Commons:Freedom of panorama

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

(Redirected from COM:FOP)
Jump to: navigation, search


Shortcut: COM:FOP

Panorama freedom allows the taking of photographs in public spaces. It is usually subject to special regulations in local copyright laws with the goal of granting reasonable freedom for photography in public space. Such laws, generally, allow photography of publicly visible buildings and non-private scenes from public places for the purposes of publishing. The actual extent of possible allowed usage of a picture taken in a public place is usually wider and depends upon the particular formulation of the law or clause that grants the possibility.

Contents

[edit] Legal status

[edit] Buildings and sculptures as works of arts

The author of the work depicted on the photograph is Grzegorz Sadowski.
The author of the work depicted on the photograph is Grzegorz Sadowski.

Every building and sculpture we can see in our neighbourhood is subject to the copyright law, as far as it incorporates artistic creativity. The Berne convention, art.2-1 explicitly states so: "The expression “literary and artistic works” shall include [...] works of drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture, engraving and lithography".

Usually, the copyright law acts mention such an object explicitly as their subject matter. This is reproduced in national laws (for instance the USA Copyright Law in § 102-8).

[edit] The legal status of pictures

The Berne convention Article 9 explicitly states that:

(1) Authors of literary and artistic works protected by this Convention shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form.
(2) It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproduction of such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.
(3) Any sound or visual recording shall be considered as a reproduction for the purposes of this Convention.

This has been reproduced for instance in § 106 of the USA Copyright Law, and corresponding national laws. According to copyright laws, then:

Taking pictures of buildings is a reproduction, which must theoretically be authorized by the architect if the right to reproduction is not in the national copyright law.

This is the situation for any derivative work based on any artistical creation.

[edit] Photograph of a building

A photograph of a building or even any scene in a city or a village inevitably depicts some pieces of architecture or even sculptures. The photograph may or may not have its own creative element, making it a work of its own, but the value of this work clearly depends on the value in the works that are depicted on it. In case of such a dependency the photograph is deemed to be a derivative work.

This restriction on building photographs is often weakened by a separate clause for photographs or pictures of buildings in public places. However, this clause is not always made explicit in national laws.

[edit] Nuances in the panorama freedom

We will discuss here the case of the German legislation. Here is the content of § 59 of the German Copyright Law (Urheberrechtsgesetz, UrhG):

(1) It shall be permissible to reproduce, by painting, drawing, photography or cinematography, works which are permanently located on public ways, streets or places and to distribute and publicly communicate such copies. For works of architecture, this provision shall be applicable only to the external appearance.
(2) Reproductions may not be carried out on a work of architecture.

Quoted from an English translation.

[edit] Publishing of reproductions

The article above allows to reproduce and publish photographs taken in public places. It is understood that this includes publishing the pictures in a commercial way.

[edit] Public places

German law allows photographers to take pictures that are visible from publicly accessible places. This includes private ways and parks with common access. However, it does not include railway station buildings or platforms. The picture must be taken from a publicly accessible point. It is not allowed to take a picture of such a building from a private house or from a helicopter.

In other countries, these restrictions are sometimes less stringent. For instance, the Austrian, British, Mexican and Indian law allows taking pictures of publicly accessible interiors.

[edit] Permanent vs temporary

The exhibited objects must be exhibited in a permanent way. If a work is presented on a public place temporarily, one may be obliged to get the explicit permission to take its picture.

Whether a work is installed at a public place permanently or not is not a question of absolute time, but a question of what the intention was when the work was placed there. If it was put there with the intention of leaving it in the public place indefinitely or at least for the whole natural lifetime of the work, then it is "permanent".

A sculpture is typically placed with the intent of leaving it for an indefinite time. But if it was clear from the beginning that it would be left there only, say, for three years and then be moved to a museum, then the placement was not "permanent". On the other hand, if a sculpture was placed with the intent of leaving it "open end", but is then removed due to new construction plans some time later, its placement remains "permanent" even if the sculpture is eventually removed.

Even quickly decaying works can thus be "permanent" and therefore be subject to freedom of panorama. Street paintings, ice, sand, or snow sculptures rarely last more than a few days or weeks. If they're left in public space for their natural lifetime, they are considered "permanent" all the same. But if, for instance, an ice sculpture is exhibited only for a few hours and then moved to cold storage, it may not be permanently placed.

[edit] Architecture vs sculptures

The German law allows to take pictures both of buildings and sculptures. This, however, looks differently in Belgium. The law there allows to take freely pictures of buildings, but requires to get permission for publication of the photographs with sculptures that are the central motives of pictures.

[edit] Music, literature etc.

Sometimes, a literary work is a part of a sculpture or is presented on a publicly accessible plaque. It is usually understood that the particular presentation of the work falls under the panorama freedom.

