Commons:Droit d'auteur par territoire/Pérou

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Peru and the translation is 25% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Peru and have to be approved by a translation administrator.
Outdated translations are marked like this.

Cette page fournit un aperçu des règles de droit d'auteur du Pérou applicables au téléchargement d'œuvres sur Wikimedia Commons. Notez que toute œuvre originaire du Pérou doit appartenir au domaine public ou être disponible sous licence libre au Pérou et aux États-Unis avant de pouvoir être téléchargée sur Wikimedia Commons. En cas de doute sur le statut de droit d'auteur d'une œuvre du Pérou, reportez-vous aux lois applicables pour plus de précisions.

Contexte

Les espagnols ont conquis la région au 16e siècle. Le Pérou a acquis sont indépendance en 1824. La première loi sur le droit d'auteur, datant de 1849, a été signée sous le gouvernement de Ramón Castilla[1]. Le 31 octobre 1961, l'administration de Manuel Prado à mis à jour la seconde loi sur le droit d'auteur, restée en vigueur jusqu'en 1996[2].

Le Pérou est membre de la Convention universelle sur le droit d'auteur (en anglais) depuis le 16 octobre 1963, de la Convention de Berne depuis le 20 août 1988, de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce depuis le 1er janvier 1995 et du Traité de l'OMPI sur le droit d'auteur depuis le 6 mars 2002.

En 2018, l'Organisation mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle (OMPI), une agence des Nations Unies, dit que la Loi sur le droit d'auteur (décret législatif n° 822) de 1996 était la principale loi sur le droit d'auteur promulguée par la législature du Pérou.[3][4] Il a été modifié notamment par,

  • Loi n° 30276 modifiant la loi sur le droit d'auteur (décret législatif n° 822)
  • Décret-loi n° 1076 du 27 juin 2008 sur la loi modificative du du décret-loi n° 822
  • Loi n° 28571 modifiant les articles 188 et 189 de la loi sur le droit d'auteur (décret-loi n° 822 du 23 avril 1996)

Celles-ci ne semblent pas affecter les définitions des œuvres protégées ni les durées de protection.

Durées

La première loi péruvienne sur le droit d'auteur a été signée en 1849 sous le gouvernement de Ramón Castilla et protégeait les droits de l'auteur de son vivant et pendant 20 ans après sa mort[5]. Plusieurs années plus tard, une version mise à jour a été signée sous l'administration de Manuel Prado a prolongé la durée des droits d'auteur à 50 ans après la mort de l'auteur[5]. La loi s'applique aux œuvres des détenteurs de la nationalité péruvienne ou, dans le cas des citoyens non péruviens, aux personnes résidant dans le pays[24518/1986 Art. 6]. Les œuvres posthumes étaient protégées pendant une durée d'au moins 30 ans[13714/1961 Art. 28]. En 1986, le gouvernement d'Alan Garcia a annoncé que les droits d'exploitation sur les oeuvres littéraires et intellectuelles étaient prolongés pour correspondre à la durée de vie des enfants, des conjoints et des parents de l'auteur, par la loi n°24518 (ne faisant pas preuve de rétroactivité pour les personnes décédées avant la date correspondante selon l'article 189 de la constitution de 1979)[24518/1986 Art. 1][6].
D'après l'ancienne loi, entrée en vigueur le 1er novembre 1962, les œuvres expiraient avant 1996 (et à l'époque une nouvelle protection de 70 ans était imposée par l'administration d'Alberto Fujimori). En 1993, la Communauté Andine a étendu la protection des œuvres littéraires aux bases de données[Decision 351 Art. 58]. Pour leur protection, l'utilisation de notice ou de règlements avec le bureau des droits d'auteur n'est pas nécessaire, sauf pour certaines œuvres[13714/1961 Art. 9]. Cependant, certaines œuvres se voient appliquer la règle du délai le plus court dans certains cas[13714/1961 Art. 21]. D'après la loi d'octobre 1961, régie en 1962 par le Décret suprême n°061-62-ED pour la création du Registre national du droit d'auteur (Registro Nacional de Derecho de Autor, RNDA) :

Durations from 1961 law for non-renewed works

Based on the old law starting on 1 November 1962, works that expired before 1996 are non-renewed (and by which time a new 70 year protection was imposed by the Alberto Fujimori administration). For old works protection the use of notices or regulations with the copyright office is not necessary, except in some works. [13714/1961 Art. 9] Also, in 1994 Peru adopted Decision 351 of the Andean Community, forces that the databases are not excluded as literary works.[Decision 351 Art. 58 and DS No 03-94-ITINC] Unpublished works of an author who died after 1946 or any unpublished draft since 1996 are not subject to the 1961 law. Retrieved from law of October 1961 regulated in 1962 by Supreme Decree No. 061-62-ED for creation of National Copyright Register (Registro Nacional de Derecho de Autor, RNDA, restructured in 1992 as National Institute of Jurisdiction and Protection of Intellectual Property or Indecopi):

  • Œuvres personnelles ou de collaboration : 50 ans après la mort du dernier auteur survivant antérieure au 1er janvier 1946[13714/1961 Art. 25]. Les œuvres posthumes publiées avant 1966 étaient protégées pendant une durée d'au moins 30 ans[13714/1961 Art. 28].
  • Œuvres du gouvernement et des entités publiques : 25 ans à partir de la première publication avant 1971[13714/1961 Art. 24]. Pour les œuvres collectives, l'éditeur conserve la propriété[13714/1961 Art. 11].
  • Œuvres anonymes : 15 ans après la première publication avant 1976 (si l'auteur n'est jamais révélé)[13714/1961 Art. 12 and 30]. Ceci s'applique aussi aux photos non enregistrées ne portant pas la mention "Ne pas reproduire".

Some works apply rule of the shorter term.[13714/1961 Art. 21] There are special terms of protection for certain creations:

  • Photographies : 20 ans à partir de la première publication sans exclusivité dans du contenu littéraire ou scientifique avant 1976[13714/1961 Art. 27], que l'auteur soit vivant ou non[7]. Les droits exclusifs de circulation pour les éditoriaux de presse sont de 5 ans[13714/196 Art. 44].
  • Œuvres cinématographiques : 25 ans après sa publication avant 1971[13714/1961 Art. 26]. Pour être prise en compte, elle doit contenir le nom d'une personne physique ou morale, la direction artistique, les auteurs des dialogues, la musique, les acteurs et la date de la première projection[13714/1961 Art. 25]. Le producteur conserve les droits sur l’œuvre et les termes excluent la projection, ainsi que la création littéraire, et la bande-son pour les utilisations indépendantes de l'œuvre[13714/1961 Art. 45 and 48].
  • Œuvres phonographiques : 50 ans après la mort du dernier auteur survivant avant le 1er janvier 1946. Pour être pris en compte, elle doit contenir le nom de l’œuvre, l'auteur, des artistes, de l'association, la date, le lieu et l'enregistrement et le nom de l'entreprise.[13714/1961 Art. 54]
  • Slogans et phrases : "Durant la période pendant laquelle elle finance la publication de l’œuvre d'art". Ils sont donc traités comme des "marques déposées"[13714/1961 Art. 31 and 61].[8]
  • Le droit publication sont effectifs 5 ans à partir de la première publication d’œuvres du domaine public non publiées[13714/1961 Art. 16].

