Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Consolidated list G

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Copyright rules by territory

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O
P Q R Sa-Sl So-Sy T U V W X Y Z

This page gives overviews of copyright rules in different countries or territories. It is "transcluded" from individual pages giving the rules for each territory.

Text transcluded from
COM:Gabon

Gabon

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Gabon relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Gabon must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Gabon and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Gabon, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background[edit]

France officially occupied Gabon in 1885. In 1910, Gabon became one of the four territories of French Equatorial Africa, a federation that survived until 1959. The territories of French Equatorial Africa became independent on 17 August 1960.

Gabon has been a member of the Berne Convention since 26 March 1962, the World Trade Organization since 1 January 1995 and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 6 March 2002.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the 1987 Law No. 1/87 on the Establishment of the Protection for Copyright and Neighboring Rights as the main copyright law enacted by the legislature of Gabon.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2]

Standard terms[edit]

Under Law No. 1/87 of 1987,

  • The author's economic rights last for their lifetime and for 50 years after death.[1/1987 Article 60]
  • With collaborative works, economic rights subsist for 50 years after death of the last surviving contributor.[1/1987 Article 60]
  • Economic rights last for 50 years from the end of the calendar year when the work was made public for:
    • Photographic works, radio and audiovisual works and works of applied art.[1/1987 Article 60]
    • Anonymous or pseudonymous works where the author cannot be identified.[1/1987 Article 60]
  • Posthumous works are protected for 50 years after being made public, if this happens within 50 years of death.[1/1987 Article 60]

All terms run to the end of the calendar year.

Collective work[edit]

Under Law No. 1/87 of 1987, "Collective work" shall mean a work created on the initiative of a natural or legal person who edits it, publishes it and discloses it under his direction and name, and in which the personal contributions of the various authors who participated in its development are merged in the overall work for which they were conceived, so that it is impossible to attribute to each author a separate right in the work as created[1/1987 Article 10] A collective work, in the absence of proof to the contrary, shall belong to the natural or legal person under whose name it has been disclosed. The author's rights shall vest in that person[1/1987 Article 17]

Not protected[edit]

Under Law No. 1/87 of 1987, Protection shall not apply: to laws and regulations and officially published preparatory work therefor, decisions of the courts and of administrative bodies and official translations of such texts;the news of the day published, diffused or communicated to the public.[1/1987 Article 11]

Public domain and folklore non-free[edit]

See also: Commons:Paying public domain

Under Law No. 1/87 of 1987, On expiry of the term of protection defined in Article 60, the work falls into the public domain. The right of exploitation of works in the public domain shall be exercised by the National Artistic and Cultural Promotion Agency (ANPAC). Performance, public execution and reproduction of such works shall require prior authorization issued by ANPAC. In the case of a profit-making utilization, authorization shall be granted against payment of a fee calculated in accordance with the general tariffs and schedules in force.[1/1987 Article 61]

Works of folklore shall belong ab origine to the national heritage.[1/1987 Article 6] "folklore" shall mean all literary and artistic productions created on the national territory by authors presumed to be Gabonese nationals or by national ethnic communities, passed from generation to generation, which form one of the fundamental elements of the national traditional cultural heritage.[1/1987 Article 6] Works of national folklore shall be protected without limitation in time.[1/1987 Article 7] The right of exploitation of folklore shall be administered by ANPAC. Such authorization shall be granted against payment of a royalty, the proceeds of which shall be used for cultural and welfare purposes for the benefit of the authors.[1/1987 Article 8]

Currency[edit]

OK. Bank of Central African States, which issues Central African CFA franc used in Gabon, is based in Cameroon. Article 3c of the main IP law of Cameroon, the 2000 Copyright law, explicitly excludes banknotes and coins from copyright protection.

Please use {{PD-CA-CFA-franc}} for Central African CFA franc images.

See also: COM:CUR Cameroon

Freedom of panorama[edit]

OK {{FoP-Gabon}} OK. For photographs, film and television of protected works of art, including architectural works, if permanently located in a public place.
OK. For incidental inclusion of protected works in films or television, regardless of location.
OK. For informational photographs of protected works in reports on a current event, regardless of location.

Under Law No. 1/87 of 1987,

  • Literary, scientific or artistic works seen or heard in the course of a current event may, for the purposes of information, be reproduced and made available to the public in a report on that event by means of photography, cinematography or sound or visual diffusion.[1/1987 Article 35]
  • Works of art, including architectural works, permanently located in a public place, may be reproduced and made available to the public by means of cinematography, photography or television. The same shall apply where the inclusion of such a work in a film or a broadcast is of an accessory or incidental nature only in relation to the main subject.[1/1987 Article 37]

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Gabon Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
  2. Law No. 1/87 on the Establishment of the Protection for Copyright and Neighboring Rights. Gabon (1987). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Gambia

The Gambia

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of the Gambia relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in The Gambia must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both the Gambia and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from the Gambia, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background[edit]

The Gambia was colonized by the British in 1765. The country gained independence in 1965.

The Gambia has been a member of the Berne Convention since 7 March 1993 and the World Trade Organization since 23 September 1996.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Copyright Act, 2004 as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of the Gambia.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2]

General rules[edit]

Under the the Copyright Act of 2004,

  • The economic right and moral right of an author shall be protected during the life of the author and for 50 years after his or her death.[2004 Section 21(1)]
  • The economic right or moral right are protected for a work of joint authorship, during the life of the last surviving author and for fifty years after his or her death.[2004 Section 21(2a)]
  • The rights to a collective work, other than a work of applied art, are protected for 50 years from the date on which the work was either made, first made available to the public or first published, whichever date is the latest.[2004 Section 21(2b)]
  • A work published anonymously or under a pseudonym is protected for 50 years from the date on which the work was made, first made available to the public or first published, whichever date is the latest.[2004 Section 21(2c)]
  • A work of applied art is protected for 25 years from the making of the work.[2004 Section 21(2d)]
  • Where the copyright in a work is owned by a public corporation or other body corporate, the term of protection shall be 50 years from the date on which the work was made public.[2004 Section 22]
  • For an audiovisual work, a sound recording or broadcast, the rights are protected until the expiration of 50 years from the date of the making of the work, or where the work is made available to the public during that period with the consent of the author, until the expiration of fifty years from the date of its communication to the public.[2004 Section 23]
  • For a photographic work, the rights of the author are protected until expiration of 50 years from the date of the making of the work.[2004 Section 25]

Every period above runs to the end of the calendar year in which it would otherwise expire.[2004 Section 21(3)]

Folklore: not free[edit]

See also: Commons:Paying public domain

"Expression of folklore" means a group-oriented and tradition-based creation of groups or individuals reflecting the expectation of the community as an adequate expression of its cultural and social identity, its standards and values as transmitted orally, by imitation or by other means, including (a) folktale, folk poetry and folk riddle; (b) folk song and instrumental folk music; (c) folk dance and folk play; and (d) production of folk art, in particular, drawing, painting, carving, sculpture, pottery, terracotta, mosaic, woodwork, metal ware, jewelry, handicraft, costume and indigenous textile.[2004 Section 2]

An expression of folklore is protected by copyright against ­(a) reproduction; (b) communication to the public by performance, broadcasting. distribution bv cable or other means; and (c) adaptation. translation and other transformation, when the expression is made either for commercial purposes or outside a traditional or customary context.[2004 Section 8(1)] The right to authorise such an act shall vest in the Secretary of State on behalf of and in trust for the people of The Gambia.[2004 Section 8(4)] The rights vested in the Secretary of State on behalf of and in trust for the people of The Gambia in respect of expression of folklore under section 8 exist in perpetuity.[2004 Section 26]

Copyright tags[edit]

Freedom of panorama[edit]

 Not OK The 2004 copyright act of Gambia does not contain any special provision in regard to the works displayed in public premises.

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Gambia Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
  2. Copyright Act, 2004. Gambia (2004). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Georgia

Georgia

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Georgia relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Georgia must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Georgia and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Georgia, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background[edit]

Georgia was absorbed by the Russian Empire during the 19th century. After the Russian Revolution Georgia was briefly independent, then was part of the Transcaucasian Federation, a member of the Soviet Union. In 1936 Georgia became a republic of the Soviet Union. In April 1991 Georgia became fully independent of the Soviet Union. In 1992-93 Abkhasia, in the west, gained de-facto independence under the protection of Russia. In 2008 South Ossetia also gained de-facto independence under the protection of Russia. The breakaway regions have not gained international recognition.

Georgia has been a member of the Berne Convention since 16 May 1995, the World Trade Organization since 14 June 2000 and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 6 March 2002.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed Law of Georgia No. 2112-IIS of June 22, 1999, on Copyright and Neighboring Rights (as amended up to Law No. 1917 of December 23, 2017) as the main copyright law enacted by the legislature of Georgia.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] Works whose protection had expired when the 1999 law came into force did not gain renewed protection, but works that were still protected would continue to be protected under the terms of the new law.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 67]

General rules[edit]

The Law on Copyright and Neighboring Rights as of 2017 says,

  • Copyright shall commence upon creation of a work and shall run for the life of the author and for 70 years after his/her death, except for the cases provided for by Article 32 of this Law.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 31.1]
  • If a work is published anonymously or under a pseudonym, copyright lasts for 70 years from year of publication unless the author reveals themself or there is no doubt about who they are, in which case it lasts for 70 years after their year of death.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 32.1]
  • Copyright of a work with co-authors belongs to all the authors, even if the work is divisible, and lasts for 70 years after the year of death of the last surviving author.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 32.2]
  • Copyright in composite and derivative works shall run for 70 years from the time when the works were lawfully published or made available to the public, and if a work has not been published or made available to the public - from the date of its creation.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 32.4]
  • The author of a compiled work (collective work) such as an encyclopedia, periodical or newspaper holds copyright in that work, but unless provided otherwise by contract the individual authors have the right to use their contributions independently and in other compiled works.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 14]
  • Copyright in an audiovisual work shall run for 70 years after the death of the last of the surviving authors (co-authors).[2112-IIS/2017 Article 32.5] With audiovisual works the producer, director and authors of script, dialog and music are considered co-authors.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 15]
  • Calculation of the terms prescribed by Articles 31 and 32 shall commence from January 1 of the year following the year in which the legal event, serving as a basis for commencing the running of the above-mentioned terms, has occurred.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 31.2]

Not protected[edit]

Under the Copyright Laws as of 2017, "The following shall not be protected by copyright: a) official documents (legislative acts, court decisions, other texts of administrative and regulatory nature), as well as their official translations; b) official state symbols (flags, coats-of-arms, anthems, rewards, banknotes, other state symbols and insignia); c) information about facts and events".[2112-IIS/2017 Article 8]

Copyright tags[edit]

  • {{PD-GE-exempt}} – for official documents (laws, decisions of courts, other texts of administrative and normative character), as well as their official translations; official symbols of state (flag, emblem, anthem, award, monetary symbols, other official signs and symbols of state); information of events and facts.
  • {{PD-Georgia}} – for works first published in Georgia and now in the public domain because a copyright protection has expired by virtue of the Law of Georgia on Copyright and Neighboring Rights.

