Probably not. A patent protects an invention, which may be embodied in a product/object, but it only prevents others from making, using, selling or importing the patented invention.
A copyright protects creative expression, which can be embodied in an object of sculpture, for example. Taking a picture of that object creates a new copyrightable object: the photograph. If the object is a work of visual arts, then the photograph could be considered a "derivative" work, based upon the original work. However, simply taking a picture (creating, in theory, a copy) would probably not rise to the level of "infringement" because the owner of the copyright on the original has not been "harmed" yet.
An invention or idea cannot be protected by copyright, only by patent. The content of a description of an invention cannot be protected by patent, only by copyright. Printed matter recorded on a CD cannot be protected by patent, only by copyright. The way printed matter FUNCTIONS on a CD can be protected by patent but not copyright. The way the same material can be USED can be protected by copyright AND patent. You cannot patent or copyright something that was copied from someone else's work. So the answer would depend upon what aspect of CDs you're referring to.
"an object that has a meaning" is rather a curious turn of phrase. If you mean a sculpture, an object with a symbolic meaning, it would be protected by copyright as soon as it is fixed in a tangible medium. A patent would be more appropriate for a new type of object with a useful function.
No, you would patent the wheels on a bus, not copyright.
Technology would typically be protected by patent law, with the exception of software, which can fall under both copyright and patent.
The game Operation is protected by copyright and trademark.
A patent grants the holder the rights to produce the product. Only they can make it for the length of the patent. They can also license out the rights to make something. Anyone else making the product can be sued for violation of the copyright.
While a patent or copyright is held by a company or a person, no one else can use that product or copyrighted material (also known as intellectual property) without the permission of the patent/copyright holder which usually involves some kind of compensation. If someone wants to use one of these products or materials, and can't come to an agreement with the patent/copyright holder, then they are motivated to produce a variation or an improvement on it and get their own patent/copyright for themselves. New products and materials are developed all the time to compete with an existing patent or copyright.
You would want to protect it by copyright, not patent. Copyright protection is automatic as soon as the music is fixed in a tangible medium (notated or recorded).
you will have to go to the us patent office and have a copy right for the picture
No, they're not "public domain" until the copyright of the author expires. Just because they were sent to the patent office and issued as a patent does not changed the copyright ownership or duration. However, an author of a patent application has, by statute, granted a limited right to others to reproduce the patent. Most of the rules in the US Patent Office regarding copyright notice have not been subject to comprehensive update since the 1988 laws were changed to repeal the need to have a proper copyright notice on a publication in the USA if it was to have copyright protection. Copyright of any creative work of authorship is now free, instantaneous and automatic, whether or not the copyright owner knows it or wants to enforce it, without requiring any copyright notice, nor any registration.
No; copyright would protect an author, and patent would protect an inventor.
Aquacoir is protected by patent and trademark, not copyright. The trademark is registered to OMS Investments.