[edit] Acknowledgement of source

The copyright law usually obliges the photographer to give credits of his photograph. That usually means that he must provide a description of the depicted objects and its authors. However, he can be exempted from the obligation when the authorship is difficult to deduce. For instance, German copyright law says in § 62 that the photographer needs not provide the credits if they are not clearly present on the object that is depicted.

[edit] The right to modify

The panorama freedom is restricted to taking pictures of the actual objects. Generally, the freedom to modify such pictures is restricted. For example, the German law in § 62 forbids any modifications except those technically required by the method of replication.

[edit] Further derivative works

A derivative work based on a photograph is most often also a derivative work based on the depicted object. The panorama freedom usually does not include the delegation of the right to authorize the derivative works. The author of a photograph has the right to authorize the derivative work based on the photograph only to the extent that results from the creative element of his work. However, he does not have the right to authorize the derivative work in the extent associated with the original object.

[edit] Pictures of public domain objects

Public domain objects are not protected by copyright, so objects of this kind can be freely photographed and the pictures can be published both royalty free and commercially, at least so far as copyright law is concerned (there may be contractual or other restrictions on picture-taking, though, especially on private property). Moreover, pictures of public domain objects can be freely modified and derivative works can be freely developed. For example, old buildings and statues where the architect or artist died more than a certain number of years ago (depending on the country), are in the public domain.

[edit] Situation in different countries

This section presents more detailed accounts of the legal situation of panorama freedom in different countries and regions. Again, this is not a legal advice, but just a presentation for educational purposes.
If you want to contribute, please consider the following guidelines:
  • Try to make the description as comprehensive as possible
  • Don't forget that sometimes small formulation nuances have big impact
  • Add reference to particular articles in the copyright law
  • Provide a link to the copyright law in the original language, if possible
  • Provide a link to the copyright law in English, if possible
  • Provide links to web pages which discuss panorama freedom issues in given country or region

[edit] Andean Community of Nations (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru)

Decision 351 of the Andean Community of Nations provides for FOP as follows:

  • "Artículo 22.- Sin perjuicio de lo dispuesto en el Capítulo V y en el artículo anterior, será lícito realizar, sin autorización del autor y sin el pago de remuneración alguna, los siguientes actos:...h) Realizar la reproducción, emisión por radiodifusión o transmisión pública por cable, de la imagen de una obra arquitectónica, de una obra de bellas artes, de una obra fotográfica o de una obra de artes aplicadas, que se encuentre situada en forma permanente en un lugar abierto al público" (translation):
  • "Article 22.- Without prejudice to that put forth in the Chapter 5 and in the previous article, it will be legal to realize, without authorization from the author and without the payment of any remuneration, the following acts:...h) Realizing the the reproduction, emitting by radio diffusion or public transmission by cable, of the image of an architectural work, of a work of fine arts, of a photographic work or of a work of applied art, that is found situated in permanent form in a place open to the public".

[edit] Commonwealth of Independent States

Most of the successor nations of the Soviet Union have identical provisions on freedom of panorama and restrict it to non-commercial uses only. The legal information for the member state is available at the web page of the Coalition for Intellectual Property Rights. The three baltic states Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania also have similar provisions in their copyright laws.

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan
All these countries' laws only allow this limited form of freedom of panorama: images of architectural works, photographic works, or works of fine art (which includes sculptures and statues) that are permanently located in publicly accessible places may be published only for non-commercial purposes and if the depicted copyrighted base work is not the main subject of the image.
Ukraine
Ukrainian copyright law does not contain a general exception for reproductions of works in public places. Architectural works (plans, models, and actual buildings, §8(1)(9) and §8(1)(12)) as well as a statues and sculptures (§8(1)(8); definition of "work of fine art" in §1) are objects of copyright. The author holds—amongst other rights—the exclusive rights to reproduction, public display, and communication to the public (§15). Architectural and sculptural works are in no way treated differently than other kinds of works in Ukrainian law.
It is claimed[2], though, that article 21(4) of the Ukrainian law on copyright and related rights implied some kind of "freedom of panorama": "...it shall be permitted without the consent of the author (or other copyright holder) and with mandatory indication of the author's name and of the source of borrowing: ... to reproduce, in order to highlight current events by means of photography or cinematography, to carry out public notification or other public communication of the works seen or heard in the course of such events to the extent justified by the informational purpose." This, however, is limited to "informational purposes" and to "current events". It is not general freedom of panorama but a "fair use"-like provision for news reporting.

[edit] Commonwealth

[edit] Australia

Freedom of Panorama is dealt with in the Australian Copyright Act, sections 65-68. These sections allow photographers to take pictures of buildings and also of sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship provided that they are permanently located in a public place or in premises open to the public. It is also permitted to publish such pictures (section 68). Australian law is modelled on UK law, and in the absence of any specific case law to the contrary is reasonable to assume that the rules will be identical. See the United Kingdom section for more details.