Currency[edit]

OK Georgian currency is not copyrighted. Monetary items, together with other state symbols, are explicitly excluded from copyright by article 8 of Copyright law of Georgia.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 8]

Please use {{PD-GE-exempt}} for Georgian currency images.

Freedom of panorama[edit]

 Not OK Images cannot be used if a protected work is the main subject or it is used for commercial purposes.

It shall be permitted to reproduce or communicate to the public without the consent of the author or other copyright holder and without remuneration thereof images of works of architecture, photography, and fine arts permanently displayed in public places, except for the cases when the image of a work is the main object for such reproduction or communication to the public, or is used for commercial purposes.[2112-IIS/2017 Article 24]

Stamps[edit]

use {{PD-GE-exempt}}.

See also[edit]

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Georgia Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-08.
  2. Law of Georgia No. 2112-IIS of June 22, 1999, on Copyright and Neighboring Rights (as amended up to Law No. 1917 of December 23, 2017). Georgia (2017). Retrieved on 2018-11-08.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Germany

Germany

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Germany relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Germany must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Germany and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Germany, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Governing laws[edit]

Germany has been a member of the Berne Convention since 5 December 1887, the World Trade Organization since 1 January 1995, and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 14 March 2010.[2]

As of 2019, the main copyright law of Germany is the 1965 Act on Copyright and Related Rights (Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte) (UrhG). In general, the current (consolidated) text of the law is provided by the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection and can be found here. An unofficial English translation is also available courtesy of the Ministry—see here—, but often does not reflect the most recent amendments, so you may wish to review the "Version information" at the top.

Summary of copyright terms[edit]

Standard term for works[edit]

As of 2019, the standard copyright term for works is life + 70 years.[3]

Anonymous and pseudonymous works[edit]

The treatment of anonymous and pseudonymous works in copyright law changed in 1995. Since then, for all anonymous or pseudonymous works created prior to 1 July 1995 the term of copyright must be calculated as follows: Calculate the point of expiry under the old law (the "old method"), then calculate the point of expiry under the new law (the "current method"). Copyright expires on whichever date comes last.[4]

The old method

Unpublished works: The term of copyright is life + 70 years (the special rules for anonymous and pseudonymous works did not apply to unpublished works).[5]

Published works: It was controversial whether the special rules for anonymous and pseudonymous works applied to all published works or only to so-called released works (verbreitete Werke).[6] ("Released" is a special case of "published".[7]A work is deemed to have been released "when copies of the work have been offered, with the rightholder's consent, to the public or brought to the market after their production in sufficient quantity", § 6(2) UrhG. By way of example, when a new film is shown on television, that makes it a "published" work, but not yet a "released" one.[8] Once DVDs of the film are distributed to stores, it would also be considered "released".)

That aside, the general rules were as follows:[9] If and only if the following three conditions are met:

  1. The work is not a work of fine art and
  2. neither the real name of the author nor a known pseudonym of his were specified in the usual manner on a released/published copy of the work, and
  3. neither the real name of the author nor a known pseudonym of his were specified within the context of a communication to the public of the work

then the copyright term for the work was 70 years after publication unless

  1. the work was published (again) within that period of time and this time the author was designated with their real name or their known pseudonym in the usual manner on a published copy or
  2. the author has become known in some other way within that period of time, or
  3. an application was filed within that period of time to enter the author's name in the register of anonymous and pseudonymous works, or
  4. the work has never been published during the lifetime of the author.

If any of these four conditions is met, then the term of copyright was life + 70 years.[10]

The current method

Unpublished works: If an anonymous or pseudonymous work is still unpublished 70 years after its creation, its copyright expires.[11]

Published works: The copyright term for anonymous and pseudonymous works is 70 years after publication unless

  1. the author reveals their identity within that period of time, or
  2. an application is filed within that period of time to enter the author's name in the register of anonymous and pseudonymous works, or
  3. the pseudonym adopted by the author leaves no doubt as to his identity.

If any of these three cases applies, the term of copyright is life + 70 years instead.[12]

Two miscellaneous comments on these provisions are in order: First, it should be noted that the prevailing view is that the term "work of fine art" in (A) also applies to works of applied art and architectural works;[13] it does not extend to photographic works.[14] This implies that the copyright term of works like oil paintings, sculptures, or buildings created before July 1 1995 is, effectively, always life + 70 years, irrespective of whether they would otherwise qualify as anonymous/pseudonymous. Second, as a practical matter, condition (2) is particularly problematic. It is very much unclear how one would ascertain whether the author "has become known in some other way" during the 70 years following the work's (first) publication. Courts have so far not provided meaningful guidance on the issue. Academic commentators seem to advocate a rather low bar. In the view of Paul Katzenberger, "it was sufficient if a not completely insignificant part of the relevant public became aware of the author's identity[;] by no means was it necessary that [the identity] became general knowledge".[15]

Related rights[edit]

  • Publication right: 25 years from first publication or first public performance if copyright has expired before such publication or performance, or if the work has never been protected in Germany and the author died more than 70 years before the first publication.[UrhG/2017 § 71]

Official works[edit]

Section 5(1) works[edit]

Not protected[edit]

Under § 5(1) of the 1965 Act on Copyright and Related Rights (Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte) (UrhG), acts, statutory instruments, official decrees and official notices, decisions, and official headnotes of decisions do not enjoy copyright protection.

The fuzziest element within this enumeration is perhaps the fourth, "official notices" (amtliche Bekanntmachungen). According to the Federal Court of Justice, such notices need to have "regulatory substance"—the provision is not intended to render unprotected "merely informatory expressions by an administrative body".[16] More broadly, the Court held that § 5(1) as a whole applies only to works that contain a "normative or individual legal stipulation" (normative oder einzelfallbezogene rechtliche Regelung) for only in this case there is a "sufficient public interest in the distribution to justify the exception from copyright with no strings attached".[17] "Decisions" are decisions by federal or state courts or administrative authorities that, as judgements, court orders, official ordinances, etc, contain legally binding stipulations.[18]

An important question for this project is whether § 5(1) is capable of applying to all types of works. A 2012 decision by the Berlin Regional Court (which has garnered some attention by users of this project as the lawsuit was brought against the Wikimedia Foundation) followed some academic and non-judicial commentators in holding that § 5(1) applies exclusively to literary works (Sprachwerke).[19] This view has been criticised by others who have pointed out that official decrees, decisions, etc may very well contain other types of works and that it would defeat the purpose of § 5(1) if these all had to be removed prior to publication.[20]

The prevailing view is that § 5(1) does not apply to currency (notes and coins),[21] postage stamps,[22] or official coats of arms (although the latter thus far have not nearly received as much academic—let alone judicial—attention).[23] Those who deem § 5(1) applicable to non-literary works mostly agree that the provision applies to land-use plans (Bebauungspläne) pursuant to § 8(1) of the Federal Building Code (Baugesetzbuch), which contain legally binding designations for urban development,[24] as well as to official road signs.[25] Most maps and plans originating in government, however, do not qualify for subsection 1 but either for subsection 2 (see below) or are not considered "official works" at all. According to the Federal Court of Justice, for instance, topographic maps issued by the state offices for survey are not official works under copyright law.[26]

Section 5(2) works[edit]

Section 5(2) broadens the scope of application of the German official works provision, stating that "official works published in the official interest for general information purposes" also do not enjoy copyright protection.[27] However, these works—unlike the § 5(1) works described above—may not be modified (prohibition of alteration, § 62) and when using them the source must be acknowledged (§ 63). Due to these requirements, there has been some discussion on this project whether official works pursuant to § 5(2) should be accepted.[28] As of 2019, the prevailing view seems to be that we may not rely on § 5(2): The {{PD-GermanGov}} template refers exclusively to § 5(1) as a possible justification.[29] We will therefore forego a more thorough analysis of § 5(2) on this page.


Copyright tags[edit]

  • {{PD-GermanGov}} – for public domain images from German statutes or other regulations.
  • {{PD-BW}} – for publicly available service regulations ("Zentrale Dienstvorschrift") of the German Armed Forces (Bundeswehr).
  • {{PD-Coa-Germany}} – for German coats of arms of corporations governed by public law that are in the public domain according to German law because they are official works (§&5 Abs.1 UrhG).
  • {{PD-Flag-Germany}} – for German flags of corporations governed by public law that are in the public domain according to German law because they are official works (§5 Abs.1 UrhG).
  • {{PD-Seal-Germany}} – for German seals of corporations governed by public law that are in the public domain according to German law because they are official works (§5 Abs.1 UrhG).
  • {{PD-VzKat}} – for road signs published as statutes or other regulations.
  • {{PD-German stamps}} – for current German stamps.
  • {{PD-Deutsche Bundespost stamps}} – for German stamps released as Deutsche Bundespost.
  • {{PD-GDR stamps}} – for German stamps released as Deutsche Post der DDR.
  • {{PD-Meyers}} – for images from the 4th edition of Meyers Konversationslexikon (1885–90).
  • {{PD-Germany-§134}} – for literary works, works of music and scientific or technical images published by a legal entity under public law more than 70 years ago that do not mention the author.
  • {{PD-Germany-§134-KUG}} – for photographs and works of art published by a legal entity under public law more than 70 years ago that do not mention the author.
  • {{Data license Germany-attribution-2.0}} – for data from German authorities, very similar to CC BY-SA
  • {{Data license Germany-Zero-2.0}} – for data from German authorities, very similar to CC0

Currency[edit]

 Not OK except for Deutsche Mark bank notes.

  • At present many Commons images of German coins and banknotes use {{PD-GermanGov}}, but this template relies on § 5 Abs. 1 UrhG, which has recently been declared by a low German court (Landgericht) to apply only to text, not images. See discussion at Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2012/07#German currency.
  • Deutsche Bundesbank has confirmed public domain for German DM-banknotes 1949–2001, which is, however, a permission for simple usage only (and not solely sufficient) towards Wikipedia.[30]
  • According to the coinciding German copyright literature, works like bank notes, coins and stamps are not to be considered works by the government and are not free.[31] This, however, does not influence above-mentioned permission by Deutsche Bundesbank affecting Deutsche Mark bills (not coins!).

De minimis[edit]

Under § 57 of the 1965 Act on Copyright and Related Rights (Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte) (UrhG), "any reproduction, distribution, and communication in public of a work shall be admissible if the work is to be regarded as an immaterial supplement in comparison to the actual subject matter of the reproduction, distribution, or communication in public."