Durées, depuis la loi de 1996

Selon la loi de 1996,

  • Les droits patrimoniaux durent toute la vie de l’auteur et 70 ans après sa mort.[822/1996 Art.52]
  • En ce qui concerne les œuvres collectives, les programmes d’ordinateur et les œuvres audiovisuelles, les droits patrimoniaux s’éteignent 70 ans après la première publication ou, à défaut, après la date d’achèvement de l’œuvre.[822/1996 Art.54]
  • En ce qui concerne les œuvres anonymes et pseudonymes, la durée de la protection est de 70 ans à compter de l’année de la divulgation de l’œuvre, sauf si l’auteur révèle son identité avant le terme de cette période, auquel cas les dispositions de l’article précédent s’appliquent.[822/1996 Art.53]

Les délais fixés dans le présent chapitre sont calculés à partir du 1er janvier de l’année qui suit celle de la mort de l’auteur ou, selon le cas, celle de la divulgation, de la publication ou de l’achèvement de l’œuvre.[822/1996 Art.56]

  • La protection conférée par le présent chapitre dure toute la vie de l’artiste interprète ou exécutant et 70 ans après sa mort, à compter du 1er janvier de l’année qui suit le décès. À l’expiration de ce délai, l’interprétation ou exécution entre dans le domaine public.[822/1996 Art.135]
  • La durée de la protection conférée au producteur de phonogrammes est de 70 ans à compter du 1er janvier de l’année qui suit celle de la première publication du phonogramme.[822/1996 Art.139]

La durée de la protection conférée par le présent chapitre [Organismes de radiodiffusion] est de 70 ans à compter du 1er janvier de l’année qui suit celle de l’émission ou de la transmission.[822/1996 Art.142]

  • Any video, whether it qualifies as an "audiovisual work" or not, is protected until 70 years after the publication (or its creation, if not published in that time).[822/1996 Art.143]
  • Quiconque fait une photographie ou effectue une autre fixation obtenue par un procédé analogue, qui n’a pas le caractère d’œuvre selon la définition établie dans la présente loi, jouit du droit exclusif d’autoriser sa reproduction, sa distribution ou sa communication au public dans les mêmes conditions que celles dont bénéficient les photographes. La durée de ce droit est de 70 ans à compter du 1er janvier de l’année qui suit celle de la réalisation de la photographie.[822/1996 Art.144]

Œuvre : toute création intellectuelle, personnelle et originale, qui est susceptible d’être divulguée ou reproduite sous une forme quelconque, connue ou non encore connue.[822/1996 Art.2.17]

  • Par la présente loi, il est reconnu un droit d’exploitation sur les enregistrements d’images en mouvement, accompagnées ou non de sons, qui ne sont pas des créations pouvant être qualifiées d’œuvres audiovisuelles. La durée des droits reconnus dans le présent article est de 70 ans à compter du 1er janvier de l’année qui suit celle de la divulgation de l’enregistrement ou, s’il n’a pas été divulgué, celle de sa réalisation.[822/1996 Art.143]
  • Quiconque publie pour la première fois une œuvre inédite appartenant au domaine public a sur elle les mêmes droits d’exploitation que ceux qu’aurait eus l’auteur de l’œuvre. La durée des droits reconnus dans le présent article est de 10 ans à compter du 1er janvier de l’année qui suit celle de la publication.[822/1996 Art.145]

About public domain

Resolution N° 097-1999/TPI-INDECOPI indicates that even if a work is in the public domain, the moral rights of a work prevail. This file mentions a case in which Indecopi fined an advertising company for using excerpts from Van Gogh self-portrait. This painting was mutilated without attribution for a commercial for a mass circulation newspaper.

About extinction of domain of criminal works

Legally since 2007,[9] the Peruvian State can apply extinction of domain of assets obtained by criminal organizations as a result of terrorism.[DL 1373, previously DL 25475 and DL 992, see Art 102 of Peruvian Penal Code as 2021)] Under civil law, a patrimonial right of the owner constitutes an "furniture" (asset).[Article 886 clause 6 of Peruvian Civil Code as 2018; see also Article 819.5 of Peruvian Civil Code of 1936] The Ministry of Justice states that those furniture considered as "criminal patrimonials" are not subject to the right of ownership,[10] and the application of the extinguishment of assets of questionable origin has a lower threshold in accordance with Sentencia Plenaria Casatoria 1-2017/CIJ-433 which cites Article 10 of this legislative decree as "criminal activity that produces money, goods, effects or profits" and "do not [require] that the illicit activities that produced the money, goods, effects or proceeds are under investigation, prosecuted or have been the subject of a conviction". This is relevant for the Shining Path, since this terrorist organization becoming similar as a legal entity is prohibited from obtaining patrimonial assets, including work for hire, and meets the requirements of article 30 (and consequently article 9a) of DL 822 because this assets cannot be exploited commercially within national legal system, as well as outside the country due to its legal effect.[11]

About applied works

The copyright protection is independent and compatible with industrial works protection that may exist for useful articles.[822/1996 Art.4a] In general, the "originality" threshold of recent designs (adding handicrafts, gastronomy and clothing) is low for industrial protection and high for copyright (see COM:TOO Peru).[12] Resolution N° 063-2001/TPI-INDECOPI indicates that fashion design in industrially useful objects are "applied works" and would receive double protection except the if its trend of applied art is already accessible to the public and lacks novelty to be protected as industrial property. In this case, copyright corresponds exclusively to the signs as original artistic or literary work in text, images, logotypes, 3D forms and colors but not to useful articles per se.[823/1996 Art. 128 and 136]

For those that do not constitute an artistic work, they are industrially protected ("propiedad industrial"). If the work is ornamental, the non-copyright protection will be for 10 years post-registration (if never published before the registration);[823/1996 Art. 109] if the work is patented as industrial, 20 years post-registration.[13] Because the industrial objects are often similar to others, they don't usually receive fashion design protection because their are below the distinctive umbral: "[the sign] is not endowed with the necessary attributes to be the means by which to identify and differentiate the products it is intended to distinguish from others offered for mass-market". See Resolution N° 16543-2010/DSD-INDECOPI.[14] Otherwise, if any sign is above the artistic originality threshold, the principle of "which best privilege for their author" in copyrighted artistic works prevails.[15]

Termes

Œuvres individuelles

Date de la mort de l'auteur Date de publication Bandeau de licence
avant 1er novembre 1931
date QS:P,+1931-11-01T00:00:00Z/7,P1326,+1931-11-01T00:00:00Z/11
N'importe quand[note 1]  {{PD-Peru-1961law}}
 {{PD-old-auto-unpublished|deathyear=death year}}
du 1er novembre 1931 au 31 décembre 1939 avant 2 janvier 1926  {{PD-US-expired|country=PE|hide_us_warning|deathyear=death year}}
or, for 19th-century works without a definite date:
 {{PD-old-assumed}}
du 2 janvier 1926 au 31 décembre 1939[note 2]  {{PD-Peru-1961law}}
 {{PD-old-auto-expired|deathyear=death year}}
du 1er janvier 1940 au 31 décembre 1965 The work was in domain public in Peru on the date of URAA restoration (January 1, 1996) because copyright of the posthumous work was valid for 30 years from its publication before December 31, 1965.[13714/1961 Art. 28] The situation in the United States should be marked next to this label.
 {{PD-Peru-1961law}}
 {{PD-US-not renewed}}
après 1er janvier 1966[note 3]  {{PD-old-auto-1996|country=Peru|deathyear=death year}}
 {{PD-old-auto-unpublished|deathyear=death year}}
du 1er janvier 1940 au 31 décembre 1945 avant 1er janvier 1946
après 1er janvier 1966
 {{PD-Peru-1961law}}
 {{PD-old-auto-1996|country=Peru|deathyear=death year}}
du 1er janvier 1946 au 31 décembre 1965 The work was in domain public in Peru on the date of URAA restoration (January 1, 1996) because copyright of the posthumous work was valid for 30 years from its publication before 1966.[13714/1961 Art. 28] The situation in the United States should be marked next to this label.
 {{PD-Peru-1961law}}
 {{PD-US-not renewed}}
du 1er janvier 1946 au 31 décembre 1951[note 4] avant 31 décembre 1926
date QS:P,+1926-12-31T00:00:00Z/7,P1326,+1926-12-31T00:00:00Z/11
 {{PD-US-expired|country=PE|hide_us_warning|deathyear=death year}}
après 1er janvier 1927 The work expired because its author died more than 70 years ago. Unpublished works are kept for a maximum of 70 years after his/her death. But, some type of work maybe still be copyright in USA on the date of URAA restoration (January 1, 1996).[822/1996 Art. 23 and 52]
 {{PD-old-auto|country=Peru|deathyear=death year}}
 {{Not-PD-US-URAA|country=PE}}
Others The work is still protected under 1996 law.

Œuvres anonymes ou sous pseudonyme

If the author of the work is unveiled during its copyright term (nonexistent in 1849 law, 15 years in 1961 law, extended to 70 years in 1996), it is protected as an individual work. e.g. Rafael de la Fuente Benavides (died in 1985) and his pen name "Martin Adán" are well-known among people, so his works will be protected in Peru until 2055. Applies to any media, including photography.

Date de publication Copyright tag
avant 1er janvier 1927  {{PD-Peru-anonymous}}
 {{PD-anon-expired}}
or for 19th-century works:
 {{PD-old-assumed}}
du 1er janvier 1927 au 31 décembre 1980  {{PD-Peru-anonymous}}
 {{PD-old-auto-1996}}
à partir de 1er janvier 1981 The work is still protected under 1996 law.