[edit] Jamaica

Copyright legislation in Jamaica follows closely that of the United Kingdom, in particular §73, dealing with freedom of panorama, is identical to section 62 of the Copyright, Designs and patents Act of the United Kingdom.

[edit] New Zealand

Copyright legislation in New Zealand also follows that of the United Kingdom. In the absence of any specific case law to the contrary it is reasonable to assume that the rules will be identical. See the United Kingdom section for more details.

[edit] European Union

There is a European Parliament directive on the harmonisation of the copyright law 2001/29/EC which asserts in article 5 section 3 letter h that the copyright law of the member states may restrict the copyright rights for sculptures and buildings exposed in public places:

Member States may provide for exceptions or limitations to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 in the following cases: (...) (h) use of works, such as works of architecture or sculpture, made to be located permanently in public places;

[edit] Austria

The freedom of taking pictures of public places is slightly wider than in the German law. It includes also the publicly accessible interiors of buildings (see § 54 clause 5 of Austrian UrhG).

[edit] Belgium

There is no panorama freedom in Belgium. The modern pieces of art cannot be the central motive of a commercially available photographs without permission of the artwork copyright holder.

[edit] Czech Republic

Pictures, drawings, paintings, movies, etc. displaying a work permanently located in any public place (incl. streets, places, parks etc.) may be distributed without the original work's author's consent. The name of the author and the title of the work should always be indicated. The allowance does not apply to three-dimensional reproductions.

[edit] Denmark

The article 24 of the Danish copyright law permits panorama freedom for buildings. This, however, does not extend to the works of art that are located in public places. They cannot be commercially published when they constitute the central element of the picture.

[edit] Estonia

The § 20 of Estonian copyright law permits an interesting kind of panorama freedom. It allows taking pictures and publication of all kinds of creative works (including other photographies) that are permanently displayed in public places. However, the works cannot constitute the central motive of the picture and cannot be used in advertisements. This means that the panorama freedom in this country essentially can be exploited non-commercially only.

[edit] Finland

The article 25a of the Finnish copyright law permits panorama freedom for buildings, both exteriors and interiors. This, however, does not extend to works of art (other than architecture) which are located in public places. They cannot be commercially published when they constitute the central element of the picture.

[edit] France

There is no freedom of panorama in France, neither for sculptures, nor for buildings that pass the threshold of originality. A court recently (TGI Lyon, 4 avril 2001, Buren & a. c/ Tassin & a.) emphasized that “droit d'auteur unquestionably applies to the reproduction of artworks placed in public space” (« le droit d'auteur s'étend incontestablement à la reproduction de l'œuvre installée dans un espace public »). Concerning buildings, case law (CA Riom, 26 mai 1967) recognizes two criteria for originality: “a definite artistic character” (« un caractère artistique certain ») and the fact that it does not belong to a series. For instance, the architect of the Louvre Pyramid is entitled to claim copyright over representations of the Pyramid. This can extend to the designer of lighting systems; for instance, the company operating the Eiffel Tower claims copyright of images of the tower when lighted at night.

Case law traditionally admits an exception if the copyrighted artwork is “accessory compared to the main represented or handled subject” (CA Paris, 27 octobre 1992, Antenne 2 c/ société Spadem, « la représentation d'une œuvre située dans un lieu public n'est licite que lorsqu'elle est accessoire par rapport au sujet principal représenté ou traité »). Thus, ruling #567 of March 15, 2005 of the Court of Cassation denied the right of producers of works of arts installed in a public plaza over photographs of the whole plaza:

Because the Court has noticed that, as it was shown in the incriminated images, the works of Mr X... and Z... blended into the architectural ensemble of the Terreaux plaza, of which it was a mere element, the appeals court correctly deduced that this presentation of the litigious work was accessory to the topic depicted, which was the representation of the plaza, so that the image did not constitute a communication of the litigious work to the public

Case law states that the said artwork must not be intentionally included as an element of the setting: its presence in the picture must be unavoidable (CA Versailles, 26 janvier 1998, Sté Movie box c/ Spadem et a.):

Can be considered as an illicit representation of a statue by Maillol, the broadcasting of a commercial in which it appears, as it was not included in a film sequence shot in a natural setting — which would explain the brief, and non-essential to the main subject, appearance of the sculpture, which is set in the Tuileries gardens — but used as an element of the setting (« Constitue une représentation illicite d'une statue de Maillol la diffusion d'un film publicitaire dans laquelle elle figure, alors qu'elle a été utilisée, non pas dans une séquence tournée en décor naturel, ce qui justifierait une apparition fugace de la sculpture, placée dans le jardin des Tuileries, totalement accessoire au sujet traité, mais comme un élément du décor. »).

[edit] Related matter: ownership rights

While architects may have rights to works derived from their work of art, this is not the case of the owners of works of art or buildings, in general. The summary of the conclusions of a May 7, 2004 ruling by the Court of Cassation was:

The owner of a thing does not have an exclusive right over the image of this thing; he or she can however oppose the usage of this image by a third party if this usage results in an abnormal disturbance to him or her."