The first step in assessing whether a particular use of a work is covered by § 57 is to determine the actual (primary) subject matter reproduced, distributed, or communicated to the public.[32] The primary subject matter does not itself need to be protected by copyright.[33]To qualify under § 57, the work must not only "fade into the background" or be of "subordinate significance" relative to the primary subject matter; rather, it must not even attain marginal or minor significance.[34]

According to the Federal Court of Justice, this is the case

  1. if it could be omitted or replaced and the average observer would not notice it (or, in the alternative, the overall impression of the primary subject matter would not be at all affected); or
  2. if, in light of the circumstances of the case, it bears not even the slightest contextual relationship (inhaltliche Beziehung) to the primary subject matter, but rather is without any significance to it whatsoever due to its randomness and arbitrariness.[35]

The Federal Court of Justice also provided a (non-exhaustive) list of examples where it is "regularly impossible" that the use of a work qualifies as de minimis:

  1. The work noticeably impacts the style or mood conveyed (erkennbar stil- oder stimmungsbildend);
  2. the work underscores a particular effect or statement;
  3. the work serves a dramaturgic purpose; or
  4. the work is characteristic in any other way.[36]

Note that whether the work can be replaced with another work is relevant only to the extent that if an average observer of the primary subject matter would not notice the work in question because it can be arbitrarily replaced or omitted, this supports a finding of immateriality (see above). However, as soon as it has been established that the work is part of the overall concept (say, because it impacts the mood of the picture), it no longer matters if the work could be replaced: Section 57 does not apply.[37]

Examples of de minimis use from court cases:[38]

There are very few court decisions discussing the German de minimis provision and the 2014 decision by the Federal Court of Justice, which set out the tests expounded above, was the first by Germany's highest court of civil jurisprudence that revolved around § 57.[39] In the case at issue, the Court looked at a photograph in a furniture catalogue depicting several furniture items for sale and a painting on the wall in the background (pictured here, p 3). The Court held that the publisher could not rely on § 57 for its use of the painting after the lower court found that the painting added a "markedly contrasting colour accent". The Court deemed this sufficient to rule out an immaterial use pursuant to § 57. In another decision, the Federal Court of Justice held that the use of a picture of a Spanish city as part of a high-school student's essay on that city does not qualify as de minimis.[40]

In light of the 2014 judgement, older decisions by lower courts will need to be viewed with some caution. That being said, the use of a photograph of an individual wearing a T-shirt with a protected design on the cover page of a magazine (pictured here) was held by the Munich Higher Regional Court in 2008 to fall within the definition of use as an immaterial supplement because the design did not bear any contextual relationship to the primary subject matter due to its randomness and arbitrariness.[41]

Freedom of panorama[edit]

OK {{FoP-Germany}}

See also: de:Panoramafreiheit#Deutschland

General[edit]

Under section 59(1) of the 1965 Act on Copyright and Related Rights (Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte) (UrhG), it is permitted to "reproduce, distribute and communicate to the public, by means of painting, drawing, photography, or cinematography, works located permanently in public streets, ways, or public open spaces".[42]

Section 59(1) applies to all types of works as long as they are reproduced by painting, drawing, photography, or cinematography.[43] The German freedom of panorama limitation is thus capable of applying to photographs of works of artistic art (such as paintings, fountains, sculptures, or photographic works) as well as to pictures of poems and song lyrics inscribed on commemorative plaques.[44]

For the exception to arise, two principal conditions must be met: The work must be located in a place that is "public" and the work needs to be located there "permanently". The two conditions are discussed in more detail below.

Public[edit]

Despite the somewhat ambiguous wording, a work is located "in" a public place if it can be observed from a public place.[45] In other words, what needs to be public is the place from where the photograph is taken; it does not matter if the work itself is accessible to the public.[46] It is important to note that only the view from the public place is privileged: If, for instance, a statue is located next to a public street, photographs of the statue taken from that street enjoy freedom of panorama, but photographs of the very same statue taken from a non-public spot do not.[47] Accordingly, the Federal Court of Justice held that a picture of a building taken from the balcony of a privately owned flat across the street did not comply with the requirements of § 59(1) because the balcony is not a public place.[48] To simplify life for photographers and re-users of their pictures, there is a rebuttable presumption that if a given photograph of a work could have been made from a public place, it was in fact made from a public place.[49]

When a photographer has used special tools (such as a ladder) to create the picture or has taken the picture after removing objects that otherwise would have shielded the work from the public eye (think of a photographer brushing aside the branches of a hedge to get a better view of a sculpture), § 59(1) cannot be relied upon for the resulting view is no longer part of what the general public can visually perceive from the public place.[50] Based on the same reasoning, the Federal Court of Justice has held that aerial photography does not meet the requirements of § 59(1).[51] (In a 2020 decision, a regional court challenged this view, holding that the decision of the Federal Court of Justice is no longer good law as EU law compels German courts to extend the freedom of panorama to photographs created from the airspace as long as the works shown are located in public spaces.[52] In a separate case, however, a higher regional court in 2023 squarely rejected that position.[53] The court did allow an appeal, though, which as of November 2023 is pending before the Federal Court of Justice.[54]) There is some controversy in the legal literature as to whether telephoto lenses should also be treated as impermissible tools—the majority of commentators answers this in the affirmative.[55]

Whether a place is "public" for purposes of § 59(1) does not depend on whether it is public or private property.[56] Instead, the question turns on its actual accessibility, which, according to the prevailing view, needs to be such that one can infer a (sufficient) dedication to the public.[57] Against this backdrop, many academic and extra-judicial commentators argue that publicly accessible station halls, subway stations, and departure halls fall short of the "public" requirement because they are not in the same way dedicated to the public as streets, ways, or public open spaces.[58] The status of atria and passages is controversial.[59] On the other hand, the place does not need to be accessible all the time. Graveyards are often cited as an example of a place that is public despite the fact that it is often closed during night hours.[60] Private property that cannot be freely accessed, for instance because there is some type of access control in place (or even an entrance fee is charged), does not fall under § 59(1).[61] Buildings such as museums, public collections, churches, or administrative buildings are not "public" within the meaning of the statute, and thus photographs of works exhibited in their interior do not qualify for § 59(1).[62]

The location alternatives listed in § 59(1) ("streets", "ways", and "open spaces") are merely illustrative; freedom of panorama also extends, inter alia, to what can be seen from international and coastal waters, waterways, and ocean harbours.[63]

Permanent[edit]

Permanently located in a public place (see Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798): protected work of art ("Smiling Lips") on the bow and the hull of a cruise ship
(design by Feliks Büttner; pictured here near Funchal, Madeira)
Permanently located in a public place (see Bundesgerichtshof 19 January 2017, case I ZR 242/15 East Side Gallery, (2017) 119 GRUR 390): protected work of art on a remaining section of the Berlin Wall
("Hommage an die junge Generation" by Thierry Noir, East Side Gallery)
Permanently located in a public place (see Oberlandesgericht Köln 9 March 2012, case 6 U 193/11 Liebe deine Stadt, (2012) 16 ZUM-RD 593) based on having been in place for five years: installation by Merlin Bauer (protected as a work of art) on a rooftop in Cologne, Germany, Nord-Süd-Fahrt

To meet the condition as to permanence, a work does not need to remain at its location during its entire existence. According to the Federal Court of Justice, the proper test is whether the display or the erection of the work in a public place, as perceived by an objective observer, serves the purpose of a not-merely-temporary presentation.[64] In a more recent decision, the Court clarified that a work is permanently located in a public place if "from the point of view of the general public, [it is] intended to remain in the public place for a long, mostly indefinite, period of time".[65] On that basis, the Court determined that a work presented to the public for just two weeks—the so-called Wrapped Reichstag—cannot be reproduced under § 59(1). In the same vein, a regional court held that an artistic "grass sofa" installed in a freely accessible garden for many years without any indication of an end date of the exhibition, is located there permanently.[66] These cases must be distinguished from the case of ephemeral works, such as ice or sand sculptures, or chalk paintings on streets, whose lifetime is limited by certain natural constraints; leading academic commentaries almost universally consider such works permanent even though they often exist only for a short period of time.[67] The same position is usually taken with respect to graffiti on exterior walls (which in all likelihood will be painted over sooner or later).[68]

Works displayed in shop windows do not fall under § 59(1) due to a lack of permanent display.[69] There is some controversy in the literature over the permanent nature of posters on advertising columns and similar structures.[70]

In order to be located "permanently" in a public place, a work does not need to remain in one and the same place—its location may change.[71] Accordingly, the Federal Court of Justice held that a protected work of art on the bow of a cruise ship meets the "permanence" condition because the artwork and the cruise ship "are intended to be located for a long time in (different) public places".[72] In the view of the Court, this seems to apply more broadly to "street cars, omnibuses, or even freight vehicles", which are "increasingly being used as an advertising medium and at least a non-negligible share of the designs attached to such vehicles are copyright-protected as works of applied art".[73]

Additional requirement for architectural works[edit]

In the case of architectural works, the freedom of panorama provision is applicable only to the external appearance.[74] Therefore, pictures of interior staircases and interior courtyards cannot be used under § 59(1) even if all of the above-described conditions are met.[75]

Prohibition of alteration[edit]

Section 59(1) does not permit the use of modifications of the depicted work. Therefore, when the photographer of a horse sculpture digitally changed the colour of the horse and digitally added a Santa hat to it, a regional court found that he could no longer use the resulting picture under the freedom of panorama.[76] The same conclusion was reached by a higher regional court when a photographer digitally altered the colour of a protected sign ("Liebe deine Stadt", pictured) and the colour of the sky visible in the background of his photograph.[77] Modifications that directly result from the chosen method of reproduction are permitted.[78] Partial reproductions are generally allowed, even if essential parts of the work are left out and even if it would be possible to reproduce the work as whole.[79]

Acknowledgement of source[edit]

The source of the work must be clearly acknowledged.[80] The "source" generally includes the name of the author, but goes beyond that, in that it shall enable a third party to identify the copy of the work that was depicted.[81]

While it is straightforward to apply the attribution requirement when the author is identified directly on/next to the particular copy of the depicted work, it is not entirely clear whether a photographer needs to undertake research (and if so, how thoroughly) when the author is not named on (in the vicinity of) the particular copy. It is widely believed that those who rely for their communication to the public on the freedom of panorama need to undertake a reasonable effort to identify the author,[82] but the interpretations of that differ. Professor Dreier argues in his treatise, for instance, that when using pictures of works of architecture or applied art, less of an effort can be expected than in the case of pictures of works of fine art;[83] Dreyer J, writing extra-judicially, points out that what is reasonable depends primarily on the intensity of the use (publishers printing post cards depicting a work vs tourists giving photographs of a work to their acquaintances as gifts);[84] and Professor Götting argues that it seems unreasonable to him to make the user of a picture of an unsigned architectural work research the name of the author.[85]


Stamps[edit]

According to a decision by a German regional court (Landgericht Berlin) in a case of the heirs of German artist Loriot against the Wikimedia Foundation, announced 27 March 2012, German postage stamps are not "official works" according to § 5 I or II UrhG and are therefore not in the public domain, as previously assumed on Commons.

Stamps of other private entities are copyrighted as well. However, the usual German copyright expiration term applies - copyright expires 70 years after 1 January after death of the creator. Some individual stamps may be copyright-free for other reasons (e.g. simple graphic design). For a further discussion, see Wikilegal/Copyright of Images in German Postage Stamps

Outdated license templates, to be deleted or changed[edit]

See Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review.

