Prompted by David Siegel's [answer](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/64967/can-photographs-of-landmark-properties-be-used-commercially),
specifically his final sentence:



> 
> if a building is old enough that it is not protected by copyright, there is no protection.
> 
> 
> 


Would this apply when the building has recently been altered in some way?


I assume that a substantial alteration, such as a new wing, might have its own copyright but what about a fresh lick of paint on the front door or having wooden window frames replaced with uPVC ones?


I appreciate that it is highly likely to be fact-specific and although I've added the [united-states](/questions/tagged/united-states "show questions tagged 'united-states'") tag for consistency, I'm interested in people's thoughts from any jurisdiction.



Copyright on building renovations