In this decision, the court excluded that the owner of a hotel, who had made extensive repairs and enhancements to the buildings at high costs, could claim exclusive rights to the image of that hotel: merely demonstrating that the costs supported did not demonstrate that the publishing of images was an abnormal disturbance.

The Court already ruled on June 5, 2003, that the right of property comprised absolutely no right to the image of this property. However, they also upheld the right to privacy of the homeowners: in this case, not only a photograph of a house was published, but also its exact location and the name of the owners. Earlier rulings (May 2, 2001) similarly rejected requests based on ownership without a justification of an abnormal disturbance.

[edit] Germany

It is possible by § 59 of the Copyright Law Act to take pictures of publicly visible buildings and sculptures and publish them commercially. Still, the right to modify the works and to produce derivative works requires the permission of the original copyright holder. (§62) See also the German article.

[edit] Greece

According to §26 of the Greek Copyright Law as last amended in 2003, the "occasional reproduction and communication by the mass media" of works of architecture, works of the fine arts, photographs, and works of the applied arts is allowed for works permanently situated in a public place without the consent of the author of the work and without payment of any remuneration.

It is unclear what "occasional reproduction" means exactly. Furthermore, the provision appears to apply only to the "mass media", but not to other publishers.

[edit] Hungary

According to article 68 of the Hungarian copyright law (1999/LXXVI), if a fine art, architectural or applied art creation is erected with a permanent character outdoors in a public place, a view of it may be made and used without the authorization of the author and paying remuneration to him.

[edit] Ireland

§93 of the Irish copyright law permits photographers to take pictures of sculptures, buildings, and works of artistic craftsmanship that are permanently located in a public place or premises open to the public, and to publish such pictures in any way. Irish law is in this respect modeled on UK law, and in the absence of any specific case law to the contrary it is reasonable to assume that the rules will be identical. See the United Kingdom section for more details.

[edit] Italy

The Italian copyright law does not contain any exception for pictures from public places.

[edit] Latvia

The Latvian copyright law in article 25 permits taking pictures of architectural works, photographs, visual arts, design works and the works of applied arts when displayed permanently in public places. The pictures can be used for personal purposes, in news concerning the current events, and can be included in works of non-commercial purpose.

[edit] Lithuania

The panorama freedom in Lithuania is granted in the article 28 of the copyright act. It permits to make and publish pictures of sculptures and works of architecture that are permanently located in public places. However, it explicitly excludes works presented in museums and on exhibitions. The panorama freedom is, however, subject to further restrictions - the works of art cannot be the central element of the picture and the reproduction cannot be used directly or indirectly for commercial purposes.

[edit] Luxembourg

The regulation is presented in the article 10 point 7. A copyright holder may not prevent "the reproduction and communication of [his or her] works located in a publicly accessible place, when such works do not constitute the primary subject of the reproduction or communication."

[edit] The Netherlands

The article 18 of the Dutch copyright act says that: "it is not an infringement of copyright to reproduce and publish pictures of a work, as meant in article 10, first paragraph, under 6°[1] or of an architectural work as meant in article 10, first paragraph, under 8°[2], which are made to be permanently located in a public place, as long as the work is depicted as it is located in the public space. Where incorporation of a work in a compilation is concerned, not more than a few of the works of the same author may be included."

  • [1] drawings, paintings, works of architecture and sculpture, lithographs, engravings and the likes
  • [2] drafts, sketches and three-dimensional works relating to architecture, geography, topography or other sciences

Original (Dutch) text:

Als inbreuk op het auteursrecht op een werk als bedoeld in artikel 10, eerste lid, onder 6°, of op een werk, betrekkelijk tot de bouwkunde als bedoeld in artikel 10, eerste lid, onder 8°, dat is gemaakt om permanent in openbare plaatsen te worden geplaatst, wordt niet beschouwd de verveelvoudiging of openbaarmaking van afbeeldingen van het werk zoals het zich aldaar bevindt. Waar het betreft het overnemen in een compilatiewerk, mag van dezelfde maker niet meer worden overgenomen dan enkele van zijn werken.


[edit] Poland

The copyright act from July 4th, 1994 in article 33 point 1 allows to propagate works that are permanently exhibited on the publicly accessible roads, streets, squares or gardens provided that the propagation is not for the same use. The name of the creator and source should be provided if it is possible by article 34. This use is royalty free, provided that it does not harm the legitimate interests of the creator by article 34.

[edit] Portugal

Portuguese copyright law allows the use of works permanently installed at public locations. The law explicitly mentions buildings and sculptures as examples of such works (§75(2)q). "Use" includes taking a photograph of such a work and publishing it (§68).

[edit] Romania

Per the Romanian copyright law of 1996, images of architectural works, of three-dimensional works of art, of photographic works or of works of applied art permanently located in public places may be published only for non-commercial uses or if the work is not the main subject of the image.