Threshold of originality[edit]

Works of fine art (including works of applied art and architectural works)

"Works of fine art", as defined in § 2(1)(4) of the 1965 Act on Copyright and Related Rights (Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte) (UrhG), is a catch-all term for works of fine art in a stricter sense, works of applied art, and architectural works. Fine art is distinguished from applied art by its lack of a utilitarian purpose.[86] For many decades, courts imposed a higher threshold of originality on works of applied art than on works of fine art ("two-tier theory").[87] In 2013, however, the Federal Court of Justice expressly changed its jurisprudence, holding that "in general, the copyright protection of works of applied art is not subject to other requirements than the copyright protection of works of non-utilitarian fine art or of literary or musical creation. It is hence sufficient that they attain a level of creativity that allows a public open to art and relatively familiar with views on art to justifiably speak of 'artistic' creations".[88]

In assessing whether an article with a utilitarian purpose is protected by copyright, one must take into account, however, that the aesthetic effect of the article can only provide a basis for copyright protection to the extent that it is not dictated by the article's utilitarian purpose, but instead is based on an artistic effort.[89] Only those features of a utilitarian article that are not entirely dictated by the technical function can justify copyright protection.[90] A feature is considered "dictated by the technical function" if the article could not function without it.[91] This includes features that, for technical reasons, must necessarily be used in articles of the same kind as the article concerned, as well as features that, while being used for technical reasons, are freely selectable or interchangeable. To the extent that the design of such features is entirely dictated by their technical function, they are incapable of justifying copyright protection of the utilitarian article.[92]

Examples from court cases on applied art:[93]

Protection denied:

  • a climbing structure for playgrounds made of ropes (pictured in the decision, p 3 bottom) because the structure consists of freely selectable or interchangeable yet technically required features and does not exhibit artistic creativity;[94]
  • a wooden toy train ("birthday train") with wagons in which candles and numbers can be inserted (pictured in the decision, p 3) because there were similar-looking, pre-existing toy trains.[95]
  • a logo (pictured here in black and white) consisting of the text "Match by Audiotec Fischer" and the commonly used "fast-forward" symbol because neither the design of the text nor the design of the symbol ("widely used in the audio world") nor the combination of the two could be considered an artistic creation.[96]

Protection accorded:

  • a logo consisting of a mouth, eyes, and wave lines ("eyebrows") (pictured in the decision, p 3) (in the case at issue, the design was painted on the exterior of a ship and therefore could be reproduced under the freedom of panorama limitation);[97]
  • a toy train comprised of wooden animal figurines on wheels ("birthday caravan") (pictured in the decision, p 3) because it was a complete redesign of pre-existing toy trains, whose locomotive and waggons were replaced with animals, and the overall design (shapes, colours) was not the result of technical necessities but an expression of the author's artistic creativity;[98]
  • an urn emblazoned with an airbrushed depiction of a deer (pictured in the decision, on the left);[99]
  • a Birkenstock sandal (model "Madrid");[100]
  • a Porsche 356 sports car (pictured in the decision, 3rd and 4th image from the top);[101]
  • a patio heater with a triangular base (pictured in the decision, first image).[102]

In the past decades, court cases where protection as applied art was eventually accorded primarily revolved around renowned designer objects, in particular items of furniture and lamps.[103] A few more recent examples:

  • chairs and tables based on drafts by the designers Marcel Breuer ("Wassily" chair, "Laccio" table) and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe ("Barcelona" chair, stool, couch, and table; "Brno" chair; "Prag" chair);[104]
  • the "Wilhelm Wagenfeld table lamp";[105]
  • a brilliant-cut diamond ring ("Niessing-Spannring").[106]

Signatures[edit]

German copyright law requires a high threshold of originality, called Schöpfungshöhe.

OK for a typical signature. The relevant law is the Urheberrechtsgesetz, abbreviated UrhG. Paragraph 2(2) UrhG makes it clear that there is a threshold of originality that must be met: "Werke im Sinne dieses Gesetzes sind nur persönliche geistige Schöpfungen", which can be roughly translated as "According to this law, only personal intellectual creations are considered as works." The Schöpfungshöhe defines the minimal requirements that must be met for a work to become a copyrightable intellectual creation. In this context, signatures are comparable to simple graphics that just fulfill some practical purpose which are likewise not eligible for copyright as documented by following cases:

  • OLG Köln, 6 U 199/85 (GRUR 1986, 889) ruled that this image is ineligible for copyright including its animation
  • BVerfG 1 BvR 1571/02 ruled that this image is ineligible for copyright because it is a work of applied art serving a practical purpose which requires a higher threshold of originality

In general, simple type faces and signatures for practical purposes are not eligible for copyright. To quote from Haimo Schack: Urheber- und Urhebervertragsrecht, p. 118:

"Dagegen wird ein Urheberschutz von Schriftzeichen von der Rechtssprechung in aller Regel verneint. Auch das einprägsame Signet der "ARD-1" erfüllte nicht die Anforderungen an eine persönliche geistige Schöpfung. Seit dem 1.6.2004 werden Schriftzeichen nicht mehr über das Schriftzeichengesetz, sondern unmittelbar als Geschmacksmuster geschützt (vgl § 61 GeschmMG)."

Rough translation:

"In contrast, copyright protection for typefaces is declined by the prevailing case law. Even the catchy logo "ARD-1" did not fulfil the requirements of a personal intellectual creation. Since 1 June 2004 type faces are no longer protected by the Schriftzeichengesetz (law for type faces) but as design patents (see § 61 GeschmMG)."

See also de:Rechtsschutz von Schriftzeichen#Schutz handschriftlicher Schriftarten und Gestaltungen.

However, there may still be copyright be if the signature is sufficiently complex to become a protectable artistic work (e.g. because it has more creativity than this image - see above).