Œuvres du gouvernement et des personnes morales

In general, only applies to works prior to 1971 from employee(s) of "personas jurídicas" (legal persons), like Government (Gobierno), municipalities (municipalidades) and organizations. Works must be attributed only from official legal entities, unless they are produced by the archives of the National Library or transfered to public institutions and juridical entities.[13714/1961 Art. 15] The deadline is counted from the time of full broadcasting to the public or in any means of communication.[13714/1961 Art. 38 and 39] If the work is claim by natural person ("persona natural") via external participation and was not transferred to legal person, the shortest rule will not apply.

Date de publication Copyright tag
avant 1er janvier 1927  {{PD-Peru-organization}}
 {{PD-US-expired}}
du 1er janvier 1927 au 31 décembre 1970[note 5]  {{PD-Peru-organization}}
 {{PD-1996}}
à partir de 1er janvier 1971 The work is still protected according 1996 law (under "collective work" or "anonymous work" term, with works by the Peruvian Government exceptions).

Photographies non individuelles

Applicable only to old and simple photographs that were exhibited or performed in any medium:

  • The owner of the negative film cannot be distinguished from other photographs from third parties to be considered as individual or personal firm: for 1961 is if the photo is created only on their literary or scientific works, for 1996 law extends to any photograph that expresses their individuality excluding everyday situations or things. This justifies some photographs with less protection than those that are integral and dependent on the mentioned individuality works.[7][19]
  • The photo does not have a copyrighted subject (for example, drawings or paintings) with the exception of outdoor exposure (freedom of panorama). Nor should it be an unpublished work of others persons up to 70 years post-mortem.[13714/196 Art. 40]
  • It is not an frame of a documentary work (except for photojournalism, mentioned only in the 1961 law).
Date de divulgation Date of creation Copyright tag
avant 1er janvier 1927 jusqu'au 31 décembre 1975
date QS:P,+1975-12-31T00:00:00Z/7,P582,+1975-12-31T00:00:00Z/11
[note 6]
 {{PD-Peru-photo}}
 {{PD-US-expired}}
du 1er janvier 1927 au 31 décembre 1975 In case the photo was not published in the United States or was not renewed in the United States (for example, it does not have the © icon):
 {{PD-Peru-photo}}
 {{PD-1996}}
à partir de 1er janvier 1976 avant 31 décembre 1951
date QS:P,+1951-12-31T00:00:00Z/7,P1326,+1951-12-31T00:00:00Z/11
The photograph expired in Peru because the photographs without artistic purpose was created 70 years ago. However, the image could be protected in the United States.
 {{PD-Peru-photo}}
 {{Not-PD-US-URAA|country=PE}}
à partir de 1er janvier 1952 Judged under 1996 Copyright law (except of anonymous photograph under 1961 law).


Œuvres non protégées

Raccourci

Voir aussi : Commons:Œuvres non protégées

Previously, under the 1961 law, works passed into the public domain for: (a) folk songs by unknown authors (use {{PD-Peru-anonymous}} for anonymous text and media works published before 1981); (b) works that expired on the current term; (c) works by authors without heirs; (d) works by authors who have waived their copyright; (63) works by authors who died five years ago and real utilities were expropriated by the Ministry of Public Education without opposition from their heirs and editorials (use {{PD-Peru-organization}} for orphaned works of an author who died before 1988 and who was never claimed); (64) legal texts, decrees and publications of public authorities of State as Executive, Executive and Judicial Branches (use {{PD-Peru-organization}} for text and documents published before 1996); (65) informative news content.[13714/1961 Art. 62-65] (1) Ideological or technical content or that scientific work without industrial use.[13714/1961 Art. 1]

Ne font pas l’objet d’une protection par le droit d’auteur (a) les idées contenues dans les œuvres littéraires ou artistiques, les procédés, les modes opératoires ou concepts mathématiques en tant que tels, les systèmes ou le contenu idéologique ou technique des œuvres scientifiques, ni leur application industrielle ou commerciale; (b) les textes officiels de caractère législatif administratif ou judiciaire, ni les traductions officielles de ces textes, sans préjudice de l’obligation de les respecter et de citer la source; (c) les nouvelles du jour, sous réserve que, en cas de reproduction textuelle, la source d’emprunt soit citée; (d) les simples faits ou données.[822/1996 Art.9]

Œuvres du gouvernement péruvien

Theoretically, all government work of an official nature is usually open access due to their divulgation, requiring respect for their integrity and source attribution. Firstly, article 7b of DL 822 establishes that "official texts" are not protected. Regardless of their originality, specialists Antequera and Ferreyros say that administrative acts on behalf of the State are not protected by copyright as well as other "official works", including judicial texts, resolutions, discussions and others (Bienes de dominio público, the content is not limited to text only).[20] To reduce ambiguities Resolution No. 0730-2006-TPI-INDECOPI the court established in SUNAT v. Instituto de Investigación El Pacífico E.I.R.L for "official texts":

For works to be considered an official texts:
  • They must be issued by an administrative or judicial authority or with legislative powers.
  • They contain mandatory mandates or that without being mandatory may affect third parties.
  • They are of general interest to know the content of the texts (regardless of their originality).

Exception of this works is from other creations carried out without State powers (Bienes de dominio privado estatal) or third-party collaboration like notes of law firms for private use or unofficial translations which are usually "public" without being "official".[21] Regarding documents without a normative concept, in Resolution No. 056-2004/ODA-INDECOPI (also cited Resolution No. 0927-2004/TPI-INDECOPI) the Intellectual Property Court justified works not exempted from copyright:

[The] fact that a given work [of internal nature] was prepared by the employees of a public entity in the performance of their duties or by third parties commissioned by a State entity does not give this the status of an "official text", since the State, like any other natural or legal person, may in turn hold the ownership derived from copyright of a patrimonial right or exercise copyright of a moral right on behalf of the authors. [If the work] does not have the status of a rule, regulation or administrative or judicial decision, in compliance with being published or disclosed to be mandatory or to be in effect to the collective [and] this has been shared by the holder of the rights by any means such as the Internet, since the publication of a protected work whose ownership corresponds to the State or to any public body does not acquire the character of an official text by the mere fact of its availability in any means.

State property and public domain

In the context of the Lima principles, the Sistema Nacional de Bienes Estatales (SNBE) establishes which tangible and non-tangible assets from State are in the public or private domain. This applies to freedom of panorama (regardless of their status, they are imprescriptible, i.e. they cannot be appropriated by others) and implicitly to copyright (the 1996 copyright law does not mention which works are not subject to patrimonial rights, so this principle is taken).[22][23] Points 10 to 12 of Casación 1673-2015 exemplify the differences between the two terms.

  • Bienes de dominio público: "A public property is that state property destined for use or that serves as a support for the provision of any public service". Also Casación 1673-2015 justifies that "special form of property, intended for the use of all, for a service to the community or to the national interest, in other words, intended for the satisfaction of public interests and purposes". This first point is taken by confusion with "cultural heritage" and non-ownership of elements.[24]
  • Bienes de dominio privado estatal: "A private property is a state property that is owned by the State or by any entity, is not destined to be used or used for any public service. And in respect of which its owners exercise the right of ownership with all its attributes". The State could exercise copyrights for the case. For example, the works of TV Perú are owned by the Instituto Nacional de Radio y Televisión del Perú or El Peruano by Editora Perú.

Reuse from administrative and open data platforms

Beyond of DL 822, in practice, since 2003 the diffusion of official works follow Articles 1 and 4 of the Lima Principles in 2000, in which "everyone has the right to freedom to search, obtain, access and share [official nature] information without interference by public authorities" and "all [official nature] information held by the State does not belong to their owner but is in fact the property of the citizens".[25] Under "principio de publicidad" term of 1993 Constitution, citizens and the mass media have the right to publicize official activities set in text and multimedia without authorization from the authorities; for other documents not yet disclosed, they can request to extract information ("sin expresión de causa") but should not interfere with the laws of the country like documents of "internal nature".[26][27] The Peruvian Ombudsman's Office (one of the institutions that signed these principles and authorized the media to freely broadcast official information) considers for this type of document as public interest and dissemination and has no royalties for download or copy (see also DS No 072-2003-PCM Art. 13 for free reproduction).[28]

The standard for documents of administrative nature is Texto Único de Procesos Administrativos (TUPA). This covers to "the set of acts and formalities carried out by the entities, leading to the issuance of an administrative act that produces individual or individualizable legal effects on the interests, obligations or rights of the parties involved",[27444/2001 Art. 1.1] are official texts[27444/2001 Art. 42] and "principio de publicidad" apply.[27806/2002 Art.3] In DS No 004-2008-PCM, chapter III explicitly states that the formal documents published in the Peruvian State Portal have "official" nature and are within the TUPA standard. The Ministry of Justice has detailed regulations on the uses of administrative documents.

