compliance with statutory formalities—particularly copyright notice—could be dedicated to the public domain.
- A limited publication (restricted distribution for a limited purpose) does not divest protection; a general publication (unrestricted dissemination to the public at large) does.
- Authorized publication of visual representations (including photographs) can constitute publication of the underlying visual art when the images disclose the work to the public.
- Subjective intent regarding donation or control does not defeat the legal consequences of objective conduct that constitutes general publication without notice.

## Conclusion

The court held that the commission’s authorized publicity campaign broadly disseminated photographs disclosing the sculpture’s design without copyright notice, constituting general publication that placed the work in the public domain and invalidated the commission’s asserted copyright.


Letter Edged in Black Press, Inc. v. Public Building Commission of Chicago, 320 F. Supp. 1303 (N.D. Ill. 1970)