[Veratyr]

http://blog.kenkaminesky.com/photography-copyright-and-the-l... in the "Do I need a model or property release to own the copyright in my photograph" section goes into this a bit.

TL;DR: "In general, if property is visible and can be photographed from a public place, you don’t need a property release to use an image that depicts the property and you may use the photo in any manner. Copyright law provides an exclusion for photographing buildings located on property, but not for statues or other items that may have separate copyrights."

and

"Nevertheless, some companies have tried to prevent the use—both commercially and editorially—of photographs of their buildings or objects via trademark protection or contract law. Examples include the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, the Lone Cypress tree on the 17 Mile Drive at Pebble Beach, CA, the Golden Gate Bridge, and the “Hollywood” sign. While these attempts have been unsuccessful, it can be expensive to litigate them"

In general, I believe copyright always belongs to a photographer unless they're taking the photos in the employ of someone else, in which case the copyright belongs to their employer. However copyright, trademark and publicity rights are all very different things and it's quite possible that even if you own the copyright to a photo, you can't use it commercially (for example if you're taking a photo of someone and using their likeness to endorse something). Buildings don't seem to have issues like this though.