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. § 69 Urheberrechtsgesetz (in German). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  2. Germany Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-11.
  3. Section 64 UrhG.
  4. For if under the new rules the copyright term would be shorter than what it used to be under the old law, then the old term continues to apply. Section 137f(1) UrhG, 1st sentence. See generally P Katzenberger and A Metzger, "§ 66" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (5th edn, Beck 2017) para 8; W Gass, "§ 66" in H Ahlberg and K Nicolini (eds), Möhring/Nicolini: Urheberrechtsgesetz (2nd edn, Vahlen 2000) para 16. Conversely, if the copyright term under the current provisions is longer than what it used to be under the old law, then the new rules apply. T Dreier, "§ 66" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 12.
  5. P Katzenberger, "§ 66" in G Schricker and U Loewenheim (eds), Urheberrecht (4th edn, Beck 2010) para 25; T Dreier, "§ 66" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 14; O-F von Gamm, Urheberrecht (Beck 1968) § 66, para 2.
  6. See P Katzenberger, "§ 66" in G Schricker and U Loewenheim (eds), Urheberrecht (4th edn, Beck 2010) paras 25ff. for a thorough review of the literature and the underlying arguments.
  7. A Nordemann, "§ 6" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 4.
  8. Bundesgerichtshof 6 February 2014, case I ZR 86/12 Peter Fechter, (2014) 67 NJW 1888 [34]–[36].
  9. Sections 66(1), 66(4) UrhG; see generally P Katzenberger, "§ 66" in G Schricker and U Loewenheim (eds), Urheberrecht (4th edn, Beck 2010) paras 29ff.
  10. Section 66(2) UrhG [old version]
  11. Section 66(1) UrhG, 1st sentence.
  12. Sections 66(2) and 66(3) UrhG.
  13. T Dreier, "§ 66" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 16; W Gass, "§ 66" in H Ahlberg and K Nicolini (eds), Möhring/Nicolini: Urheberrechtsgesetz (2nd edn, Vahlen 2000) para 35; probably E Ulmer, Urheber- und Verlagsrecht (3rd edn, Springer 1980) 144. Contra O-F von Gamm, Urheberrecht (Beck 1968) § 66, para 2.
  14. T Dreier, "§ 66" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 16; Oberlandesgericht München 12 June 1967, case 6 AR 24/67, (1968) 51 UFITA 377, 379.
  15. P Katzenberger, "§ 66" in G Schricker and U Loewenheim (eds), Urheberrecht (4th edn, Beck 2010) para 42; in the same vein: O-F von Gamm, Urheberrecht (Beck 1968) § 66, para 2.
  16. Bundesgerichtshof 20 July 2006, case I ZR 185/03 Bodenrichtwertsammlung, (2007) 109 GRUR 137 [13].
  17. Bundesgerichtshof 20 July 2006, case I ZR 185/03 Bodenrichtwertsammlung, (2007) 109 GRUR 137 [14].
  18. P Katzenberger and A Metzger, "§ 5" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 46; C Arnold, Amtliche Werke im Urheberrecht: Zur Verfassungsmäßigkeit und analogen Anwendbarkeit des § 5 UrhG (Nomos 1994) 94; MCG Marquardt, "§ 5" in A-A Wandtke and W Bullinger (eds), Praxiskommentar zum Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2022) para 12.
  19. Landgericht Berlin 27 March 2012, case 15 O 377/11 Loriot-Briefmarken, (2012) 16 ZUM-RD 399, 402. In the same vein: T Dreier, "§ 5" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 4 ("written works"); H Ahlberg, "§ 5" in H Ahlberg and K Nicolini (eds), Möhring/Nicolini: Urheberrechtsgesetz (2nd edn, Vahlen 2000) para 10.
  20. JB Nordemann, "§ 5" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 10. See also P Katzenberger and A Metzger, "§ 5" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 68 (subsection 1 applicable to official road signs as they are part of a law). Cf C Arnold, Amtliche Werke im Urheberrecht: Zur Verfassungsmäßigkeit und analogen Anwendbarkeit des § 5 UrhG (Nomos 1994) 104 (subsection 1 limited to "texts", which also includes at least illustrations of a scientific or technical nature).
  21. On those, see COM:CUR Germany.
  22. Landgericht Berlin 27 March 2012, case 15 O 377/11 Loriot-Briefmarken, (2012) 16 ZUM-RD 399, 402; H Ahlberg, "§ 5" in H Ahlberg and K Nicolini (eds), Möhring/Nicolini: Urheberrechtsgesetz (2nd edn, Vahlen 2000) para 14; P Katzenberger and A Metzger, "§ 5" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 68; EI Obergfell, "§ 5" in W Büscher, S Dittmer, and P Schiwy (eds), Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz, Urheberrecht, Medienrecht (3rd edn, Heymann 2015) para 19; G Dreyer, "§ 5" in G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 20; H-P Götting and U Loewenheim, "§ 31" in U Loewenheim (ed), Handbuch des Urheberrechts (3rd edn, Beck 2021) para 10; D Leuze, Urheberrechte der Beschäftigten im öffentlichen Dienst (3rd edn, Erich Schmidt 2008) 40; D Dünnwald, Der Urheber im öffentlichen Dienst (Nomos 1999) 133; H Schack, Urheber- und Urhebervertragsrecht (10th edn, Mohr Siebeck 2021) para 632; H Schack, Kunst und Recht (3rd edn, Mohr Siebeck 2017) para 276; M von Albrecht, Amtliche Werke und Schranken des Urheberrechts zu amtlichen Zwecken in fünfzehn europäischen Ländern (VVF 1992) 52; G Schricker, "Zum Urheberrechtsschutz und Geschmacksmusterschutz von Postwertzeichen – Teil II" (1991) 93 GRUR 645, 647ff; P Katzenberger, "Die Frage des urheberrechtlichen Schutzes amtlicher Werke" (1972) 74 GRUR 686, 694. Note that for those who believe that § 5(1) is incapable of applying to non-literary works to begin with (see above for references), this is a simple corollary. Contra Landgericht München 10 March 1987, case 21 S 20861/86, (1987) 89 GRUR 436, 436f (stating that "the postage stamp has lost the copyright protection it enjoyed during the drafting stage when it was included in the Official Journal of the Minister of Post and Telecommunications"); A Peukert, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte (19th edn, Beck 2023) § 25, para 12 (stating that privately created works can also constitute official works, giving the example of "officially announced stamps"); J von Ungern-Sternberg, "Werke privater Urheber als amtliche Werke" (1977) 79 GRUR 766, 768 (because "postage stamps of the Bundespost are announced with pictures some time prior to their issuance in the Official Journal of the Minister of Post and Telecommunications" and are therefore in the public domain as part of an official notice).
  23. H Ahlberg, "§ 5" in H Ahlberg and K Nicolini (eds), Möhring/Nicolini: Urheberrechtsgesetz (2nd edn, Vahlen 2000) para 14; P Katzenberger and A Metzger, "§ 5" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 68; D Dünnwald, Der Urheber im öffentlichen Dienst (Nomos 1999) 133. J von Ungern-Sternberg ("Werke privater Urheber als amtliche Werke" (1977) 79 GRUR 766, 768) seems to consider coats of arms official works pursuant to § 5(2) rather than § 5(1). Again, for those who believe that § 5(1) is incapable of applying to non-literary works to begin with (see above for references), this is a simple corollary.
  24. JB Nordemann, "§ 5" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 15; MCG Marquardt, "§ 5" in A-A Wandtke and W Bullinger (eds), Praxiskommentar zum Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2022) para 7; EI Obergfell, "§ 5" in W Büscher, S Dittmer, and P Schiwy (eds), Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz, Urheberrecht, Medienrecht (3rd edn, Heymann 2015) para 8; P Katzenberger and A Metzger, "§ 5" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) paras 68f.
  25. MCG Marquardt, "§ 5" in A-A Wandtke and W Bullinger (eds), Praxiskommentar zum Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2022) para 7; P Katzenberger and A Metzger, "§ 5" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 68; T Dreier, "§ 5" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 8. Contra EI Obergfell, "§ 5" in W Büscher, S Dittmer, and P Schiwy (eds), Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz, Urheberrecht, Medienrecht (3rd edn, Heymann 2015) para 8 (who argues that they fall under subsection 2).
  26. Bundesgerichtshof 2 July 1987, case I ZR 232/85 Topographische Landeskarten, (1988) 41 NJW 337, 338f.
  27. Somewhat misleadingly, in the English translation of the UrhG provided by the German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (accessed 19 August 2019) the phrase "amtliche Werke" in § 5(2) is incorrectly translated as "official texts" rather than "official works".
  28. See, for instance, Commons talk:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review#PD-GermanGov and related (perma); Template talk:PD-GermanGov#§ 5 Abs. 2 UrhG (perma); see also de:Wikipedia:Urheberrechtsfragen/Archiv/2009/12#Amtliche Werke / §5 Abs. 2 UrhG.
  29. See also the notice at the top of Template talk:PD-GermanGov (perma).
  30. Geldscheinsammlung (in German). Deutsche Bundesbank. Retrieved on 2019-03-26.
  31. Dreier/Schulze (2004) § 5 Rn. 11: „Nicht § 5 II UrhG unterfallen nach Ansicht zumindest des überwiegenden Teils der Literatur […] Banknoten, Münzen und Briefmarken (Wandtke/Bullinger/Marquardt § 5 Rn. 19; Häde ZUM 1991, 356; Schricker GRUR 1991, 645, 657ff.; vgl. jedoch die insoweit abweichende Entscheidung des LG München I GRUR 1987, 436 – Briefmarke)“. Die letztgenannte Entscheidung des LG München ist mittlerweile hinfällig. (in German)
  32. Bundesgerichtshof 17 November 2014, case I ZR 177/13 Möbelkatalog, (2015) 68 NJW 2119 [16].
  33. M Vogel, "§ 57" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (5th edn, Beck 2017) para 8; T Dreier, "§ 57" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 1.
  34. Bundesgerichtshof 17 November 2014, case I ZR 177/13 Möbelkatalog, (2015) 68 NJW 2119 [26f].
  35. Bundesgerichtshof 17 November 2014, case I ZR 177/13 Möbelkatalog, (2015) 68 NJW 2119 [27].
  36. Bundesgerichtshof 17 November 2014, case I ZR 177/13 Möbelkatalog, (2015) 68 NJW 2119 [27].
  37. Bundesgerichtshof 17 November 2014, case I ZR 177/13 Möbelkatalog, (2015) 68 NJW 2119 [31].
  38. Appeals court level or higher.
  39. R Jacobs, "Was ist "beiläufig"? Ein Beitrag zu § 57 UrhG" in W Büscher and others (eds), Rechtsdurchsetzung: Rechtsverwirklichung durch materielles Recht und Verfahrensrecht. Festschrift für Hans-Jürgen Ahrens zum 70. Geburtstag (Heymanns 2016), 225; FL Stang, "Bundesgerichtshof 17 November 2014, case I ZR 177/13" (2015) 117 GRUR 670 (note).
  40. Bundesgerichtshof 10 January 2019, case I ZR 267/15 Cordoba II, (2019) 121 GRUR 813 [59].
  41. Oberlandesgericht München 13 March 2008, case 29 U 5826/07, (2008) 12 ZUM-RD 554.
  42. Note that in the English translation of the UrhG provided by the German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (accessed 18 August 2019), § 59(1) UrhG is incorrectly translated (the means adjunct in the first sentence is missing).
  43. G Dreyer, "§ 59" in G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 8.
  44. See T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 2; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 18.
  45. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [22].
  46. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [22]; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 19.
  47. See Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [35]; Bundesgerichtshof 5 June 2003, case I ZR 192/00 Hundertwasser-Haus, (2003) 105 GRUR 1035, 1037.
  48. Bundesgerichtshof 5 June 2003, case I ZR 192/00 Hundertwasser-Haus, (2003) 105 GRUR 1035, 1037.
  49. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [37].
  50. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [35]; see also CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 140ff.
  51. Bundesgerichtshof 5 June 2003, case I ZR 192/00 Hundertwasser-Haus, (2003) 105 GRUR 1035, 1037. See also H Schack, Urheber- und Urhebervertragsrecht (10th edn, Mohr Siebeck 2021) para 609; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 22. Cf Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [35] (photographs created through use of a ladder not covered by the freedom of panorama).
  52. Landgericht Frankfurt am Main 25 November 2020, case 2-06 O 136/20, (2021) 25 ZUM-RD 155 = openJur 2021, 5952.
  53. Oberlandesgericht Hamm 27 April 2023, case I-4 U 247/21 Drohnenaufnahmen, (2023) 125 GRUR 1018 = openJur 2023, 5924.
  54. Docket No. I ZR 67/23.
  55. See C Czychowski, "§ 59" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 7; G Dreyer, "§ 59" in G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 6; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 22; CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 142ff. Contra T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 4. See the Wikipedia article in German for additional references.
  56. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [23]; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 19. See also Landgericht Frankenthal 9 November 2004, case 6 O 209/04 Grassofa, (2005) 107 GRUR 577, 577 (holding that a freely accessible park owned by a charitable foundation is public).
  57. M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 20. But see Bundesgerichtshof 17 December 2010, case V ZR 45/10 Preußische Gärten und Parkanlagen, (2011) 64 NJW 749, 751 (affirming the higher regional court's holding to deny freedom of panorama on the grounds that the "de facto free access to the park is based on a decision by plaintiff [...] which they may change at anspany time"), widely criticised, see inter alia H Schack (2011) 66 JZ 371 (note), 376.
  58. C Czychowski, "§ 59" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 7; G Dreyer, "§ 59" in G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 6; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 20; CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 137; S Ernst, "Zur Panoramafreiheit des Urheberrechts" (1998) 42 ZUM 475, 476. Contra S Lüft, "§ 59" in A-A Wandtke and W Bullinger (eds), Praxiskommentar zum Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2022) para 3; EI Obergfell, "§ 59" in W Büscher, S Dittmer, and P Schiwy (eds), Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz, Urheberrecht, Medienrecht (3rd edn, Heymann 2015) para 3.
  59. In favour of applicability of freedom of panorama: T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 3; EI Obergfell, "§ 59" in W Büscher, S Dittmer, and P Schiwy (eds), Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz, Urheberrecht, Medienrecht (3rd edn, Heymann 2015) para 3; CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 135f. Opposed: C Czychowski, "§ 59" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 7. See the Wikipedia article in German for additional references.
  60. T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 3; R Kirchmaier, "§ 59" in E-J Mestmäcker and E Schulze (eds), Urheberrecht (Luchterhand R 55 2011) para 9; EI Obergfell, "§ 59" in W Büscher, S Dittmer, and P Schiwy (eds), Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz, Urheberrecht, Medienrecht (3rd edn, Heymann 2015) para 3; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 20. See also Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [33] ("The fact that the ship may at times not be located in publicly accessible places [...] does not preclude the application of § 59(1)").
  61. C Czychowski, "§ 59" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 6 ("private property that has constant public exposure but is not freely accessible due to fencing and entry controls"); S Lüft, "§ 59" in A-A Wandtke and W Bullinger (eds), Praxiskommentar zum Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2022) para 3 ("private property that is not freely accessible due to fences and controls"); EI Obergfell, "§ 59" in W Büscher, S Dittmer, and P Schiwy (eds), Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz, Urheberrecht, Medienrecht (3rd edn, Heymann 2015) para 3 ("fencing, access control, and similar"); M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 20 ("private property with access control").
  62. G Dreyer, "§ 59" in G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 6; R Kirchmaier, "§ 59" in E-J Mestmäcker and E Schulze (eds), Urheberrecht (Luchterhand R 55 2011) para 9; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 17; CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 133. See also the official motives accompanying the draft bill proposing the UrhG, Bundestag Printed Paper IV/270 of 23 March 1962, p 76 (stating that "the artwork permanently exhibited in public museums" shall not be privileged for it is "not to the same degree dedicated to the public as the works erected in public squares"). Cf Oberlandesgericht Köln 5 May 2000, case 6 U 21/00 Gies-Adler, (2000) [53] NJW 2212, 2213 (denying freedom of panorama for photographs of a work of art inside the former house of parliament on the grounds that it is not located in a public street, way, or public open space).
  63. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [24].
  64. Bundesgerichtshof 24 January 2002, case I ZR 102/99 Verhüllter Reichstag, 150 BGHZ 6, 10f.
  65. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [32]. It is readily apparent that the actual duration of the presentation does not matter: If, say, a fountain is inadvertedly destroyed two days following its construction, this does not affect the applicability of § 59(1) in respect of the pictures created during the two days of its existence. See M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) paras 26, 28; CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 149.
  66. Landgericht Frankenthal 9 November 2004, case 6 O 209/04 Grassofa, (2005) 107 GRUR 577, 577.
  67. C Czychowski, "§ 59" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 8; G Dreyer, "§ 59" in G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 17; H Schack, Urheber- und Urhebervertragsrecht (10th edn, Mohr Siebeck 2021) para 610. Contra T Koch, "Von dreidimensionalen Vervielfältigungen und schwimmenden Kunstwerken – Die Panoramafreiheit in der Rechtsprechung des Bundesgerichtshofs" in Hans-Jürgen Ahrens and others (eds), Festschrift für Wolfgang Büscher (Heymanns 2018) 205. See the Wikipedia article in German for additional references.
  68. T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 5; G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 17; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 27; CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 154f.
  69. T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 5; G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 18; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 27; CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 169.
  70. In favour: T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 5; G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 17; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 27 (departing from the view expressed in the previous edition); CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 170. Contra S Ernst, "Zur Panoramafreiheit des Urheberrechts" (1998) 42 ZUM 475, 477. See the Wikipedia article in German for additional references.
  71. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [32].
  72. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [33].
  73. Not entirely clear from Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [29] on account of the discussion taking place in relation to the "public" requirement, but see the various notes on the judgement, eg T Koch, "Von dreidimensionalen Vervielfältigungen und schwimmenden Kunstwerken – Die Panoramafreiheit in der Rechtsprechung des Bundesgerichtshofs" in H-J Ahrens and others (eds), Festschrift für Wolfgang Büscher (Heymanns 2018) 204; M Stieper, "Die Freiheit des Straßenbildes im Urheber- und Designrecht – Anmerkung zu BGH ZUM 2017, 766 – AIDA-Kussmund" (2017) 61 ZUM 770 [771]; D Ettig (2017) 63 WRP 955 (note) para 13.
  74. Section 59(1), 2nd sentence.
  75. T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 8.
  76. Landgericht Mannheim 14 February 1997, case 7 S 4/96 Freiburger Holbein-Pferd, (1997) 99 GRUR 364, 366.
  77. Oberlandesgericht Köln 9 March 2012, case 6 U 193/11 Liebe deine Stadt, (2012) 16 ZUM-RD 593, 595.
  78. Section 62(3) so provides for artistic works and photographic works. In the literature, this is extended to architectural works. See T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 11; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 33; CG Chirco, Die Panoramafreiheit (Nomos 2013) 207.
  79. Bundesgerichtshof 19 January 2017, case I ZR 242/15 East Side Gallery, (2017) 119 GRUR 390 [41], [43]. But see M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 11 (arguing that in certain cases the partial reproduction may not comply with the three-step test pursuant to art 5(5) of the Information Society Directive (2001/29/EC), art 10(2) of the WCT, and art 13 of the TRIPS Agreement).
  80. Section 63.
  81. W Bullinger, "§ 63" in A-A Wandtke and W Bullinger (eds), Praxiskommentar zum Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2022) paras 11f; A Dustmann, "§ 63" in A Nordemann, JB Nordemann, and C Czychowski (eds), Fromm/Nordemann: Urheberrecht (12th edn, Kohlhammer 2018) para 6. Cf Oberlandesgericht Brandenburg 15 October 1996, case 6 U 177/96 Stimme Brecht, (1997) 50 NJW 1162, 1163 (in the context of the quotation limitation, which is also subject to § 63).
  82. See eg T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 12; M Vogel, "§ 59" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) para 34; R Kirchmaier, "§ 59" in E-J Mestmäcker and E Schulze (eds), Urheberrecht (Luchterhand R 55 2011) para 7.
  83. T Dreier, "§ 59" in T Dreier and G Schulze (eds), Urheberrechtsgesetz (7th edn, Beck 2022) para 12.
  84. G Dreyer, "§ 59" in G Dreyer and others (eds), Heidelberger Kommentar Urheberrecht (4th edn, CF Müller 2018) para 20.
  85. H-P Götting, "§ 31" in U Loewenheim (ed), Handbuch des Urheberrechts (3rd edn, Beck 2021) para 44.
  86. Bundesgerichtshof 12 May 2011, case I ZR 53/10 Seilzirkus, (2012) 114 GRUR 58 [17].
  87. See, in particular, Bundesgerichtshof 27 November 1956, case I ZR 57/55 Morgenpost, 22 BGHZ 209, 215ff; Bundesgerichtshof 22 June 1995, case I ZR 119/93 Silberdistel, (1995) 97 GRUR 581, 582. See further A Ohly, "Where is the Birthday Train Heading? The Copyright-Design Interface in German Law" in G Karnell and others (eds), Liber Amicorum Jan Rosén (eddy.se ab 2016) 593ff.
  88. Bundesgerichtshof 13 November 2013, case I ZR 143/12 Geburtstagszug, 199 BGHZ 52 [26].
  89. Bundesgerichtshof 13 November 2013, case I ZR 143/12 Geburtstagszug, 199 BGHZ 52 [41].
  90. Bundesgerichtshof 12 May 2011, case I ZR 53/10 Seilzirkus, (2012) 114 GRUR 58 [19].
  91. Bundesgerichtshof 12 May 2011, case I ZR 53/10 Seilzirkus, (2012) 114 GRUR 58 [20].
  92. Bundesgerichtshof 12 May 2011, case I ZR 53/10 Seilzirkus, (2012) 114 GRUR 58 [20].
  93. Appeals court level or higher. Omitted here are cases where copyright protection was denied based on the now-abandoned "two-tier theory".
  94. Bundesgerichtshof 12 May 2011, case I ZR 53/10 Seilzirkus, (2012) 114 GRUR 58 [30].
  95. Oberlandesgericht Schleswig 11 September 2014, case 6 U 74/10 Geburtstagszug II, (2015) 15 GRUR-RR 1 [17]–[23].
  96. Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main 12 June 2019, case 11 U 51/18, (2019) 63 ZUM 787, 788f.
  97. Bundesgerichtshof 27 April 2017, case I ZR 247/15 AIDA Kussmund, (2017) 119 GRUR 798 [11].
  98. Oberlandesgericht Schleswig 11 September 2014, case 6 U 74/10 Geburtstagszug II, (2015) 15 GRUR-RR 1 [29]–[31]. Finding of copyright protection not challenged on appeal: Bundesgerichtshof 16 June 2016, case I ZR 122/14 Geburtstagskarawane, (2016) 118 GRUR 1291.
  99. Oberlandesgericht Köln 20 February 2015, case 6 U 131/14 Airbrush-Urnen, (2015) 15 GRUR-RR 275 [14]–[16].
  100. Oberlandesgericht Hamburg 14 October 2021, case 5 W 40/21 Grand Step Shoes, (2022) 124 GRUR 565 [22]–[26].
  101. Bundesgerichtshof 7 April 2022, case I ZR 222/20 Porsche 911, (2022) 124 GRUR 899 [26]–[32].
  102. Oberlandesgericht Hamburg 30 March 2023, case 5 U 84/21, (2023) 27 ZUM-RD 481.
  103. S Zentek, "Acht Jahrzehnte verkanntes Design im deutschen Urheberrecht: Die Geschichte des Schutzes von Gebrauchsgestaltungen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Nationalsozialismus" (doctoral thesis, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf 2015) 276. See also L Mezger, Die Schutzschwelle für Werke der angewandten Kunst nach deutschem und europäischem Recht (V&R unipress 2017) 60f ("hardly possible" in particular to keep track of the jurisprudence on designer furniture).
  104. Oberlandesgericht Hamburg 27 April 2011, case 5 U 26/09; affirmed in pertinent part on appeal: Bundesgerichtshof 5 November 2015, case I ZR 91/11 Marcel-Breuer­-Möbel II, (2016) 69 NJW 2335 [26]–[28].
  105. Oberlandesgericht Hamburg 30 March 2011, case 5 U 207/08; affirmed in pertinent part on appeal: Bundesgerichtshof 5 November 2015, case I ZR 76/11 Wagenfeld-Leuchte II, (2016) 69 NJW 2338 [20]–[22].
  106. Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf 30 May 2000, case 20 U 4/99 Spannring, (2001) 1 GRUR-RR 294, 296.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Ghana

