Commons:To be utilitarian or not to be utilitarian

Shortcut: COM:BEUTILITARIAN

Isn't every product copyrighted by someone? What about cars? Or kitchen chairs? My computer case?

A "useful article" is defined as "an article having an intrinsic utilitarian function that is not merely to portray the appearance of the article or to convey information."

More information can be found there, but here I want to focus on some examples that may aid to clarify what is and is not utilitarian in a visual way. Note that "utilitarian" also varies from country to country, but here I'll try to explain the most common interpretation.

The non-utilitarian examples here have expired copyright, are covered by FoP, too simple to be eligible for copyright protection or not protected by copyright for another reason.

See also: utilitarian objects protected by copyright

Case studies

Utilitarian	Reason	Not utilitarian	Reason
	Formula 1 car. It may not be street-legal, but it has a purpose. Decals can be copyrighted though.		Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article A toy car. For more detailed information see Elcobbola's essay. You can play with a toy car, but it has no function.
	Game console and controller. The casing is utilitarian as it protects the components inside and keeps them together. The controller is simply an input device like a mouse or keyboard. Also note that game consoles are typically not limited to playing games. They can also be used as a media player or training simulator.
	A book (not its contents) is utilitarian. It can be used to store information that may be protected by copyright. It is also an object made to keep many pages of paper together.		Function is merely to convey information Books, instruction manuals, etc. While not always entertaining, they merely convey information, thus, can be protected by copyright.
	A physical DVD is a utilitarian storage medium for information.		Function is merely to convey information Unlike the movie on it..
	Electronics. Some particular layouts may be protected by patents (which Commons doesn't care about), but not by copyright.		Function is merely to convey information But this diagram only conveys information.
	A baseball bat is not just a toy, it's also a potential weapon. Toys that are used and also don't depend on the fantasy of the player are typically utilitarian.		Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article Another baseball bat, but this one isn't utilitarian. You can't swing this one.
	Similarly, a pool table. It does not merely portray the appearance of the article or convey information.
	A kite is also more than just a toy. You fly a kite and you can also fight them.		Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article Prints on a kite can be protected by copyright though! (now all I have to do is find a kite with the Mona Lisa printed on it..)
	Utilitarian does not equal useful. This makeup box is perfectly utilitarian, even if it isn't a requirement to survive.
	While worn by many people like jewellery, in its essence it remains a utilitarian timekeeping device.		Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article But an object that is nothing but jewellery has no utilitarian function.
	A hat is just a piece of headgear. Keeps your head (somewhat) warm and your hair dry when it rains.		Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article At some point, the utilitarian function may be lost..
	An empty canvas, like an empty book, is a utilitarian object to paint something on.		Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article When it's no longer empty, it will be eligible for copyright.
			Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article Statues have no intrinsic utilitarian function.
			Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article A stuffed animal. This one was knitted by a Commons user! So the Creative Commons license applies to both the photograph and the stuffed animal.
	This IS a pipe. Actually it's a photo of a pipe but nevermind that.	"Ceci n'est pas une pipe"	Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article Ceci n'est pas une pipe or This is not a pipe. And indeed, it isn't. It's a painting of une pipe and protected by copyright!
		Function is merely to portray the appearance of the article (when fully transformed) This Transformer toy is blurred missing in action for a reason. The general idea of a toy car (a block on wheels) is not eligible for copyright (and any existing patents would have expired by now). The general idea of a robot action figure is also not eligible for copyright. The mechanism that allows shifting parts of the toy to change it from one form to another is also not eligible for copyright, but may be patented. However, both the particular robot form and toy car form of this model are eligible for copyright. The toy can't be used, while it is possible to play with it the only play consists of the imagination of the player and the appearance of the article. If a Transformer toy has been taken apart and its parts are laid out on a surface, assuming no individual part will be complex enough to be eligible for copyright, a photo of that will quite possibly not infringe on Hasbro's copyright. An interesting case would be a photo of a half-transformed Transformer toy without any decals that isn't recognizable as either the toy car or robot form. As this wouldn't portray any intentional toy appearance from Hasbro, it could be argued such a photo would portray a utilitarian article.