Data outside public documents: In complementation with TUPA, platform of open data is explicitly stated in Law No. 27806 for same entities with the TUPA standard (Law No 27444).[27806/2002 Art. 2] Specific government acts (as press releases, official activities, budgets, government procedures and TUPA documents,[27806/2002 Art. 5] whose works are contained in written documents, photographs, recordings, magnetic or digital media)[27806/2002 Art. 10] is usually shared on now the open data portal. Per example, after signing with the Open Government Partnership works from Executive Branch are published in Portal de Datos Abiertos offered by PCM (quoted on R.M. No 195-2012-PCM, now interoperated with Portal Nacional de Datos Abiertos and available via web). While the "official texts" are in the public domain, contents in other formats are under D.S. No 016-2017-PCM, quoting to its definition, "an open data is the information produced by public entities, in its basic form is accessible to anyone from Internet, without restrictions of any kind [...], without cost to obtain it, without limitations for reuse and redistribute by third parties and allows the creation of its derivatives", "open data from public entities is considered to be of an official nature" (Art. 5) and Art. 9 of this decree establishes as open data if they are stored in databases from:

These are some cases in that they consider as official document or open data and their concept usually varies:

  • The first reference about administrative documents was indicated in years prior to the Lima Principles.[757/1991 Art. 22] In 1992 a expired law explains that an administrative act consists of resolutions between two public entities, oficios (informative reports), governmental property proceedings and the right of petition with public purpose from public entities (therefore, this law excludes internal events).[26111/1992 Art. 2(1), updated in 27806/2003 Cap. I] For recent documents is required to add the source of the entity, since this entity publishes its updated TUPA page for know what documents are considered administrative.[27444/2001 Art. 43]
  • In opinion 59-2019-JUS/DGTAIPD any public process contained in State institutional mailings are considered official texts.
  • In 2016, the living records from political candidates (hojas de vida) submitted by JNE are published as "open data" and allow "free and open reproduction".
  • In 2017, the TUPA forms are considered free reproduction and distribution.[Nº 006-2017-JUS Art.163] This application is mentioned in a municipal resolution for affidavits.
  • In opinion 27-2020-JUS/DGTAIPD any public information generated in database from public authorities is open data, even if it was unpulished to the Plataforma de Datos Abiertos unless modified by a third party or containing sensitive information.
  • Other original works in TUPA-standard documents would are not in the public domain accourding to the opinion 06-2020-JUS/DGTAIPD, the Ministry of Justice determined for example that the questions contained in the non-free psychological tests used by another State entity may be disseminated if the Administrative decides for copyright reasons. This exception is also referred to as "trade secret".[27806/2002 Art. 15]

Bandeaux de licence

Voir aussi : Commons:Bandeaux de licence

  • {{PD-old-70}} - Œuvres dont les auteurs sont mort il y a plus de 70 ans, ou œuvres anonymes rendues publiques il y a plus de 70 ans.
  • {{PD-anon-expired}} - For anonymous works made public more than 95 years ago if this one was renewed on the URAA date.
  • {{PD-PE-exempt}} - For works exempt from copyright under Peruvian law. Including documents under the TUPA standard.
    • {{PD-PE-signs}} - For reproductions from Manual de Dispositivos de Control de Tránsito Automotor en Calles y Carreteras of road signals, a official document also exempt from copyright under Peruvian law.
    • {{PD-PE-insignia}} - For reproductions from official texts of official insignias (flags, coat of arms and logos), exempt from copyright under Peruvian law.
  • {{PD-PCP-SL}} - For works carried out by the Communist Party of Peru-Shining Path. Since it does not have rights to exploit its works outside the territorial legal framework as VRAEM and under an organization that is exempt from obtaining ownership of its works in Peruvian territory, according to the Law of Extinction of Property, the constitution and Art. 30 of DL 822: Indecopi is not legally permitted to protect their "copyright patrimonial rights" them under these criteria. It should be noted that the extinguishment of ownership applies to all "furniture", which in Article 886, paragraph 6 of the Civil Code (as 2018) includes as "furniture" "copyright patrimonial rights".
  • {{TOO-Peru}} - For non-original works like simple designs and logotypes.

Gouvernement péruvien

Some Peruvian government or administrative entities works are published under free licenses:

  • According to this guide, except as otherwise indicated, works from Portal Nacional de Datos Abiertos (National Open Data Platform) or another interoperable open data platform are subject to templates: {{ODbL}} or {{PD-because|Per COM:Peru, the file from peruvian administrative acts on their Open Data platform is free of rights.}}.
  • Photographic works from Flickr account of the municipality of Miraflores are under CC-BY 2.5 PE. Tagged as {{CC-PE-MunicipalidadMirafloresFlickr}}.

Old works under 1961 law

For old works whose protection lasted until 1 January 1996 under Manuel Prado Copyright law of 1961 are PD in U.S. and Peru (before the repeal of the law in 23 May 1996 and URAA date):

  • {{PD-Peru-1961law}} - For peruvian authors died prior to 1946 (or that the rights were not inherited for those who died before 31 December 1965).
  • {{PD-Peru-organization}} - For peruvian government and juridical organizations works released prior to 31 December 1970.
  • {{PD-Peru-photo}} - For all non-individual photographs disclosed in Peru prior to 31 December 1975 (or created more than 70 years ago in 1996 law).
  • {{PD-Peru-anonymous}} for anonymous works prior to 31 December 1980 and no register the name of the author in Registro Nacional de Derecho de Autor 15 years following publication.

Seuil d'originalité

Voir aussi : Commons:Seuil d’originalité

Indecopi established parameters to qualify the originality of graphic and photographic compositions. Because of the higher originality threshold (independent of its endeavour, novelty, inspiration and technique, the requirement is to leave some space for the development of its author's personality, not a copy or imitation, referred as "originalidad subjetiva"),[29] simple designs, non-production videographic creations and old photographs without demonstrating their individuality can be uploaded to Commons. See also Andean Community: Threshold of originality.

Photographies simples

Old published photographs have a copyright term of 20 years counted from the first of January of the year following that of the disclosing of the photograph before 1976. The notes shown are based on the rescinded 1961 law:

  • For old pictures taken prior to 31 December 1975 and which were not published within an author's own work OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg fail to meet the general definition of a "work" under 1961 law (and Article 3.4 of Universal Copyright Convention: "The provisions […] not apply to photographic works […] shall not be less than ten years").[2] The duration of the photograph was for 20 years after performed its first copy, without the author presenting this in a literary, scientific or documentary work, from January 1 of the following year.[13714/1961 Art. 27] They were not renewed during the URAA date.[13714/1961 Art. 27 and 57] Use {{PD-Peru-photo}}.
  • The duration is reduced if the following occurs: when the author did not place the name of the label with the message "Reproduction prohibited" or that the author published in a work without a full name or under an unknown pseudonym.[13714/1961 Art. 58] The duration of anonymous works prior to 31 December 1980 was 15 years after publication and expired on 1 January 1996. They were not renewed during the URAA date. Use {{PD-Peru-anonymous}}.
  • If they were used in literary or scientific works, they were documentary works or are reproductions of artistic material "of private domain", and the author died before 1946 (of before 1966 if someone had no family heirs), the law considers the photographs as OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg the author's work (life + 30/50 years).[2] In the case of collective works, the date is considered to be the last survivor. If they died after 1947, they are protected by the current law. Use {{PD-Peru-1961law}}.