Ghana

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Ghana relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Ghana must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Ghana and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Ghana, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Governing laws[edit]

Ghana's current borders were established by the 1900s as the British Gold Coast. The country became independent of the United Kingdom on 6 March 1957

Ghana has been a member of the Berne Convention since 11 October 1991, the World Trade Organization since 1 January 1995 and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 18 November 2006.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Copyright Act, 2005 (Act 690) as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of Ghana.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2]

General rules[edit]

Under the Copyright Act, 2005, No. 690,

  • The authors rights are protected for the life of the author and 70 years after the death of the author.[690/2005 Section 12(1)]
  • A jointly authored work is protected until 70 years after the death of the last surviving author.[690/2005 Section 12(2)]
  • Where copyright in a work is owned by a public corporation or other body corporate the term of protection of 70 years from when the work was made or first published, whichever is later.[690/2005 Section 13]
  • For an anonymous work or pseudonymous work, it is protected until 70 years have passed since the date of its publication or creation, whichever is latest.[690/2005 Section 14]
  • It is a audiovisual work or sound recording, and 70 years have passed since the date of its publication or creation, whichever is latest.[690/2005 Section 15]

Public domain: non-free[edit]

See also: Commons:Paying public domain

The following works belong to the public domain: works with expired terms of protection, works by authors who have renounced their rights, and foreign works that do not enjoy protection in the Republic.[690/2005 Section 38(1)] Subject to the payment of a fee that may be specified by the Minister a work that has fallen into the public domain may be used without any restriction.[690/2005 Section 38(3)] There shall be established by the Minister a fund for the deposit of any money that accrues from the payment of these fees.[690/2005 Section 38(4)] The fund shall be for the benefit of institutions that promote the arts, authors, performers, producers of sound recording, translators and the arts in general.[690/2005 Section 38(5)]

Folklore: non-free[edit]

An expression of folklore is protected against reproduction, communication to the public by performance, broadcasting, distribution by cable or other means, and adaptation, translation and other transformation.[690/2005 Section 4(1)] The rights of folklore are vested in the President on behalf of and in trust for the people of the Republic.[690/2005 Section 4(2)] These rights exist in perpetuity.[690/2005 Section 17]

A person who intends to use folklore for any purpose other than as permitted under section 19 shall apply to the [National Folklore] Board for permission in the prescribed form and the person shall pay a fee that the Board may determine.[690/2005 Section 64(1)] There shall be established a fund for the deposit of any fees that may be charged in respect of the use of folklore.[690/2005 Section 64(2)] The fund shall be managed by the Board and shall be used (a) for the preservation and promotion of folklore, and (b) for the promotion of indigenous arts.[690/2005 Section 64(3)]

Freedom of panorama[edit]

 Not OK. ({{NoFoP-Ghana}}) Article 19(1)(f) of the Copyrights Act, 2005 restricts freedom of panorama to cinema or television or in a broadcast by television.

