Copyright laws in common law jurisdictions provide protection to architectural works. Such protection often makes architects exclusive owners of their work and obliges third parties to seek a license to use the protected rights. However, courts sometimes look for an implied license to effectuate parties’ intentions and assist them in fulfilling the main purpose of their contract. Courts have used a few tests to find and justify the existence of an implied copyright license in architectural works and vindicate the transferability of an implied license. Such application of fiction by courts is not seen in Indian Courts in cases of copyright licensing in architectural works. This article examines these tests and approaches taken by courts in common law countries and by courts in United States of America in finding an implied license and its sublicensing