Recent published photographs below threshold have a copyright term of 70 years counted from the first of January of the year following that of the taking of the photograph. Fortunately, this term usually flexible in the cases and facts shown below:

  • La définition générale d'une "œuvre" dans la loi de 1996 est "toute création intellectuelle personnelle et originale pouvant être divulguée ou reproduite sous toute forme connue ou susceptible de l'être".[822/1996 Art.2(17)]

Les photographies simples ont une durée de copyright de 70 ans à compter du premier janvier de l'année qui suit celle de la prise de la photo. Les photographies simples sont celles qui ne répondent pas à la définition générale d'une "œuvre".[822/1996 Art.144]

  • The Court of Indecopi believes that originality in a photograph should be limited to the originality of any work, requirements to protect against plagiarism. According to article 3.c of the Regulation of Inscriptions in the Registry National Copyright Act, provides that "no may be subject to registration the photographs that are limited to simple reproductions of people, of things, or of objects already existing or showing a mere documentary character [...] photography to be a work can not constitute only a simple reproduction of already existing objects".[19]
  • Derecho PUCP journal explains examples of highly distinguishable events that surpass the threshold of originality: creative use of lights, unique moment, transmission of a message in their work and the photographer's personality. Below these and other criteria, simple photographs are legislated under Legislative Decree 1044 on unfair competition.[30]

Examples for photographs under 1961 law:

Examples for photographs under 1996 law:

  • In 2002 the Court considered two images of household appliances as below of threshold of originality due to the lack of creative evidence, despite they are in a catalog with individuality. See Resolution No 354-2002/TPI-INDECOPI.[31]
  • Also, in 2002 the Court ruled that a magazine photograph of Skándalo boy band in ordinary dress and solid-colored background receives related rights-only because it lacks individuality. See Resolution No 378-2002/TPI-INDECOPI, Alomi Producciones S.A.C. v Karinto S.A p.13.[19]
  • In 2007 the Court justified a photograph of gift box for a web catalog as original work because of its shade selection and during the editing process it carried meticulous details, specifically the colored shade artificially created. See Resolution No 1263-2007/TPI-INDECOPI, Enrique Capella v Grupo Americano de Comercio S.A.C. and Citybank del Perú S.A p.4.[32]
  • In 2008 the court determined that press snapshots of sporting, political or weather events lack originality for lack of prior preparation in their production. See Resolution No 2521-2008/TPI-Indecopi, Agencia Efe S.A. v Las Rosas Editorial S.A.C.
  • In 2012 the Court concluded that non-artistic techniques of photographs are not protectable (for example, scanning). See Resolution No 059-2012/TPI-Indecopi and Indecopi (2015), p.75.[8]
  • In 2013 Indecopi deduced that a promotional photograph of a model wearing clothes of a textile company does bear originality due to the framing, focus and composition to highlight her outfit. See Resolution No 0384-2013/CDA-INDECOPI, Peruvian Connection Ltd. v SENATI p. 9 and 10.[33]
  • In 2021 the criteria for originality of photographs were simplified to three points: transmittable, framed and lighting that shows their personality. Between pages 77 and 82 of this resolution the court evident that press photographs from Hildebrandt en sus trece magazine do carry originality because they focus on the gestures of the photographed and the depth of the camera. See Resolution No 0096-2021/TPI-INDECOPI, Plutón Editores S.A.C. v DP Comunicaciones S.A.C..
Procédé vidéographique

There is threshold of originality for audiovisual creations but their protection is similar for both works and recordings (publish/create + 70 years). While cinematographic works ("obra audiovisual") are protected in their entirety, the related rights can only be granted to the producer of non-artistic filming ("grabación audiovisual"),[822/1996 Art. 140] which also include performance and broadcasting.[822/1996 Art. 143] Resolution 000111-1999-ODA-INDECOPI establishes differences between the two terms, in particular, and in a similar way to simple photographs, the fixation of the succession of images. But, Resolution 371-2001/TPI-INDECOPI establishes that the main requirement to receive related rights from the producer of non-artistic filming consists of: "present in their creation process a certain OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg degree of creativity, technical or organizational skill sufficient to justify the recognition of a similar right in their favor" (p.e. Pay-per-View events).

Theoretically, a security camera captures in a public place could OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg lack of their producer (as a public asset is mainly assumed to Peruvian State) to be in the public domain. Security camera footage from Sistema Nacional de Seguridad Ciudadana is provided anonymously to the Peruvian National Police or Public Prosecutor's Office like state cameras in public areas, there is no knowed evidence from the original producer of the material.[N° 007-2020-IN Art. 18] Opinión Consultiva 60-2019-JUS/DGTAIPD indicates that footage records are disclosure if these are for public interest and share in open data process (see also Works by the Peruvian Government ),[N° 007-2020-IN Art.22] the places filmed correspond to "places of public domain",[N° 007-2020-IN Art. 7] human monitoring exists but does not interfere with the surveillance camera's technical or creative ability for recording.[N° 007-2020-IN Art. 2] Also it isn't artistic work since its custody cannot be altered from the original,[N° 007-2020-IN Art. 19] as a result, the footage is below the threshold of originality and don't comply with related rights of article 143 of the 1996 law.[34][35] Moral rights prevail of the person involved in this media. For these footage in official works, use {{PD-PE-exempt}}.

Logos, designs et autres œuvres

Simple or ordinary logos and designs are OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK to upload to Commons, because they are below the threshold of originality required for copyright protection. In words of Indecopi and Ministry of Justice and quoting Resolutions No. 1349-2001/TPI-INDECOPI (first paragraph) and 0286-1998/TPI-INDECOPI (second paragraph):

According to Article 3 of Decision 351 [of the Andean Decision], in accordance with Article 2 of Legislative Decree No. 822, a work is understood to be any original intellectual creation of an artistic, scientific or literary nature, susceptible of being disclosed or reproduced in any form.[...] Whatever already part of the cultural heritage -artistic, scientific or literary- will not be considered [original creation], nor will [original] the form of expression that derives from the nature of things or from mechanical-only application of the provisions of certain legal norms, nor will [original] the form of expression that is reduced to a simple technique or simple instructions that only require manual skill for this execution.

—Indecopi, La originalidad como requisito de protección por derechos de autor ("requisito de la originalidad"), Precedentes y normativa del Indecopi en Propiedad Intelectual (2015)[8]

In 18th paragraph in Casación Número: 1686-2011 explains the use of originality with architectural works satisfying utilitarian functions:

The originality of the architectural work [...] must be sought essentially in the creative features that are most distinguishable from the purposes of the model, its nature, its geographic and landscape context, and the functional requirements of the costumer, as well as the technical and urban planning standards applicable to the case; and respond rather, in a particular way or as totality, to the individuality or artistic personality of the author. [An] architectural model [...] must be subjected to analysis for the purpose of identifying whether they respond only to elements of functionality or natural characteristics of the species to which they belong or, on the contrary, contain features that correspond to the whim or personality that the author has wanted to attribute to them, beyond their functionality or technical rigor, resulting in giving individuality to the work, in relation to the rest of the constructions of its species.

Note: Some creations are above the threshold of originality and OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg are not valid for upload to Commons:

  • Logo of Tres Olivas: a leaf with three olives with tonalities, use of brightness and sensation of movement. See Resolution No 1774-2012/TPI-INDECOPI, Olivos del Sur S.A.C. vs Antonio Moncayo Cortés.[15]
  • Emblema La Primera. See Resolution No 2361-2016/TPI-INDECOPI.
  • A fictional character in Superman: Krisis of the Krimson Kryptonite. See Resolution No 1164-2014/TPI-INDECOPI.
  • A logo with a people with torch to the letter E, above the letter T. Triunfo Empresarial. See Resolution No 0319-2018/TPI-INDECOPI.

Divers

Monnaie

Voir aussi : Commons:Monnaie

Avant 1971
Anverse of sol coin (1892 in this picture, during the mandate of President Miguel de San Román) is PD in Peru.
OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK The old peruvian sol is out of circulation, most of designs were created before 1971.[39] The reverse side with the coat of arms was created in 1825.[D. L. 11323/1950] Use {{Peruvian currency}}.
Entre 1971 et 1991
Pictogram-voting question.svg Unclear There is not enough information regarding the copyright status of this. If the design was published anonymously before 1981, use {{Peruvian currency}}.
Après 1991
OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Non libre. La monnaie péruvienne n'est pas exonérée de droits d'auteur.[822/1996 Art.9]

La loi 26714, article 256, interdit de reproduire des billets et des pièces et de les distribuer à des fins publicitaires ou à des fins similaires, de manière à créer une confusion ou à faire en sorte que les reproductions soient utilisées par des tiers comme si elles étaient une véritable monnaie[40].

Please note that not all coins are copyrighted, because they contain previous designs and patterns released to be in the public domain or are below the originality threshold. See discussion.

Chèques

Voir aussi : Commons:Chèque

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK in some cases Cheques are also not exempt from copyright law. However, pre-1971 designs are public domain and recent cheques often lack originality by bearing simple data, signatures or common identification codes. So templates must be taken: {{PD-Peru-organization}} or {{PD-simple}}.

