Claimant developed and sold a prototype suite of furniture with a particular design.
Defendant manufactured a similar suite of furniture, which Claimant alleged infringed copyright in Claimant’s suite as artistic works.
Claimant claimed that their suite of furniture was a ‘work of artistic craftsmanship’.
Claimant’s suite of furniture was not a work of artistic craftsmanship.
Fact that something looks nice does not make it ‘artistic’
Varying tests as to what is ‘artistic’ offered by judges