[edit] Slovakia

According to section 27 of the Slovak copyright law, Slovakia has freedom of panorama. Works permanently located at public places may be freely reproduced by drawing, painting, graphics, relief picture or relief model, or by photography or film, and such reproductions may be freely published and sold without the consent of the original author.

[edit] Spain

Article 35 of the Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996 of April 12, 1996, and amended by Law 5/1998 of March 6, 1998, states:

  1. Any work liable to be seen or heard in the reporting of current events may be reproduced, distributed and communicated to the public, but only to the extent justified by the informatory purpose.
  2. Works permanently located in parks or on streets, squares or other public thoroughfares may be freely reproduced, distributed and communicated by painting, drawing, photography and audiovisual processes.

Article 40bis further states the above law "may not be so interpreted that they could be applied in a manner capable of unreasonably prejudicing the legitimate interests of the author or adversely affecting the normal exploitation of the works to which they refer."

The original Spanish text:

El artículo 35 del Real Decreto Legislativo 1/1996 de 12 de abril de 1996, modificado por la ley 5/1998 del 6 de marzo de 1998, establece:

  1. Cualquier obra susceptible de ser vista u oída con ocasión de informaciones sobre acontecimientos de la actualidad puede ser reproducida, distribuida y comunicada públicamente, si bien sólo en la medida que lo justifique dicha finalidad informativa.
  2. Las obras situadas permanentemente en parques, calles, plazas u otras vías públicas pueden ser reproducidas, distribuidas y comunicadas libremente por medio de pinturas, dibujos, fotografías y procedimientos audiovisuales.

Artículo 40 bis. "Los artículos del presente capítulo no podrán interpretarse de manera tal que permitan su aplicación de forma que causen un perjuicio injustificado a los intereses legítimos del autor o que vayan en detrimento de la explotación normal de las obras a que se refieran".

[edit] Sweden

The Swedish copyright law allows in the article 24 to take pictures of works of art that are located permanently at public places outdoors. It is assumed that one can also publish the photograph for commercial purposes.

Swedish copyright law explicitly requires that a work needs to be permanently placed at a public place outdoors ("på eller vid allmän plats utomhus") to be covered by FOP.

[edit] United Kingdom

Section 62 of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is much broader than the corresponding provisions in many other countries, and allows photographers to take pictures of

  • buildings, and
  • sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship (if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public).

without breaching copyright. Such photographs may be published in any way.

Note that under UK law, works of artistic craftsmanship fall into a different copyright category from graphic works such as paintings, photographs, drawings and the like. The freedom provided by Section 62 does not apply to graphic works (which will typically be two-dimensional) such as paintings, murals, advertising hoardings, maps, posters or signs. These cannot be uploaded to Commons without a licence from the copyright holder even if they are permanently located in a public place.

The courts have not established a consistent test for what is meant by a "work of artistic craftsmanship", but one of the standard reference works on copyright, Copinger and Skoane James (15th edn, 2005), suggests that for a work to be considered as such the creator must be both a craftsman and an artist. Evidence of the intentions of the maker are relevant, and according to the House of Lords case of Hensher -v- Restawhile [1976] AC 64, it is "relevant and important, although not a paramount or leading consideration" if the creator had the conscious purpose of creating a work of art. It is not necessary for the work to be describable as 'fine art'.

In Hensher -v- Restawhile, some examples were given of typical articles that might be considered works of artistic craftsmanship, including hand-painted tiles, stained glass, wrought iron gates, and the products of high-class printing, bookbinding, cutlery, needlework and cabinet-making. Copinger and Skoane James suggests that original jewellery is another candidate.

Other works that have been held to fall under this definition include hand-knitted woollen sweaters, fabric with a highly textured surface including 3D elements, a range of pottery, and items of dinnerware. The cases are, respectively, Bonz -v- Cooke [1994] 3 NZLR 216 (New Zealand), Coogi Australia -v- Hyrdrosport (1988) 157 ALR 247 (Australia), Walter Enterprises -v- Kearns (Zimbabwe) noted at [1990] 4 EntLR E-61, and Commissioner of Taxation -v- Murray (1990) 92 ALR 671 (Australia).

The practical effect of the broad Freedom of Panorama provisions in the UK and in other countries with similar laws is that it is acceptable to upload to Commons not only photographs of public buildings and sculptures but also works of works of artistic craftsmanship which are on permanent public display in museums, galleries and exhibitions which are open to the public. According to Copinger and Skoane James, "The expression "open to the public" presumably extends the section to premises to which the public are admitted only on licence or on payment". Again, this is broader than 'public place' which is the wording in many countries.

[edit] Other

[edit] Algeria

According to article 51 of the Algerian copyright law, it shall be lawful to reproduce or to communicate to the public, without authorization of the author and without remuneration, a work of architecture or the fine arts, a work of applied arts or a photographic work that is permanently situated in a public place, with the exception of art galleries, museums and classified cultural or natural sites.