De minimis

Voir aussi : Commons:De minimis

There is subtle mention of "de minimis" in determinate cases:

  • Media for private use, non-profit educative events or extracts of musical works in official events.[822/1996 Art.41(a, b and c)] In other words, the sentence is equivalent to Fair use and is unacceptable to upload in Commons.
  • Broadcasting of well-known quotations and current events in any media.[41] "The exception provided [...] shall be interpreted restrictively, and may not be applied to cases that are contrary to proper practice".[822/1996 Art. 44-45, 50 and Decision 351 Art. 22]

Don't be an object of intelligent plagiarism ("plagio inteligente", also referred in Article 217c of the Penal Code, 2007):

    • Parodies: Allowed within the legal basis.[822/1996 Art. 49] Resolution No. 0864-2007/TPI-INDECOPI (also No. 4372-2013/TPI-INDECOPI) pointed out that the work is a infringement if the design adopts similarities or derivations from another without the parody intention (ordinary or substantial plagiarism). Best example is the 2008 TV series Magnolia Merino, which complies with the concept of parody when deals with a subject of public interest from other artistic point of view with excerpts based on the scenario, impersonation and musicalization of Magaly TeVe (see Resolution No. 3251–2010/SC1-INDECOPI).[42]
    • Incidental: In APSAV v. Arkinka S.A. (Anuario Andino 19 August 2004, based on Resolution No. 243-2001/ODA-INDECOPI) the limitation of the use of third parties works has been applied when "the appearance within the work should be incidental". Freedom of panorama is also mentioned and justified in both Decision 351 and DL 822 with the term "public places" such as "public museums".[43]

Liberté de panorama

Voir aussi : Commons:Liberté de panorama

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg   {{FoP-Peru}} Selon la 1996 loi,

  • S’agissant des œuvres déjà divulguées de manière licite, il est permis d’effectuer les actes ci-après sans l’autorisation de l’auteur: ... la reproduction d’une œuvre d’art exposée de façon permanente dans une rue, sur une place ou dans un autre lieu public ou sur la façade extérieure d’un bâtiment, si elle est réalisée dans une autre forme d’art que l’original, à condition que soient indiqués le nom de l’auteur s’il est connu, le titre de l’œuvre s’il en existe un, ainsi que le lieu où celle-ci se trouve;[26714/1992 Art.43(e)]
  • Dans tous les cas décrits dans le présent article, équivaut à un acte illicite toute utilisation des exemplaires qui porte atteinte au droit exclusif de l’auteur d’exploiter son œuvre.[26714/1992 Art.43 (Note finale)]

Remarques :

  • Resolutions No 0372-2006-TPI-INDECOPI and 0760-2010-TPI-INDECOPI (El Comercio v APSAV) specifies the situations in which the work may be legitimately reproduced for acts of exhibition. A "public place" (like MVCS: "bien de dominio público", with exceptions for "dominio privado estatal", see Works by the Peruvian Government)[29151/1991, updated in D.S. 008-2021-VIVIENDA Art. 3.3.2][44] is an internal or external location that is permanently available to the public including museums. The freedom of panorama applies even to artistic works: the "permanent" status is not lost to works that have been relocated from one public place to another public place or that are in the process of temporary closure for maintenance. The places declared as cultural heritage, even if they were abandoned or never discovered, are property of the Peruvian State and match the definitions previously mentioned.[28296/2008 Title I, Art. 2, 5 and 11]
  • Previously, the 1961 law allowed the freedom of panorama for artistic and architectural works, regardless of their legal validity, in public places. There is no mention if the work must be "permanently accessible".[13714/1961 Art. 72 and 74] During the government of Alberto Fujimori, the concept of "public spaces" expands in heavy attended interiors from public institutions, free areas in private institutions and mass transport.[25357/1991 Art.2] In the case of museums, the audiovisual reproduction in newspapers, television channels and movies of works acquired inside the place is also allowed. But, should be noted that these reproductions are "copies of a work" with name of its author, for the copyrighted work itself cannot be used for trade.[13714/1961 Art. 73]
  • Copyright protection of architectural works expire 70 p.m.a of their original designer. However, for clarification, if the architectural work was inaugurated before 1960 and never attributed by any author, this lacks coverage by recent copyright laws to protect it because limitations from 1849 law that buildings are not designate as works of art.[13714/1961 Art. 7(ll) and 153] The freedom of panorama is applied in Art. 37 and 38 of the Intellectual Property Code of the Peruvian Association of Architects with condition that "the works are open to the public", even indoors unless strictly reserved by their author.[45]

Timbres postaux

Voir aussi : Commons:Timbres postaux

Stamps created prior to 1971
Public domain Some stamps were created by Casa de Correos y Telégrafos, today Ministry of Transport and Communications-owned Servicios Postales del Perú (Serpost). In Law No. 13714 of 1961, works by the government had a duration of 25 years and its copyright expired before 1996.
Il n'existe pas de modèle pour le domaine public spécifique au Pérou. Utilisez {{PD-old-auto}} le cas échéant.
Timbres postaux créés depuis 1971

Red copyright.svg. La loi basique sur des droits d'auteur en Pérou est contenue dans l'Arrêté Législatif N ° 822 du 23 avril 1996. il n'y a pas mention spéciale sur les timbres postaux dans cette loi.[822/1996 Art.9] Les droits d'auteur durent 70 ans depuis la mort, calculés depuis le 1 janvier suivant à l'an de la mort, ou pendant 70 ans depuis l'an de divulgation des œuvres anonymes et sous pseudonyme.[822/1996 Art.52–53]

Signatures

Voir aussi : Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag/fr

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for a typical signature. Because calligraphies consist of trivial mechanical processes that do not involve artistic and literary efforts, they do not pass the threshold of originality due to the lack of reasonable creative and individual transmission during their process ("mera naturaleza de las cosas").[29] On Resolution No. 0286-1998/TPI-INDECOPI explains the differences between a creative work and a trivial work, therefore not all creations are authentic and not are subject for their protection.[8] Also, Resolution No. 0148-2008/TPI-INDECOPI sets to the drawings of common use cannot pass the attributes of individuality, making the signatures look the same as the concept of uncopyrighted drawings.

Œuvres sur commande

Voir aussi : Commons:Commissioned works

Law No. 13714 established the State or organizations as the owner of the works created under commission or employment contract. DL 822 completely loses the transfer of the patrimonial owner, but article 16 of 1996 copyright law establish certain rights to the commissioner (whether natural or juridical person) such as the exclusivity of disclosure of the work or the moral rights of the authors (see Resolución Nº 0127-2008/CDA-INDECOPI pages 11-12).

Rétroactivité de la loi précédente

Gráfico de aplicación de los derechos de autor en Perú.png

The Peruvian copyright law of 23 April 1996, which entered in force on 24 May 1996 and repeals the previous regulation, indicates in its transitional provisions that "[works] protected under the previous legislation shall benefit from the longer terms of protection provided for in this law".[822/1996 Transitional Provision 1] This occurred days after of URAA renewal date, January 1, 1996 (see discussion explaining the expiration about which works apply to protection and how it affects to Commons). But, some registration guidelines maintained the validity of the 1961 law, until its definitive repeal in 2003.[822/1996 Transitional Provision 6][46] There is no retroactive effect on works that have already expired before 23 May 1996 according to the regulations indicated and applied to the present time:

  • Article 21 of Decision 351 [of the Andean Community] (1993): "The limitations and exceptions to copyright established in the [legislation of Peru] will be circumscribed to cases which do not conflict with the normal exploitation of the works nor resulting unjustified prejudice to legitimate interests of the owner or owners of the rights".
    • This rule is a regional adaptation of Article 18 of Berne Convention (works that were published before 1988 under Universal Copyright Convention and whose copyright expired before 1996 do not enjoy this benefit either)
    • Works that expired under the article 62 of the previous Peruvian law no longer enjoy the rights of collective recognition of the Andean Community. See also Retroactivity of AC countries.
    • Also, if the work of a Peruvian organization was published between 1968 and 1970, it went safely into the public domain in other countries because the expiration of extended protection of 50 years after publication for Andean Community members (Art. 19 and 59), The United States is not part of this community. Similar case for the authors died between 1963 and 1965 and left only assignments. Because they are part of the international community, the members could extend the duration of copyright in their country to pass the URAA date, so this should be taken into consideration in works when employing co-productions with those countries.
    • See also Resolution 489 (19 March 2001), Fábrica de Tejidos Santa Catalina S.A. requested protection of its design to Ecuador because it's published in 1969 and public domain since 1994 in its original country Peru, as a result, the design maintained its protection in Ecuador because in that country it had previously standardized its laws to be compatible with AC laws (in 1994, the 1976 law remained in force, with a protection period of up to 50 years).