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Ghana Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
  2. Copyright Act, 2005 (Act 690). Ghana (2005). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Greece

Greece

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Greece relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Greece must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Greece and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Greece, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Governing laws[edit]

Greece has been a member of the Berne Convention since 9 November 1920, the World Trade Organization since 1 January 1995 and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 14 March 2010.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed Law No. 2121/1993 on Copyright, Related rights and Cultural Matters (as amended up to Law No. 4531/2018) as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of Greece.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2]

Duration of copyright protection[edit]

Under Law No. 2121/1993 as amended up to Law No. 4531/2018,

  • Copyright lasts for the author’s life and for 70 years after his death, calculated from 1 January of the year after the author’s death.[2121/2018 Article 29(1)]
  • Copyright for works of joint authorship lasts for the life of the last surviving author and 70 years after his death, calculated from 1 January of the year after the death of the last surviving author.[2121/2018 Article 30(1)]
  • Copyright for musical compositions with words where the music and lyrics are created specifically for the composition is the same as for works of joint authorship.[2121/2018 Article 30(2)]
  • Copyright for anonymous and pseudonymous works lasts 70 years from 1 January of the year after the year when it was made lawfully accessible to the public, as long as the author is not identified in that period.[2121/2018 Article 31(1)]
  • The term of protection of audiovisual works expires 70 years after the death of the last survivor of the principal director, the author of the screenplay, the author of the dialogue and the composer of the music specifically created for use in the audiovisual work.[2121/2018 Article 31(3)]
  • After expiry of the period of copyright protection, the State, represented by the Minister of Culture, may exercise the rights relating to the acknowledgment of the author’s paternity and the rights relating to the protection of the integrity of the work deriving from the moral rights.[2121/2018 Article 29(2)] This clause may prevent the creation of certain types of derivative work, even after the copyright has expired, as the State has the right to prohibit any distortion, mutilation or other modification of the original work.
  • Any person who, after the expiry of copyright protection, for the first time lawfully publishes or lawfully communicates to the public a previously unpublished work, shall benefit from a protection equivalent to the economic rights of the author. The term of the protection is 25 years from the time when the work was first lawfully published or lawfully communicated to the public and is calculated from 1 January of the year after the first lawful publication or communication to the public”.[2121/2018 Article 51A]

Work for hire[edit]

The economic right to works created by employees (under any work relation) of the Government or a legal entity of public law in execution of their duties is transferred to the employer, unless provided otherwise by contract.[2121/2018 Article 8]

Collective work[edit]

The term “collective work” shall designate any work created through the independent contribution of several authors acting under the intellectual direction and coordination of one natural person. That natural person shall be the initial right holder of the economic right and the moral right in the collective work. Each author of a contribution shall be the initial right holder of the economic right and the moral right in his own contribution, provided that that contribution is capable of separate exploitation.[2121/2018 Article 7(2)]

Not protected[edit]

Under Law No. 2121/1993 as amended up to Law No. 4531/2018, there is no copyright protection for official texts expressive of the authority of the State, notably legislative, administrative or judicial texts, nor for expressions of folklore, news information or simple facts and data.[2121/2018 Article 2.5]

Monuments & antiquities[edit]

Non copyright restrictions: Producing pictures of monuments and antiquities that belong to the Greek State to be disseminated to the public for profit, including publishing on the internet for profit, requires a license from the Archaeological Receipts Fund according to July 2020 Law (4708/2020, Government Gazette issue 140/Α/21-7-2020 part B article 20). Photography of ancient monuments and antiquities that belong to the Greek State (all dating before 1453 and most dating before 1830 (Law 3028/2002, Government Gazette issue 153/Α/28-6-2002 articles 2 & 7)) is allowed to be taken for free when non-professional equipment is being used but publishing on the internet is allowed for free when no commercial or economical purpose exists or for a limit of up to 5 years under payment of a renewable fee according to the latest Ministerial Decision in force published in Government Gazette issue B-3046/2011-12-30 (chapter 1, article 5). The second Ministerial Decision in force has been issued in 2019 356481/254593/7509/2927/2019 - Government Gazette issue 2812/Β/4-7-2019.

Copyright tags[edit]

  • {{PD-GreekGov}} – for images which are part of official legislative, administrative or judicial documents issued by the Greek Government.

Currency[edit]

 Not OK According to the Greek legislation, neither the Bank of Greece not any other Greek authority is competent to provide you or any other interested party with any kind of permission to use the image of the Greek drachmae banknotes. However, without prejudice to the moral right of the designer recognized under Greek law (Law 2121/1993, as in force), there is no legal provision prohibiting the reproduction of drachmae banknotes.

Freedom of panorama[edit]

 Not OK {{NoFoP-Greece}}

Note: Please tag Greek no-FoP deletion requests: <noinclude>[[Category:Greek FOP cases/pending]]</noinclude>

Under Law No. 2121/1993 as amended up to Law 5043/2023:

The occasional reproduction and communication by the mass media of images of architectural works, fine art works, photographs or works of applied art, which are sited permanently in a public place, shall be permissible, without the consent of the author and without payment.

— [2121/2023 Article 26]

It remains unclear what exactly "occasional reproduction and communication by the mass media" encompasses. Even if "communication by the mass media" is seen as an extension of mere "reproduction", the interpretation of "occasional" reproduction remain to be clarified by jurisdiction or an scholarly interpretation. See talk page for a discussion.

Copyright ends 70 years after the author's death. After that, the government might claim moral rights under certain conditions.[2121/2018 Article 29(2)]

Threshold of originality[edit]

The term “work” is defined as including any original intellectual creation expressed in any form, including alterations of other works as well as collections of works, provided that the selection or the arrangement of such collections is original.[3]

Originality is understood by Greek jurisprudence as a notion of “statistical uniqueness”, which means that the work involves skill, labor and judgment emanating from the author and that no other person, acting under the same circumstances, could produce the exact same work.[4]

Stamps[edit]

Copyrighted Stamps by artists deceased more than 70 years ago (or pseudonymously designed more than 70 years ago, before 1 January 1954) are free. The copyright status of all other stamps issued before 1970 is disputed (possibly {{PD-GreekGov}} as government administrative documents). Stamps issued since 1970 follow the 70 years pma rule.

See also[edit]

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Greece Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-11.
  2. Law No. 2121/1993 on Copyright, Related rights and Cultural Matters (as amended up to Law No. 4531/2018). Greece (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-11.
  3. Greece: Copyright Act. Retrieved on 2019-12-21.
  4. Copyright Law. Retrieved on 2019-12-21.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Grenada

Grenada

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Grenada relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Grenada must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Grenada and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Grenada, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background[edit]

The French colonized Grenada in 1650. In 1763 the island was ceded to the British. From 1958 to 1962 Grenada was part of the Federation of the West Indies. Grenada gained full autonomy over its internal affairs on 3 March 1967, and gained independence on 7 February 1974.

Grenada has been a member of the World Trade Organization since 22 February 1996 and the Berne Convention since 22 September 1998.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Copyright Act (Cap. 67, Act No. 21 of 2011) as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of Grenada.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] The 2011 act repealed the Copyright Act 1988.[21/2011 Section 58]

General rules[edit]

Under the Copyright Act (Cap. 67, Act No. 21 of 2011),

  • Subject to subsections (2) to (5), rights are protected during the life of the author and for 50 years after his death.[21/2011 Section 21(1)]
  • A work of joint authorship is protected during the life of the last surviving author and for 50 years after his death.[21/2011 Section 21(2)]
  • A collective work, other than a work of applied art or a photographic work, and an audiovisual work, is protected for (a) 50 years from the date on which the work was first published; (b) 50 years from the date on which the work was first made available to the public, if the work has not been published before 25 years after its making; or (c) 50 years from the making of the work, if the work had neither been made available to the public, nor published before 25 years after its making.[21/2011 Section 21(3)]
  • A work published anonymously or under a pseudonym is protected for (a) 50 years from the date on which the work was first published; (b) 50 years from the date on which the work was first made available to the public, if the work has not been published before 25 years after its making; or (c) 50 years from the making of the work, if the work had neither been made available to the public, nor published before 25 years after its making.[21/2011 Section 21(4)]
  • A work of applied art or a photographic work is protected for 25 years from the making of the work.[21/2011 Section 21(5)]

Every period provided for under the preceding subsections shall run to the end of the calendar year in which it would otherwise expire.[21/2011 Section 21(6)]

Not protected[edit]

No protection shall extend under this Act to ... any official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, as well as any official translation thereof.[21/2011 Section 7(1b)].

Freedom of panorama[edit]

OK. Under the Copyright Act (Cap. 67, Act No. 21 of 2011),

  • Copyright is a property right which subsists in literary and artistic works.[21/2011 Section 5(1)] This includes works of architecture.[21/2011 Section 5(1)(g)]
  • The inclusion of an artistic work in a work, broadcast or communication to the public shall not be considered an infringement if the artistic work (a) is permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public; or (b) is included in the work, broadcast or communication to the public by way only of background or as incidental to the essential matters represented.[21/2011 Section 19]

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Grenada Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
  2. Copyright Act (Cap. 67, Act No. 21 of 2011). Grenada (2011). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Guatemala

Guatemala

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Guatemala relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Guatemala must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Guatemala and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Guatemala, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background[edit]

The territory of modern Guatemala was conquered by the Spanish in the 16th century. Guatemala attained independence in 1821 as part of the Federal Republic of Central America, which dissolved by 1841.

Guatemala has been a member of the Universal Copyright Convention since 28 October 1964, the World Trade Organization since 21 July 1995, the Berne Convention since 28 July 1997 and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 4 February 2003.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Law on Copyright and Related Rights (Decree No. 33-98, as amended up to Decree No. 11-2006 of the Congress of the Republic) as the main copyright law enacted by the legislature of Guatemala.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2]

General rules[edit]

Under Decree Number 33-98 as amended up to 2006,

  • Except as otherwise provided in this Act, rights are protected for the life of the author plus 75 years after his death.[33-98/2006 Art.43]
  • With works with two or more authors, the period of protection is based on death of the last surviving coauthor.[33-98/2006 Art.43]
  • With computer programs and collective works, the term of protection is 75 years from the first publication or, if not published, from completion of the work.[33-98/2006 Art.44]
  • With anonymous or pseudonymous works, the term of protection starts from first publication or, failing that, from creation.[33-98/2006 Art.44]
  • With audiovisual works, the period is counted from the first authorized publication of the work, provided that such publication occurs within 75 years after execution. Otherwise, the period is counted from the performance of the work.[33-98/2006 Art.47]

The above terms of protection are computed from 1 January of the year following that of the event they are based on.[33-98/2006 Art.48]

The State and its public entities, municipalities, universities and other educational establishments in the country, shall enjoy the protection established by law.[33-98/2006 Art.49]

Freedom of panorama[edit]

 Not OK. Pictorial representations of public art and architecture are permitted for personal use only. Effectively disallows commercial uses, which Commons:Licensing requires.

Section 64 of Guatemala's copyright law as of 2006 says:

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

d) The reproduction for personal use of a work of art permanently exhibited in public places or on the exterior façade of buildings, made by means of an art different from that used in the making of 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".[33-98/2006 Art.64(d)]

Original language (Spanish) text:

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 para uso personal de una obra de arte expuesta en forma permanente en lugares públicos o en la fachada exterior de edificios, ejecutada por medio de un arte que sea distinto al empleado para la elaboración del original, siempre que se indique el nombre del autor, si se conociere, así como el título de la obra, si lo tiene, y el lugar donde se encuentra.

See the discussions here and here for more information.