Article 51: "Est considérée licite sans autorisation de l'auteur ni rémunération, la reproduction ou la communication au public d'une oeuvre d'architecture ou des beaux arts, d'une oeuvre des arts appliqués ou d'une oeuvre photographique lorsqu'elle est située en permanence dans un lieu public, à l'exception des galeries d'art, musées et sites culturels et naturels classés."

[edit] Brazil

Article 48 of Law nº 9.610 of February 19, 1998 states:

Works permanently located in public places may be freely represented by painting, drawing, photography and audiovisual processes.

The original Portuguese text:

As obras situadas permanentemente em logradouros públicos podem ser representadas livremente, por meio de pinturas, desenhos, fotografias e procedimentos audiovisuais.

[edit] Canada

Under Section 32.2 (1)(b) of the Canadian Copyright Act 1985, it is not an infringement of copyright for any person to reproduce, in a painting, drawing, engraving, photograph or cinematographic work … "(i) an architectural work (defined as “a building or structure or any model of a building or structure”); or (ii) a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship or a cast or model of a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship, that is permanently situated in a public place or building".

Canadian law was originally derived from UK concepts and some of the United Kingdom section may therefore be of relevance., in particular the restricted legal meaning of “work of artistic craftsmanship”. The freedom provided by the quoted section does not apply to typical two-dimensional works such as paintings, murals, advertising hoardings, maps, posters or signs. These cannot be uploaded to Commons without a licence from the copyright holder even if they are permanently located in a public place.

[edit] China, People's Republic of

The "Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China" (2001) Article 22, clause 10 states that:

[A] work may be exploited without the permission from, and without payment of remuneration to, the copyright owner, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work are mentioned and the other rights enjoyed by the copyright owner by virtue of this Law are not infringed upon...
in the case of:
copying, drawing, photographing, or video recording of an artistic work located or on display in an outdoor public place

[edit] Croatia

Croatian law from 2003 allows 2D reproductions of permanently publicly displayed works, i. e. the full Freedom of Panorama (translation of relevant Article 91):

Article 91.
(1) It is permitted to reproduce copyrighted works permanently located on streets, squares, parks or other places accessible to public, and to distribute and publish such reproductions.
(2) Works from chapter 1 of this article cannot be reproduced in a three-dimensional form.
(3) On the instances of work from chapter 1 of this article, source and authorship must be stated, except when not possible.

[edit] Egypt

Article 171 of Law No. 82 of 2002:

Without prejudice to the moral rights of the author, pursuant to the provisions of the law herein, the author may not prevent third parties, after the publication of his work, from undertaking any of the following acts:
[Section 2]
...Nevertheless, the author or his successors may prevent third parties, after the publication of his work, from undertaking any of the following acts, without permission therefrom:
- Reproducing, photographing or copying fine, applied or plastic arts, unless existing in public, or is an architectural work;...

By expressly denying the copyright holder the ability to enforce his copyright on applied or plastic arts "existing in public...or architectural work" freedom of panorama for these items is implied. "Applied art" means art incorporated into useful articles. Plastic arts are three dimensional artworks. So while freedom of panorama may exist in Egypt for useful articles, three dimensional artworks, and buildings, it does not appear to exist for two dimensional artwork.

[edit] Guatemala

Article 64 of Guatemala's copyright law says "ARTÍCULO 64. Respecto de las obras ya divulgadas también es permitida, sin autorización del autor, además de lo dispuesto en el artículo 32:

d) La reproducción de una obra de arte expuesta permanentemente en lugares públicos, o de la fachada exterior de los edificios, realizada por medio de un arte distinto al empleado para la elaboración del original, siempre que se indique el nombre del autor, si se conociere, el título de la obra, si lo tuviere, y el lugar donde se encuentra."

"Article 64. With respect to already published works it is permitted, without the author's consent, besides what is set forth in article 32:

d) The reproduction of a work of art exposed permanently in public places, or of the outer surface of buildings, realized by means of an art distinct from that used in making the original, provided that the name of the author, if known, the title of the work, if it has one, and the place it is located are indicated."

[edit] Hong Kong

According to the Copyright Ordinance of Hong Kong, it is not a copyright infringement to make graphic representations, take photographs, or broadcast the images of buildings, sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if the object is permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public. Making public copies of these works is not a copyright infringement either.

[edit] Iceland

The copyright law of Iceland basically allows freedom of panorama for both buildings and works of the arts in general that have been permanently placed outdoors. If the work is the main subject of the photo and the photo is used commercially, the author of the work (this applies to both buildings and other works!) is entitled to remuneration, unless the publication of the image is in a newspaper or a TV broadcast.

In essence, Icelandic "freedom of panorama" images are free only for non-commercial uses. Overview photos in which no single work is the main subject of the image should be fine.