Article 7 of Law 29477 (2009)[47]

    • This refers to the Article 103 of the Political Constitution of 1993: "No law has force or retroactive effect, except in criminal terms, when it favors the defendant". (see Law 27454, and section "Aplicación de la ley en el tiempo" from article "SIBARITA S.A. vs AJINOMOTO DEL PERÚ S.A. (1998)" in Indecopi (2015), p. 63).[8][48] While criminal violations are usually "retroactive" (such as applying criminal penalties in favor of the copyright author), the protection does not have a "retroactive" effect for works expired by the old law, so the "public domain" status will remain in new laws.[49]
    • The number of the old copyright law is mentioned in Article 1.
  • Article III of Preliminary Title of Civil Code of Peru (established in 1984 under D.L. 195, updated in 2020)[8]
    • Aplicación de la ley en el tiempo: "The law applies to the consequences of existing juridic connections and situations. Has no retroactive force or effect, except for those set forth in the Political Constitution of Peru".
    • According to Coca Guzmán, 2020, some cases ("casaciones") were cited in which the principle of irretroactivity is applied. In order for the previous law to maintain the public domain status, the "theory of the accomplished facts" ("teoría de los hechos cumplidos") that will prevent the new law revoking their expiration before its day of coming into force is applied.[50]

Real examples occurred with Resolutions No. 584-2002/TPI-INDECOPI of June 21, 2002 (Fragil v. Discos Hispanos, Tecnología Digital Victoria and Kroton)[51] and No. 1207-2010/TPI-INDECOPI of May 31, 2010 (Mega Entertainment E.I.R.L. v. Novolexis S.A.C) for unauthorized reproductions prior to 1990 of phonographic productions published before this year. According to the 2010 resolution, the old works apply the theory of the accomplished facts, where the immediate application of the rules of 1996 is preferred to the ultraactivity of the repealed rules of 1961 (if the work not was expired explicity before 1996). But the Court did not grant the injured parties whose work was reproduced without authorization by another party under the old law because of a loophole. In the words of Indecopi: "Admit any conclusion [that favours or disfavours to the author] would retroactively apply the existing rule or ultraactively the repealed rule, contravening the ordering juridic-national".[52]

Voir aussi

Notes

  1. The 1849 Law does not extend protection to unpublished works created by the original author who died before November 1931, years before the country enters the Universal Copyright Convention, and "all [its] works go into the public domain".[1849 Art. 9] The duration of commercial exploitation (pre-copyright) was 20 years post mortem, extended to 30 in the case of holders with the Supreme Resolution N° 033-1915. This law only mentions the recognition of unpublished works for 30 years.[1849 Art. 4] However, no conditions are set for "undisclosed works". The Supreme Resolution N° 033-1915 and 1849 Law were abolished by the 1961 law.[13714/1961 Art. 159][16]
  2. The 1961 law extended the duration of those works governed by the 1849 law (20 years) and the Supreme Resolution N° 033-1915 (30 years) for 50 years. They entered the public domain before 1991.[13714/1961 Art. 153]
  3. There is no term of protection for posthumous works in the 1996 law. However, the transitional provision retains protection for 30 years after publication under the 1961 Law and no subject to the URAA. If the work was published after 1996, it is only protected for 5 years.
    In unpublished works with testament, the heirs have the option of: keeping unpublished for a maximum of 100 years or publish under a pseudonym. However, in the 1984 civil code, the term of protection for unpublished works was reduced to 50 years
    .[13714/1961 Art. 34c; 822/1996 Art. 27, 52 and 145; see also DL 195 Art. 1 for CC of 1984][16]
  4. In the event that the author died between 1946 and 1965 and also its work was published prior to 1965 and some case that someone did not carry a legacy (heirs and assignments) before 1986 (modification of Art. 21), its orphan work is in the public domain (1996), no URAA-renewable. The requirement is to prove that them has no inheritance (for example, via OTRS or web link). If this condition is satisfied, the work will be tagged with the corresponding template {{PD-Peru-1961law}}.
  5. Clarifications :
    • For Journalistic or encyclopedic works the publication rights pass to the editorial (legal person) if it did not identify the actual author of the writing.[13714/1961 Art. 44] This adds to pictures of a documentary nature, but excludes simple photographs, see the corresponding section. For recent works under 1996 law, no longer uses the term "legal person" and the equivalent term is "collective works": "the one that consists of the meeting of different productions or fragments without agreement or collaboration between their respective authors".
    Frames and non-individual production from films published before 1970 entered to public domain before 1996. For works created individually as scripts and scores the protection is autonomous. Significantly, the repealed law explicitly mentions cinematographic works as artistic works, while radio and television, omitted in its articles, were considered as journalistic works on the 1963 Printing Law (no longer in force).[14367/1963 Art. 1.2][17] From 1971, copyright protection of films, television and radio media extends to 70 years under 1996 law, that explicitly mentions as audiovisual works.
    • Sound recordings receive another type of protection in United States that does not validate uploading to Commons if published after 1925 (see also CLASSICS Act). On the Peruvian 1961 law, the phonographic rights are limited to musical compositions by the author (life plus 50 years, if died before 1946).[13714/1961 Art. 50-51] Under 1996 law, two new sections are used: the artist moral rights (life plus 70 years) and the production rights (publication plus 70 years).[822/1996 Art. 135 and 139]
    • Organizations must be registered as entities at least in the public records under the reglaments of 1936 ("Registration Regulations"), 1966 ("General Regulations of the Public Registries") or their equivalents .[13714/1961 Art. 9] Non-registered organizations as Sendero Luminoso are not valid for this protection. Consequently, these are anonymous works.[13714/1961 Art. 44] Under the 1996 law, this rule is no longer required.
    • Official texts: Art. 64 of the 1961 law provides that documents published by State authorities are not protected (see also Excluded from protection). The reliable reproduction must be attributed. The 1996 law considers the following as legislative, administrative or judicial subject. While laws, regulations, decrees and judgments are within the scope of this classification, administrative texts based on all public works of national and local authorities under TUPA standard are also within the scope (see also Works by the Peruvian Government).[18]
  6. In order to have the effect of 20 years under articles 56-59 of 1961 law, the name of author, the date of printed negative and the visible "Not for Reproduction"-like text were necessary for old photos.[13714/1961 Art. 58] Photojournalism, receives copyright protection for 5 years from the date of disclosure for the publisher.[13714/196 Art. 44] For organizational photos, except of documentaries, the transfer does not extend the term.[13714/196 Art. 57a] The owner of its negative is transferable (whether individual or organization),[13714/196 Art. 59] but for anonymous works – which are not visible the name of author and "Not for Reproduction" text – is suggested to use the corresponding template. To be protected for 70 years post-creation, the photograph had to be shared for the first time after 1976 regardless of the author's name.