See also[edit]

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Guatemala Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-08.
  2. Law on Copyright and Related Rights (Decree No. 33-98, as amended up to Decree No. 11-2006 of the Congress of the Republic). Guatemala (2006). Retrieved on 2018-11-08.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Bailiwick of Guernsey

Bailiwick of Guernsey

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of the Bailiwick of Guernsey relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in the Bailiwick of Guernsey must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Guernsey and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Guernsey, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Governing laws[edit]

Guernsey is a "territory for which the United Kingdom is responsible" rather than a sovereign state.[1] It is not a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).[2] Copyright laws are defined by the Copyright (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Ordinance, 2005.[3] The extent of law covers the whole Bailiwick, and therefore covers Guernsey, Sark, and Alderney (and for the avoidance of doubt, Herm, Jethou, Brecqhou, Burhou and any other territories of the Bailiwick).

General rules[edit]

Under the Copyright (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Ordinance, 2005,

  • Copyright in literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works expires at the end of the period of 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author dies.[2005 Section 13 (1)]
  • If the work is of unknown authorship, copyright expires at the end of the period of 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was made, or if during that period the work is made available to the public, at the end of the period of 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which it is first so made available.[2005 Section 13 (3)]
  • If the work is computer-generated, copyright expires at the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was made.[ Section 13 (7)]
  • For a work of joint authorship, copyright expires at the end of the period of 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last surviving known author dies.[2005 Section 13 (8)]
  • For sound recordings, copyright expires at the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the recording is made, published or communicated to the public, whichever is later.[2005 Section 14]
  • For films, copyright expires as with a work of joint authorship, where the co-authors are considered to be the principal director, the author of the screenplay, the author of the dialogue, and the composer of music specially created for and used in the film.[2005 Section 15]

Freedom of panorama[edit]

OK: for buildings, sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship.  Not OK: for photographs, paintings etc.

Under the Copyright (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Ordinance, 2005, 82: representation of certain artistic works on public display",

  • This section applies to (a) buildings, and (b) sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.[2005 Section 82(1)]
  • The copyright in any of those works is not infringed by (a) making a graphic work representing it (b) making a photograph or film of it, or (c) making a broadcast of a visual image of it.[2005 Section 82(2)]
  • Nor is the copyright infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the communication to the public, of anything whose making was, by virtue of this section, not an infringement of the copyright.[2005 Section 82(3)]

Citations[edit]

  1. Fact sheet on the UK's relationship with the Crown Dependencies. Ministry of Justice. Retrieved on 25 August 2014.
  2. WIPO Lex. Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
  3. Copyright (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Ordinance, 2005. Royal Court of Guernsey and the Law Officers of the Crown. Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Guinea-Bissau

Guinea-Bissau

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Guinea-Bissau relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Guinea-Bissau must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Guinea-Bissau and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Guinea-Bissau, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background[edit]

The present Guinea-Bissau was colonized as Portuguese Guinea in the 19th century. It declared independence in 1973, and this was fully recognized in 1974. The name of the capital, Bissau, is added to the name to avoid confusion with Guinea (formerly French Guinea).

Guinea-Bissau has been a member of the Berne Convention since 22 July 1991, the World Trade Organization since 31 May 1995 and the Bangui Agreement since 8 July 1998.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Portuguese Copyright Code (approved by Decree-Law No. 46.980 of March 28, 1972) as the main copyright law enacted by the legislature of Guinea-Bissau.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] The decree-law of 1972 approved and reproduced Law No. 46980 of April 27, 1966, issued by the colonial government of Portuguese Guinea.[2]

As of 2013 there were still no signs of any replacement of the colonial copyright Law No. 46,980 of April 27, 1966.[3]

General rules[edit]

Under the 1972 version of the Copyright Code,

  • The duration of protection shall cover the life of the author and 50 years following his death.[46.980/1972 Article 25]
  • Copyright in a work of joint authorship shall last for the lifetime of its authors and shall continue for 50 years after the death of the last surviving co­author.[46.980/1972 Article 30]
  • Copyright for a collective work, as a whole, shall be 50 years following the first publication or disclosure of the work, or of each volume, issue or installment of the work if these different parts are published separately at different times.[46.980/1972 Article 31, 36]
  • If, however, the collective work belongs to an individual operator, copyright shall last for the lifetime of the author and for another 50 years following his death.[46.980/1972 Article 31]
  • The duration of copyright of the individual contribution of each co­author in works of joint authorship or collective works is the life of the author and 50 years following his death.[46.980/1972 Article 32]
  • The duration of protection of posthumous works shall cease 50 years after the death of the author.[46.980/1972 Article 33]
  • The duration of protection of anonymous, cryptic or pseudonymous works shall be 50 years following disclosure or publication.[46.980/1972 Article 34]

The periods of protection shall only commence on 1 January of the year following that in which the death or other events referred to in these Articles occurred.[46.980/1972 Article 35]

Currency[edit]

 Unsure West African CFA franc used in Guinea-Bissau has close ties to France. French Cour de Cassation ruled in 2002 that franc is not covered by Copyright Law[4], but it is not known if it also applies to West African CFA franc.

See also: COM:CUR France

Freedom of panorama[edit]

OK: For 3D objects. The applicable law still is the colonial copyright law, which says "The reproduction and publication by the press, cinema, television or any other mean, of the image of works of architecture or any other kind of plastic arts already divulged by the author is free".[46.980/1972 Article 152]

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Guinea-Bissau Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
  2. a b Copyright Code (approved by Decree-Law No. 46.980 of March 28, 1972). Guinea-Bissau (1972). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
  3. Akester, Patrícia (2013) Direito de Autor em Portugal, nos PALOP, na União Europeia e nos Tratados Internacionais, p. 234
  4. [1]
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Guinea

Guinea

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Guinea relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Guinea must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Guinea and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Guinea, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background[edit]

France established control of Guinea in the late 19th century and administered the region as a territory within French West Africa. After a referendum, Guinea became independent on 2 October 1958.

Guinea has been a member of the Berne Convention since 20 November 1980, the World Trade Organization since 25 October 1995 and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 25 May 2002.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed Act No. 043/APN/CP of August 9, 1980, adopting Provisions Relating to Copyright and Neighboring Rights as the main copyright law enacted by the legislature of Guinea.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2]

General terms[edit]

  • Copyright shall subsist during the lifetime of the author and for 80 calendar years from the end of the year of his death. In the case of a work of joint authorship, the only date taken into consideration for the calculation of the term of protection shall be that of the death of the last surviving coauthor.[1980 Article 42]
  • Copyright shall subsist for 80 calendar years from the end of the year in which the work is lawfully made accessible to the public in the case of anonymous or pseudonymous works, cinematographic works; posthumous works and collective works.[1980 Article 43 (a)]
  • Copyright shall subsist for 40 calendar years from the end of the year of the author's death in the case of photographic works and works of applied art.[1980 Article 43 (b)]

Folklore: not free[edit]

Folklore belongs to the national heritage, where "folklore" means all literary and artistic creations made by authors presumed to be of Guinean nationality, passed from generation to generation and constituting one of the basic elements of the traditional Guinean cultural heritage. Public performance or direct or indirect fixation of folklore with a view to its exploitation for profit-making purposes shall require the prior authorization of the BGDA (Guinean Copyright Office) obtainable against payment of a fee.[1980 Article 5]

Domaine Public Payant[edit]

See also: Commons:Paying public domain

On expiry of the terms of protection referred to in Articles 42 and 43, during which a recognized exclusive right belongs to authors, their heirs or successors in title, the works of the author shall fall into the public domain. Exploitation of works in the public domain shall be subject to respect for moral rights, prior declaration and payment of a fee, the product of which shall be paid to the BGDA and used for cultural and social purposes for the benefit of authors. The right of exploitation or performance of works in the public domain shall be administered by the BGDA.[1980 Article 45]

Freedom of panorama[edit]

 Not OK: Only incidental use is allowed.

  • It shall be lawful, to the extent justified by the informatory purpose, to record, repro­duce and communicate to the public literary, scientific or artistic works that may be seen or heard in the reporting of current events by means of photography, cinematography, or sound or visual broadcasting.[1980 Article 13]
  • It shall be lawful to reproduce in a film or in a television broadcast and to communicate to the public works of figurative art permanently located in a public place, or whose inclusion in the film or broadcast is only by way of background or is incidental to the essential matters represented.[1980 Article 14]

See also[edit]

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Guinea Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
  2. Act No. 043/APN/CP of August 9, 1980, adopting Provisions Relating to Copyright and Neighboring Rights. Guinea (1980). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Text transcluded from
COM:Guyana

Guyana

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Guyana relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Guyana must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Guyana and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Guyana, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background[edit]

Guyana was colonized by the Dutch, then came under British control in the late 18th century. It was governed as British Guiana until it gained independence as Guyana on 26 May 1966.

Guyana has been a member of the Berne Convention since 25 October 1994 and the World Trade Organization since 1 January 1995.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the British Copyright Act 1956 (Cap. 74) as the main IP law enacted by the legislature.[1] WIPO holds the text of this act in their WIPO Lex database.[2] WIPO also lists the The Copyright (British Guiana) Order 1966 (Order No. 79 of 1966) (1966), which extends and modifies the 1956 act. WIPO holds the text of this order in their WIPO Lex database.[3] The changes in the 1966 order generally do not affect definitions of protected works or durations of protection.

General rules[edit]

Under the Copyright Act 1956, as modified by the order of 1966,

  • Copyright in an original literary, dramatic or musical work shall continue to subsist until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author died, and shall then expire.[74/1956 Section 2(3)]
  • However, if before the death of the author none of the following acts had been done, (a) the publication of the work (b) the performance of the work in public (c) the offer for sale to the public of records of the work and (d) the broadcasting of the work, the copyright shall continue to subsist until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year which includes the earliest occasion on which one of those acts is done.[74/1956 Section 2(3)]
  • Artistic works include paintings, sculptures, drawings, engravings and photographs; works of architecture, being either buildings or models for buildings; and works of artistic craftsmanship.[74/1956 Section 3(1)]
    • Copyright in artistic works generally subsists until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author died.[74/1956 Section 3(4)]
    • Copyright in an engraving that was not published before the death of the author subsists until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which it was first published.[74/1956 Section 3(4a)]
    • Copyright in a photograph continues to subsist until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the photograph is first published.[74/1956 Section 3(4b)]
  • Copyright shall subsist in a sound recording until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the recording is first published, and shall then expire.[74/1956 Section 12(3)]
  • Copyright in a cinematograph film shall continue to subsist until the film is published and thereafter until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year which includes the date of its first publication.[79/1966 Section 13(3)]

Freedom of panorama[edit]

OK for buildings, sculpture and applied art, not for paintings, drawings, engravings or photographs.

  • The copyright of a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship other than a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph which is permanently situated 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 the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast.[74/1956 Section 9(3)]
  • The copyright in a work of architecture is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the work, or the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast.[74/1956 Section 9(4)]
  • Without prejudice to the two last preceding subsections, the copyright in an artistic work is not infringed by the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast, if its inclusion therein is only by way of background or is otherwise only incidental to the principal matters represented in the film or broadcast.[74/1956 Section 9(5)]

Citations[edit]

  1. a b Guyana Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
  2. Copyright Act 1956 (Cap. 74). Guyana (1956). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
  3. The Copyright (British Guiana) Order 1966 (Order No. 79 of 1966) (1966). Retrieved on 2018-12-12.
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. See also: Commons:General disclaimer
Copyright rules by territory

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O
P Q R Sa-Sl So-Sy T U V W X Y Z