Commons talk:Freedom of panorama

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Shortcut: CT:FOP

alt= link=
Archives
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14


"non-fop" in UAE[edit]

Thousands of pictures where deleted because of assumption of non-fop. In the UAE non-fop case, an in others, there is no evidence at all, that there is a non-fop law, no evidence ist made by the ones who deleted these files. Because there is no proof of non-fop, some people here are arguing that the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works is forcing the non-fop actions. If this argument, which applies to many files, would be true, then *all* Countries, which signed the Berne Convention, would have a non-fop, and that are a lot of countries, and the people who are trying to delete all presumed non-fop pictures, should also take care of the hundred thousands of pictures from all of the countries who signed the Berne convention: all files from these countries have to be deleted from wiki commons. So, i still have no clue why some pictures are deleted and other pictures, especially the hundred thousands of photographs from the countries which signed the Berne Convention are still seen here on wiki commons.

Ronald Ali-Khan 21:46, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Photographs are typically derivative works of what they are photographing if that is a copyrighted work. The Berne Convention says they are, except that, under certain conditions, the laws of signing nations can exempt photographs from being derivative works. The US and many other nations take advantage of that exemption, but the UAE and many others don't.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Macau?[edit]

Noticed Macau wasn't listed, looking for some pointers to its copyright law, and on finding no entry went looking. The relevant decree is here: DECREE-LAW 43/99/M of August 16, 1999, and the relevant parts seem to be

Article 50, Personal and Material Eligibility
...
3. The following shall in any case enjoy the protection granted by the law of Macao:
a) works that are first or simultaneously published in Macao;
b) works of architecture built within the Territory;
c) works of art incorporated in buildings erected within the Territory;
d) audiovisual works produced by residents of the Territory.
Article 61, Fair Use
The following shall be lawful without the consent of the author:
...
j) the fixation of works of art located in public places by means of photography, videography, cinematography or other similar means;

Seems similar to other legal systems, in particular to Hong Kong, the other SAR of China whose laws date from about the same time. Can't see anything else in that file that's relevant but I could have overlooked something. Could Macau be added based on this?--JohnBlackburne (talk) 00:42, 12 November 2014 (UTC)