Références

  1. Première loi sur la propriété intellectuelle (1849) (in espagnol). Congrès du Pérou (1849). Retrieved on 2020-10-19.
  2. a b c Old Copyright Law (Law No. 13714) (in Spanish). Congress of Peru (1961). Retrieved on 2020-05-19.
  3. Peru Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-08.
  4. Copyright Law (Legislative Decree No. 822). Peru (1996). Retrieved on 2018-11-08.
  5. a b Augusto Polo Campos: sus herederos recibirán regalías por 70 años (in espagnol). RPP (2017).
  6. Modification de l'ancienne loi sur le dorit d'auteur (Loi n°24518) (in espagnol). Congrès du Pérou (1986). Retrieved on 2020-05-21.
  7. a b ¿Es ético ilustrar noticias con fotos tomadas de Pinterest? (in Spanish). Fundación Gabo (2015).
  8. a b c d e f g h Ministry of Justice (2015). "Precedentes y normativa del Indecopi en Propiedad Intelectual". Indecopi. ISSN 2409-7667.
  9. Istaña Ponce, Roger Fernando (2012). Limitación de la aplicación de la ley de pérdida de dominio su extensión a partir de sus fuentes filosóficas y doctrinarias (in Spanish). Universidad Nacional del Altiplano. Retrieved on 2021-08-24.
  10. Lavado de Activos y Pérdida de Dominio (in Spanish). Ministerio de justicia (20172). Retrieved on 2021-10-29.
  11. I Pleno Casatorio Penal de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la República (in Spanish). El Peruano (2017). Retrieved on 2021-08-24.
  12. Alcántara Francia, Olga Alejandra (april 2017). "Legal Regime Applicable to Fashion Designs in Peru". ADI (37): 244-278. Retrieved on 2021-06-13.
  13. García Ortiz, Claude (2015). Los diseños industriales (in Spanish). Indecopi.
  14. Murillo Chávez, Javier André (december 2015). "Cortes, pedazos y retazos mercantiles sobre Derecho y Moda en el Perú". Actuaalidad Mercantil (4): 176-218. ISSN 523-2851. Retrieved on 2020-12-26.
  15. a b Murillo Chávez, Javier André (febraury 2012). "Conviviendo con el enemigo. Sobre los conflictos entre el Derecho de Propiedad Industrial y el Derecho de Autor". Actualidad Jurídica (221): 321-336. ISSN 1812-9552. Retrieved on 2021-5-17.
  16. a b Murillo Chávez, Javier André (october 2016). "El derecho de autor en los tiempos de Miguel Grau. Reflexión sobre el régimen de la obra póstuma, el derecho conexo sobre obras inéditas en dominio público y la aplicación de la norma en el tiempo en el derecho de autor peruano". Actualidad Jurídica (275): 176-192. ISSN 1812-9552. Retrieved on 2020-05-21.
  17. Adding to the Printing Law No. 10309, several articles (Decree Law No. 14367) (in Spanish). Congress of Peru (1963). Retrieved on 2021-07-08.
  18. Texto Único Ordenado de la Ley N° 27444, Ley del Procedimiento Administrativo General (in Spanish). MINJUS (2017). Retrieved on 2021-02-18.
  19. a b c Indecopi (24 April 2002). Fotografía: Alcance de la protección (in Spanish). Retrieved on 2020-12-25.
  20. Murillo Chávez, Javier André (december 2015). "El copyright del juez. ¿Y si demostramos que el Derecho de autor podría mejorar –en cierto sentido– la Justicia?". La Propiedad Inmaterial (23): 80-83. ISSN 1657-1959. Retrieved on 2021-03-26.
  21. Praeli Pérez, Jorge Eduardo (october 2020). "Copyright: cuando la fidelidad no es suficiente en la traducción". Traducción y Derecho. Retrieved on 2021-10-01.
  22. Los bienes de dominio público vs. los bienes de dominio privado del Estado (in Spanish). LP: Pasión por el Derecho.
  23. Preguntas frecuentes SBN (in Spanish). Superintendencia Nacional de Bienes Estatales.
  24. Hernández Martínez, Eduardo (2011). "Los recursos naturales y el patrimonio de la Nación". Ius et Praxis (42): 185-221. ISSN 1027-8168. Retrieved on 2021-09-20.
  25. Los prinicipios de Lima: Libertad de expresión y acceso a la información en poder del Estado (in Spanish). Retrieved on July 25, 2021.
  26. Perla Anaya, José (december 2010). "El derecho de acceso a la información pública y el Hábeas Data en el Perú". Diálogos de la Comunicación. Retrieved on 2021-11-03.
  27. Novoa Curich, Yvana Lucía; Forseti, ed.. El derecho a la información pública: Contenido e importancia (in Spanish). Retrieved on November 3, 2021.
  28. Manual sobre excepciones al derecho de acceso de información pública (in Spanish). Retrieved on March 26, 2021.
  29. a b Enrique, Cavero Safra (july 2015). "El concepto de originalidad en el derecho de autor peruano". Forsetti (5): 113-127. ISSN 2312-3583. Retrieved on 2021-08-20.
  30. Chávez Gutierrez, Wendy Elizabeth (september 2014). "The absence of criteria in the peruvian legal system regarding the concept of «authenticity» applied to copyright law protection on photographic images". Derecho PUCP (73): 587-623. ISSN 0251-3420. Retrieved on 2021-08-20.
  31. Indecopi (17 April 2002). Fotografías no creativas. Protección "sui generis" (in Spanish). Retrieved on 2021-10-22.
  32. Indecopi (3 July 2007). Fotografía: Originalidad (in Spanish). Retrieved on 2021-09-26.
  33. Indecopi (4 June 2013). Resolution No 0384-2013/CDA-INDECOPI: Infraction in reuse of Peruvian Connection Spring 2010 photos (in Spanish). Retrieved on 2021-09-12.
  34. Decreto Supremo que aprueba el Reglamento del Decreto Legislativo N° 1218, Decreto Legislativo que regula el uso de las cámaras de videovigilancia y de la Ley N° 30120, Ley de Apoyo a la Seguridad Ciudadana con Cámaras de Videovigilancia Públicas y Privadas, y dicta otras disposiciones. El Peruano (2020). Retrieved on 2021-05-18.
  35. Murillo Chávez, Javier André (2017). Los derechos de autor y/o conexos del ¿Robot?. Enfoque de Derecho. Retrieved on 2021-05-17.
  36. Murillo Chávez, Javier André (febraury 2017). "Fa - Sol - La. Completando conceptos sobre la obra musical y su originalidad en la jurisprudencia peruana". Diálogo como la jurisprudencia (221): 229-254. ISSN 1812-9587. Retrieved on 2020-10-21.
  37. Murillo Chávez, Javier André (june 2015). "The incomplete puzzle. The missing rule and ruling about the protection by copyright of characters and objects of the work". Derecho PUCP (74): 189-220. ISSN 0251-3420. Retrieved on 2020-10-21.
  38. a b Maraví Contreras, Alfredo (2013). "Las creaciones gastronómicas como objeto de protección por el Derecho de Autor: Posibilidades y conveniencia". Anuario Andino de Derechos Intelectuales. (9): 95, 103. ISSN 1993-0976. Retrieved on 2020-11-12.
  39. Transformación del“Sol” al “Nuevo Sol” (in Spanish).
  40. Ley N° 26714 Modifícase los artículos 252° a 258° y 261° del Código Penal (Counterfeit currency offences) (in Spanish) (1996).
  41. Schmitz Vaccaro, Christian (september 2014). Journalistic work in latin american legislations: from its creation to self-management of copyright (in Spanish). Retrieved on 2020-10-06.
  42. Murillo Chávez, Javier André (july 2014). "De Dumb Starbucks y Otros Demonios ¿La Parodia Justifica El Uso de Marca Ajena?". Actualidad Jurídica: 86-88. ISSN 1812-9552. Retrieved on 2021-12-15.
  43. Caso ARKINKA (in Spanish). Anuario Andino (2004). Retrieved on 2021-08-23.
  44. Decreto Supremo que aprueba el Reglamento de la Ley Nº 29151, Ley General del Sistema Nacional de Bienes Estatales (in Spanish). El Peruano.
  45. Código del derecho de propiedad intelectual de los arquitectos. Colegio de Arquitectos de Perú (2003).
  46. Resolución jefatural Nº 0276-2003/ODA-INDECOPI (in Spanish). Indecopi (2003). Retrieved on 2020-10-08.
  47. Law initiating the process of consolidation of the Peruvian regulatory spectrum (Law No. 29477) (in Spanish). Congress of Peru (2009). Retrieved on 2020-07-17.
  48. Law amending the article of the code of criminal procedure (Law No. 27454) (in Spanish). Congress of Peru (2001). Retrieved on 2020-07-19.
  49. Bernales Ballesteros (1999). La Constitución de 1993. Análisis y Comentarios (in Spanish). Editora Rao. Retrieved on 2020-07-19.
  50. Aplicación de la ley en el tiempo (artículo III del Título Preliminar del Código Civil) (in Spanish). Pasión por el Derecho (2020). Retrieved on 2021-08-10.
  51. Derechos conexos, aplicación de la ley en el tiempo, irretroactividad (in Spanish). Indecopi (2002). Retrieved on 2020-07-26.
  52. BOLETÍN AGOSTO 2010 (in Spanish). Unimpro (2010). Retrieved on 2020-07-26.

External links

Resolutions search engine from Indecopi website

Attention : la description ci-dessus peut être inexacte, incomplète ou obsolète, elle doit donc être traitée avec prudence. Avant de déposer un fichier sur Wikimedia Commons, vous devez vous assurer qu’il peut être utilisé librement. Voir aussi : Commons:Avertissements généraux