[edit] India

According to the Indian Copyright Act of 1957, Section 52, as currently revised:

52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright. -(1) The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyright, namely:
...
(s) the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of a work of architecture or the display of a work of architecture;'
(t) the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of a sculpture, or other artistic work failing under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of section 2 ["any other work of artistic craftsmanship"], if such work is permanently situate in a public place or any premises to which the public has access;
(u) the inclusion in a cinematograph film of-
(i) any artistic work permanently situate in a public place or any premises to which the public has access;

Indian law is modelled on UK law, and in the absence of any specific case law to the contrary is is reasonable to assume that the rules will be similar. See the United Kingdom section for more details.

[edit] Israel

Section 19 of the Israeli new copyright Law allowes the making or publishing of paintings, drawings, engravings, or photographs of a work of sculpture or artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place, or building, or the making or publishing of paintings, drawings, engravings, or photographs of any architectural work of art.

[edit] Japan

Japanese copyright law allows the reproduction of artistic works located permanently in open places accessible to the public, such as streets and parks, or at places easily seen by the public, such as the outer walls of buildings, only for non-commercial purposes.

Architectural works (i.e., buildings) located in such places may be photographed and the photos may be reproduced for any purposes; §46(iv), which contains the "non-commercial" restriction, applies only to "artistic works".

[edit] Korea (South)

Article 32 (Exhibition or Reproduction of Works of Art, etc.) of the Korean Copyright Act says that a work of art exhibited in a place open to the public may be reproduced by any means; except for some case, such as a when the reproduction is of the same nature as the original exhibited work of art (i.e., a painting reproduced in another painting) or when the reproduction is also to be permanently exhitibed in a public place.

[edit] Mexico

Chapter 2 of Mexico's copyright law, titled "De la limitacion a los derechos patrimoniales" ("On the limitation of ownership rights") Article 148 says: "Las obras literarias y artisticas ya divulgadas podran utilizarse, siempre que no se afecte la explotacion normal de la obra, sin autorizacion del titular del derecho patrimonial y sin remuneracion, citando invariablemente la fuente y sin alterar la obra, solo en los siguientes casos... VII. Reproduccion, comunicacion, y distribucion por medio de dibujos, pinturas, fotografias, y procedimientos audiovisuales de las obras que sean visibles desde lugares publicos." ("Literary and artistic works already published may be used, provided that normal commercialization of the work is not affected, without auhorization from the copyrightholder and without remuneration, invariably citing the source and without altering the work, only in the following cases... VII. Reproduction, communication, and distribution by means of drawings, paintings, photographs, and audiovisual means of works visible from public places.")

[edit] Morocco

As described in Article 20 of the 2000 Copyright Law, Morocco only grants freedom of panorama for incidental, noncommercial uses (similar to France).

[edit] Norway

The Norwegian Copyright in Literary, Scientific and Artistic Works Act, in section 24, 2 says that works of art and photographic works may be depicted when they are permanently located in or near a public place or a publicly accessible passage through some place. However, this does not apply when the work is clearly the main motive and the reproduction is exploited commercially.

[edit] Paraguay

Article 39 of Paraguay's copyright law provides for FOP for works permanently present in public places, and for the exterior of buildings, however the work must be attributed. Article 39 also provides that the insignia of political parties, other associations, and non-profit organizations may be freely copied by others.

  • "Article 39 - Respecting already published works, it is permitted without either authorization from the author or payment of remuneration:

4. Reproduction of a work of art exposed permanently in the streets, plazas, or other public places, or of the exterior surface of buildings, realized by a means of art distinct from that employed in making the original, always indicating the name of the author if known, the title of the work if it has one, and where it is found;

[...]

7. When the work constitutes the sign, emblem, or distinctive mark of political parties, associations, or non-profit civil entities.

Reproductions admitted in this article will be permitted only if they do not cross the normal exploitation of the work or cause an unjustifiable damage to the legitimate interests of the author."

  • "Artículo 39 - Respecto de las obras ya divulgadas, es permitida sin autorización del autor ni pago de remuneración:

4. la reproducción de una obra de arte expuesta permanentemente en las calles, plazas u otros lugares públicos, o de la fachada exterior de los edificios, realizada por medio de un arte diverso al empleado para la elaboración del original, siempre que se indique el nombre del autor si se conociere, el título de la obra si lo tuviere y el lugar donde se encuentra;

[...]

7. cuando la obra constituya un signo, emblema, o distintivo de partidos políticos, asociaciones y/o entidades civiles sin fines de lucro.

Las reproducciones admitidas en este artículo serán permitidas en tanto no atenten contra la explotación normal de la obra ni causen un perjuicio injustificado a los intereses legítimos del autor."

[edit] Serbia

Serbian law from 2004 allows 2D reproductions of permanently publicly displayed works, i. e. the full Freedom of Panorama (translation of relevant Article 50):

Article 50:
It is permitted to make two-dimensional reproductions of works permanently located on streets, squares or other open places accessible to public, and to distribute such reproductions, without author's permission or paying author's fee.

