Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Consolidated list E

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:East Timor

East Timor

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of East Timor (Timor-Leste) relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in East Timor must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both East Timor 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 East Timor, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

East Timor, the eastern part of the island of Timor, was a Portuguese colony until November 1975, when it declared independence. Indonesia invaded East Timor a few days later, and in 1976 it was declared a province of Indonesia. After a prolonged struggle for independence Indonesia relinquished control in 1999 and East Timor (Timor Leste) became a sovereign state on 20 May 2002.[1]

Governing laws

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, did not list any laws enacted by the legislature of East Timor that directly defined IP rules.[2] The UN similarly found no such copyright laws except for limited provisions in the Constitution and the Civil Code.[3] The rules applicable to Portuguese colonies or to Indonesia should be considered for works created prior to 1999. For later works, we assume that Indonesian copyright law as of 1999 applies, per a VPC discussion, that law is the Copyright Law of the Republic of Indonesia Consolidated text of law No.6/1982 As amended by law No.7/1987 and Law No.12/1987.[4][5] Per its Chapter II Copyright Validity:

  • Article 26 - The copyright on:
    • a. books, computer program, pamphlets, typographical arrangement of published works, and all other written works;
    • b. sermons, lecturers, addresses and other works of utterance
    • c. visual aids for educational and scientific purposes
    • d. songs or music with or without lyrics, including arts of karawitan and phonograms;
    • e. dramatic works, dances (choreographic works), puppet shows, pantomimes;
    • f. all forms of arts, such as paintings, drawings, engravings, calligraphy, carving, sculptures, collages, applied arts in the form of handy crafting;
    • g. architecture;
    • h. maps;
    • i. batik art;
    • j. translations, interpretations, adaptations, anthologies, and other works as a result of changing of form or mode

shall be protected for the life of the author and 50 (fifty) years after his death.

  • Article 27 (1) - The copyright on:
    • a. computer programs;
    • b. cinematographic works;
    • c. phonograms;
    • d. performances;
    • e. broadcasting works;

shall be for 50 (fifty) years as from the first publication.

  • Article 27 (2) - The copyright on a photographic work shall be for 25 (twenty five) years as from the first publication of the work.
  • Article 27 (2a) - The copyright on typographical arrangement of a published work shall be for 25 (twenty five) years as from the first publication of the work.

And according to article 12, there shall be no copyright to:

  • a. any result of open meetings of the Highest State Institutions and High State Institutions and other constitutional institutionà
  • b. laws and regulations;
  • c. court decisions and judicial orders;
  • d. state addresses and government official speeches;
  • e. awards of arbitration boards.
Copyright notes

Copyright notes
Per U.S. Circ. 38a, the following countries are not participants in the Berne Convention or Universal Copyright Convention and there is no presidential proclamation restoring U.S. copyright protection to works of these countries on the basis of reciprocal treatment of the works of U.S. nationals or domiciliaries:
  • East Timor, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, Marshall Islands, Palau, Somalia, Somaliland, and South Sudan.

As such, works published by citizens of these countries in these countries are usually not subject to copyright protection outside of these countries. Hence, such works may be in the public domain in most other countries worldwide.

However:

  • Works published in these countries by citizens or permanent residents of other countries that are signatories to the Berne Convention or any other treaty on copyright will still be protected in their home country and internationally as well as locally by local copyright law (if it exists).
  • Similarly, works published outside of these countries within 30 days of publication within these countries will also usually be subject to protection in the foreign country of publication. When works are subject to copyright outside of these countries, the term of such copyright protection may exceed the term of copyright inside them.
  • Unpublished works from these countries may be fully copyrighted.
  • A work from one of these countries may become copyrighted in the United States under the URAA if the work's home country enters a copyright treaty or agreement with the United States and the work is still under copyright in its home country.

East Timor has enacted the Code of Copyright and Related Rights in November 2022, it came into force on 28 May 2023.
2022 Code of Copyright and Related Rights

On 29 November 2022, the East Timorese parliament approved its first-ever copyright law, the Code of Copyright and Related Rights; it comes into effect 180 days after it was published.[6] It contains 224 articles and is awaiting approval from the President of East Timor.[7] The date of effectivity is 28 May 2023. A copy of the law in Portuguese is available at the official journal of the Republic of East Timor, at pages 19–51.

  • {{PD-TLGov}} - works published by the Government of East Timor, public domain according to the Article 12 of 1982 Indonesian Copyright Law.[4][5] This template only applies to works published before 28 May 2023.

Freedom of panorama

OK under the new Code of Copyright and Related Rights of 2022: {{FoP-East Timor}}.

The previous law applicable for East Timor, the 1982 Indonesian Copyright Law, did not provide a suitable freedom of panorama for free uses of images of copyrighted artistic works and architecture in public spaces.

Under the new Code of Copyright and Related Rights (2022), a freedom of panorama legal right is provided that is apparently based on Portuguese model:

  • The use of works, such as, for example, works of architecture or sculpture, made to be kept permanently in public places;
  • Original (Portuguese) text: A utilização de obras, como, por exemplo, obras de arquitetura ou escultura, feitas para serem mantidas permanentemente em locais públicos;[2022/Article 129(2)(o)]

See also

Citations

  1. East Timor profile - Timeline. BBC. Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
  2. Timor-Leste Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights)[1], WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization, 2018
  3. Readiness Assessment for Cross-Border Paperless Trade: Timor-Leste 2019
  4. a b The Main Characteristics of the Timorese Legal System – a Practical Guide 177. Retrieved on 2021-04-26.
  5. a b the Copyright Law of the Republic of Indonesia Consolidated text of law No.6/1982 As amended by law No.7/1987 and Law No.12/1987. WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved on 2021-04-26.
  6. East Timor: Approved the first Code of Copyright and Related Rights. Inventa (2022-12-13). Retrieved on 2023-03-11.
  7. Borges, Nelia (2022-11-29). "TL's copyright law is prepared to be submitted to the President for its promulgation". Tatoli.
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:Ecuador

Ecuador

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Ecuador relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Ecuador must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Ecuador 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 Ecuador, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

Ecuador was colonized by Spain during the 16th century. It became independent in 1820 as part of Gran Colombia, and became a sovereign state in 1830.

Ecuador has been a member of the Universal Copyright Convention since 5 June 1957, the Berne Convention since 9 October 1991, the World Trade Organization since 21 January 1996 and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 6 March 2002.[1] Ecuador is also a member of the Andean Community of Nations. In 1993 the members of the Andean Community adopted Decision 351, which defined common rules for copyright and neighboring rights.[2][3]

The UNHCR holds a copy of Ley No. 83. RO/ 320 de 19 de Mayo de 1998 Ley de Propiedad Intelectual.[4] As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, held a copy of the Organic Code of Social Economy of Knowledge, Creativity and Innovation in their WIPO Lex database.[5] This new law, passed in 2016, repealed the 1998 Intellectual Property Law, which was last amended in 2014. A copy of the 2006 amendment of this old law, Codification No. 2006­-13, was held by the WIPO Lex database.[6] The 1998 law, in turn, repealed the Law on Copyright (Ley de Derechos de Autor) of 1976. WIPO included these laws among those enacted by the legislature.[1]

The 1998 law did not restore copyrights to works that were already in public domain.[2006-13 Art.378(Third)]

The 2016 law is not retroactive regarding intellectual property rights that were validly granted with national legislation, but is retroactive in terms of uses, enjoyment, obligations, licenses, renewals and extensions, as well as ongoing legal procedures.[2016 Disposiciones Transitorias(Décima Cuarta)]

General rules

Under the Intellectual Property Law (Codification No. 2006­-13),

  • Economic rights shall last throughout the author's lifetime and for 70 years after their death, regardless of the country of origin of the work.[2006­-13 Art.80]
  • With works of joint authorship, the period of protection shall commence on the death of the last joint author.[2006­-13 Art.80]
  • With posthumous works, the period of 70 years shall commence on the date of the author's death.[2006­-13 Art.80]
  • An anonymous work the author of which does not make byself known within 70 years of the date of first publication shall enter the public domain. Where the identity of the author of a work published under a pseudonym is not known, the work shall be considered anonymous.[2006­-13 Art.80]
  • Where the holder of rights in a work from the time of creation of the work is a legal person, the period of protection shall be 70 years from the making, disclosure or publication of the work, whichever is the later.[2006­-13 Art.81]
1976 law

The Law on Copyright (1976), which was repealed by the Intellectual Property Law (1998, last-amended in 2014), provided a term of 50 years after author's death.[7] However, works that became public domain before the enactment of the 1998 law are not affected by the extension of term to 70 years, as per the third transitional provision under the Article 378 of the 1998 law.

Not protected

{{PD-EC-exempt}}. The following shall not be protected: ... legal and regulatory provisions, judicial decisions, and instruments, agreements, deliberations and rulings of public bodies, and also the official translations thereof.[2006­-13 Art.10] Coats of arms, flags and other official symbols are not explicitly exempted from copyright protection, but they may be in the public domain if a decree or resolution originating from the proper public office, adopting such emblem or symbol, is found.

Freedom of panorama

 Not OK {{FoP-Ecuador}}

See Andean Community:Freedom of panorama.

The Organic Code of Social Economy of Knowledge, Creativity and Innovation (2016) provides a restrictive freedom of panorama that does not allow commercial uses of images of copyrighted works permanently found in public spaces:

  • The reproduction, adaptation, distribution or public communication for scientific or educational purposes and to guarantee access to people with disabilities of architectural, photographic, fine arts, applied art or other similar works, which are permanently located in places open to the public, through photography, painting, drawing, filming or any other similar technique or procedure, provided that the name of the author of the original work, if known, and the place where it is located are indicated.[2016 Art.212(7)]

The repealed Intellectual Property Law (1998, last-amended in 2014) provided a more lenient exception, under Article 83(f), permitting the use of works permanently located in public spaces as long as "the purpose is strictly the dissemination of art, science and culture." However, under the fourteenth provision of the "Disposiciones Transitorias" of the 2016 Organic Law, rules of the current copyright law are prevailing regarding uses, enjoyment, obligations, licenses, renewals, and extensions.

Decision 351 of the Andean Community of Nations provides for freedom of panorama: "Without prejudice to that put forth in the Chapter 5 and in the previous article, it will be legal to realize, without authorization from the author and without the payment of any remuneration, the following acts:...h) undertake the reproduction, transmission by broadcasting or cable distribution to the public of the image of an architectural work, work of fine art, photographic work or work of applied art located permanently in a place open to the public".[351/1993 Article 22(h)]

Nevertheless, the member states such as Ecuador have the leeway to restrict FoP rules. According to Cerda Silva (2012), "the Decision only set forth a minimum legal standard, allowing the standard to be heightened by domestic law. This is the case for moral rights recognized for authors, economic exclusive rights, term of protection, and exceptions and limitations to copyright."[2]

See also: Category:Ecuadorian FOP cases.

Stamps

Copyrighted Under the Intellectual Property Law (Codification No. 2006­-13) there is no exception for stamps, which would be protected for 70 years from publication.

  • Protected works shall include, inter alia, the following: ... works of painting, drawing, engraving and lithography ....[2006­-13 Art.8(f)]
  • The employer or commissioner owns copyright in works by made employees or commissioned.[2006­-13 Art.16]
  • Where the holder of rights in a work from the time of creation of the work is a legal person, the period of protection shall be 70 years from the making, disclosure or publication of the work, whichever is the later.[2006­-13 Art.81]

Threshold of originality

See Andean Community: Threshold of originality

See also

Citations

  1. a b Ecuador Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-08.
  2. a b Cerda Silva, Alberto J. (2012). Copyright Convergence if the Andean Community of Nations. Intellectual Property Law Section of the State Bar of Texas. Retrieved on 2018-11-30.
  3. Andean Community (17 December 1993). Decision No. 351—Common Provisions on Copyright and Neighboring Rights. Retrieved on 2018-12-01.
  4. Ley No. 83. RO/ 320 de 19 de Mayo de 1998 Ley de Propiedad Intelectual (1998). Retrieved on 2018-12-12.
  5. Organic Code of Social Economy of Knowledge, Creativity and Innovation. Ecuador (2016).
  6. Intellectual Property Law (Codification No. 2006­-13). Ecuador (2006). Retrieved on 2018-11-08.
  7. Cardoso, Pablo. The Economic Contribution of Copyright Industries in the Republic of Ecuador. World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved on 2024-05-30.
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:Egypt

Egypt

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Egypt relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Egypt must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Egypt 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 Egypt, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

The British took effective control of Egypt in the late 19th century, and on 5 November 1914 it became a British protectorate. Britain unilaterally declared that Egypt was independent on 22 February 1922, but retained a military presence until 1954.

Egypt has been a member of the Berne Convention since 7 June 1977 and the World Trade Organization since 30 June 1995.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed Law No. 82 of 2002 on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of Egypt.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] A copy of the English text is also held on Commons.[3] Law No. 82 of 2002 repealed Law #354 of 1954, and repealed any provisions of that law that contradicted the provisions of the new law.[82/2002 Article 2(c)]

General rules

According to Law No. 82 of 2002,

  • The author's economic rights are protected throughout the lifetime of the author and for 50 years from the date of his death.[82/2002 Article 160]
  • The economic rights relating to works of joint authorship are protected throughout the lives of all co-authors and for 50 years from the death of the last survivor.[82/2002 Article 161]
  • For collective works, other than works of applied art,
    • Where the copyright holder is a legal entity, the economic rights are protected for 50 years from the date on which the work was published or made available to the public for the first time, whichever comes first.[82/2002 Article 162]
    • Where the copyright holder is a natural person, the protection period is calculated as in Articles 160 and 161.[82/2002 Article 162]
  • The economic rights relating to a posthumous work expire after 50 years from the date the work was published or made available to the public for the first time, whichever comes first.[82/2002 Article 162]
  • The economic rights relating to a work published anonymously or under pseudonym are protected for 50 years from the date the work was published or made available to the public for the first time, whichever comes first.[82/2002 Article 163]
  • The economic rights of the author of a work of applied art expire 25 years from the date on which the work was published or made available to the public for the first time, whichever comes first.[82/2002 Article 164]
  • Producers of sound recordings enjoy an exclusive economic right for 50 years from the date on which the recording was made or made public, whichever comes first.[82/2002 Article 167]

United States status

As a result of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act,

  • For non-creative photographic or audiovisual works copyright has expired in Egypt if published prior to 1987 and copyright has expired in the U.S. if published prior to 1981.
  • For other works with an identifiable author, copyright has expired in Egypt if the author died prior to 1974 and copyright has expired in the U.S. if the author died prior to 1946 or published prior to 1929.
  • For other works that are either anonymous or pseudonymous, copyright has expired in Egypt if published prior to 1974 and copyright has expired in the U.S. if published prior to 1946
  • For other works (e.g. collective works) whose copyright is held by a legal person, copyright has expired in Egypt if published prior to 1974 and copyright has expired in the U.S. if published prior to 1946.

National folklore

National folklore is any expression which consists of distinctive elements reflecting the traditional popular heritage, which originated or developed in Egypt, including in particular:[82/2002 Article 138(7)]

  • Oral expressions such as folk tales, poetry and charades, and other folklore;
  • Musical expressions such as popular songs accompanied by music;
  • Motion expressions, such as popular dances, plays, artistic forms and rituals;
  • Tangible expressions such as: Products of popular plastic art, particularly drawings with lines and colours, engravings, sculpture, ceramics, pottery, woodwork and any inlaid designs, mosaics, metal or jewellery, hand-woven bags, needlework, textiles, carpets and clothes; Musical instruments; Architectural forms.

National folklore shall be considered part of the public domain of the people. The competent ministry shall exercise the author's economic and moral rights and shall protect and support such folklore.[82/2002 Article 142]

Currency

OK According to Law No. 82 of 2002 on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights: "[Copyright protection] shall not cover the following: Official documents, whatever their source or target language, such as laws, regulations, resolutions and decisions, international conventions, court decisions, award of arbitrators and decisions of administrative committees having judicial competence."[82/2002 Article 141]

Freedom of panorama

OK even for 2-D artworks. {{FoP-Egypt}}

According to Article 171 of Law No. 82 of 2002:

  • Without prejudice to the moral rights of the author, pursuant to the provisions of the law herein, the author may not prevent third parties, after the publication of his work, from undertaking any of the following acts: ...[82/2002 Article 171]
  • Make a single copy of the work for one's exclusive personal use, provided that such a copy shall not hamper the normal exploitation of the work nor cause undue prejudice to the legitimate interests of the author or copyright holders;
However, the author or his successor may, after the publication of the work, prevent third parties from carrying out any of the following acts without his authorization:
  • Reproduction or copying works of fine, applied or plastic arts, unless they were displayed in a public place, or works of architecture; ...[82/2002 Article 171(2)]

By expressly denying the copyright holder the ability to enforce his copyright on works "displayed in a public place, or works of architecture" freedom of panorama for these items is implied. "Applied art" means art incorporated into useful articles. Plastic arts are three dimensional artworks. Fine arts are painting, photography, and sculpture, so Egypt's FOP is relatively broad, covering everything except text.

See also

Citations

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:El Salvador

El Salvador

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of El Salvador relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in El Salvador must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both El Salvador 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 El Salvador, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

El Salvador was colonized by Spain in the early 16th century. It became independent in 1821, apart from periods when it was part of the First Mexican Empire (1821–23), Federal Republic of Central America (1823–41) and Greater Republic of Central America (1895–98).

El Salvador has been a member of the Universal Copyright Convention since 29 March 1979, the Berne Convention since 19 February 1994, the World Trade Organization since 7 May 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 Law on Intellectual Property (as amended up to Legislative Decree No. 611 of February 15, 2017) as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of El Salvador.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] It supersedes the Legislative Decree No. 604 of 15 July 1993.[2] WIPO also holds a copy on the 1993 law.[3]

General rules

According to the Law on Intellectual Property as amended up to February 15, 2017,

  • Protection when the author is a natural person applies during the life of the author and 70 years from the day of his death.[2017 Article 86(a)]
  • For joint authorship, protection lasts for 70 years from the death of the last surviving co-author.[2017 Article 86(a)]
  • For anonymous or pseudonymous works, protection lasts for 70 years from 1 January after the year of first public disclosure.[2017 Article 86(b)]
  • When protection is not based on the author's life, the period will be for 70 years from 1 January after the year of first public disclosure.[2017 Article 86(c)] If there is no authorized disclosure in the 50 years after creation, the period will be for 70 years from 1 January after the year of creation.[2017 Article 86(c)]

The protection term was 50 years in the law of 1993.

Freedom of panorama

OK for exterior architecture and most types of public art. {{FoP-El Salvador}}

  • "The following shall be allowed without the consent of the author or remuneration: . . . the reproduction of a work of art on permanent display in a street, square or other public place in an artistic medium different from that used for the making of the original; with regard to buildings, this right shall be limited to the exterior façade".[2017 Article 45 (f)]

Spanish text:

Respecto de las obras ya divulgadas lícitamente, es permitida sin autorización del autor ni remuneración: . . . La reproducción de una obra de arte expuesta permanentemente en las calles, plazas u otros lugares públicos, por medio de un arte diverso al empleado para la elaboración del original. Respecto de los edificios, dicha facultad se limita a la fachada exterior.

Stamps

Copyrighted According to the 2017 revision, works owned by legal entities are protected for 70 years counted from 1 January of the year following that of first publication.[2017 Article 86(c)]

Translation of the specific permission to use images of postage stamps for non-commercial educational, philatelic and cultural purposes was contained in an email message dated 11 January 2007 from Silvia María Orantes, Head of the Philatelic Office, Government of El Salvador but commercial restriction images are not permitted here.

See also

Citations

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:Equatorial Guinea

Equatorial Guinea

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Equatorial Guinea relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Equatorial Guinea must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Equatorial 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 Equatorial Guinea, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

The Spanish colonies of Bioko and Rio Muni were united in 1926 to form the colony of Spanish Guinea. In 1959 its status was raised from "colonial" to "provincial". In 1968 Equatorial Guinea became an independent republic.

Equatorial Guinea has been a member of the Berne Convention since 26 June 1997.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Spanish Law of January 10, 1879, on Intellectual Property as the main IP law.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2]

General rules

Under the 1879 Spanish law,

  • Intellectual property belongs to the author during their lifetime and is transmittable to their heirs for a term of 80 years.[1879 Article 6]
  • