File talk:Minimundus117.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This file was nominated for deletion on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Minimundus117.jpg but was kept. If you are thinking about re-nominating it for deletion, please read that discussion first. |
More on copyright
[edit]
The 2011 deletion debate does not explicitly answer the question which I presume motivated the original nomination for deletion, namely that it is not enough for Austria to have Freedom of Panorama if the work being photographed in Austria is itself a violation of copyright. The 2014 discussion in the village pump archives "Does FoP washes copyright violations?" addresses this:
- User:Túrelio
- The second photo of an Atomium "model" has been kept based on FoP terms of Austrian copyright law and on the assumption that the owner of the Minimundus park, where the model is permanently installed, has obtained permission for this installation by the Atomium copyright holder
- User:Jheald
- A country can decline to protect photographs of works on the grounds of FoP. But that only applies to copyright claims for damage in that country. It doesn't prevent a copyright owner persuing claims in other countries, which do not have an FoP exception, regardless of where the photograph was taken. This is usually a nuance of copyright law we quietly ignore
This sentence from the minimundus website suggests that it probably has obtained permission...
- First we get in contact with the authority responsible for the structure or the respective consulate in order to get the appropriate information [for making a scale model].
...in that asking "can you send us the specs of your building so we can make a model of it for our visitor attraction" it is tantamount to asking for permission to copy. But that doesnt address the point Jheald made. Jnestorius (talk) 22:19, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