[edit] Singapore

In Singapore, copyright in sculptures and other works of artistic craftsmanship "situated, otherwise than temporarily, in a public place, or in premises open to the public, is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the work or by the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast" according to paragraph 63 of the Copyright Act. Paragraph 64 allows for reproducing a building or model of a building by "painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the building or model or by the inclusion of the building or model in a cinematograph film", with no restriction on location.

[edit] Switzerland

In Switzerland, works permanently installed at or on publicly accessible places or ground may be pictured, and such pictures may be offered for sale, sold, transmitted, or otherwise published. It must not be possible to use the picture for the same purpose as the original.

[edit] Taiwan (Republic of China)

The "Copyright Act" of Republic of China (2004) Article 58 states that:

Artistic works or architectural works on outdoor long term displays on the streets, in parks, on outside walls of buildings, or other outdoor locales open to the public, may be exploited by any means except as specified in the following circumstances:
  1. Reproduction of a building by construction of another building.
  2. Reproduction of a work of sculpture by another sculpture.
  3. Reproduction for the purpose of long term public display in locales specified in this article.
  4. Reproduction of artistic works solely for the purpose of selling copies.

[edit] Thailand

Sections 37 to 39 of the Thai Copyright Act of B.E. 2537 (A.D. 1994) state that:

Section 37. A drawing, painting, construction, engraving, moulding, carving, lithographing, photographing, cinematographing, video broadcasting or any similar act of an artistic work, except an architectural work, which is openly located in a public place shall not be deemed an infringement of copyright in the artistic work.
Section 38. A drawing, painting, engraving, moulding, carving, lithographing, photographing, cinematographing or video broadcasting of an architectural work shall not be deemed an infringement of copyright in the architectural work.
Section 39. A photographing or cinematographing or video broadcasting of a work of which an artistic work is a component shall not be deemed an infringement of copyright in the artistic work.

[edit] Tunisia

Article 16 of the Tunisian Copyright law of 1994 limits "freedom of panorama" to incidental inclusion in films or on television only. Article 15 generally allows reproducing works for the purposes of reporting on current events and is not a "freedom of panorama" provision either. Hence Tunisia does not have "freedom of panorama".

[edit] Turkey

The Turkish copyright allows "freedom of panorama". Law No. 5846 of 5 December 1951, on Intellectual and Artistic Works, as last amended on 7 June 1995 by Law No. 4110, section 40, says: The duplication through illustrations, graphics, photographs, etc., promulgation, demonstration by projection at public places and broadcasting through radio and similar media of the works of fine arts stationarily placed on the public roads, streets and avenues are allowed. This authority is exclusive only to the outer shape in the works of architecture. Unless a prohibitory record is clearly placed on them by their owners, the works of fine arts can be demonstrated at public places by their possessors or by others upon their approval. There have been some amendments to the law since then, but that section has remained unchanged.

[edit] Vietnam

According to article 25.1(h) of the Vietnamese copyright law, it is allowed to use (i.e. take and publish pictures, or televise) published works of the fine or applied arts or photographs, if the works have already been publicly displayed for "introduction purposes", without obtaining permission from and without paying royalties or other remuneration to the copyright owner.

[edit] USA

Buildings are works subject to copyright in the U.S. according to 17 USC 102(a)(8) since the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act was passed in 1990. It applies to all buildings that were completed (not begun) after December 1, 1990, or where the plans were published after that date.

However, the U.S. federal copyright law explicitly exempts photographs of such copyrighted buildings from the copyright of the building in 17 USC 120(a). Anyone may take photographs of buildings from public places. The photographer holds the exclusive copyright to such an image (the architect or owner of the building has no say whatsoever), and may publish the image in any way. 17 USC 120 applies only to architectural works, not to other works of visual art, such as statues or sculptures. For artworks, even if permanently installed in public places, the U.S. copyright law has no similar exception, and any publication of an image of a copyrighted artwork thus is subject to the approval of the copyright holder of the artwork.

[edit] See also

[edit] Bibliography

  • Vogel. In: Gerhard Schricker (Hrsg.): Urheberrecht. Kommentar. 2. Auflage. Beck, München 1999, ISBN 3-406-37004-7
  • Dreier. In: Thomas Dreier/Gernot Schulze: Urheberrechtsgesetz. 2. Auflage. München: Beck 2006 ISBN 340654195X
  • Cornelie von Gierke: Die Freiheit des Straßenbildes (§ 59 UrhG). In: Hans-Jürgen Ahrens (Hrsg.): Festschrift für Willi Erdmann. Zum 65. Geburtstag. Heymann, Köln u.a. 2002, S. 103-115, ISBN 3-452-25191-8

[edit] External links

This article is based on the German Wikipedia article Panoramafreiheit
Retrieved from "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_panorama"
Personal tools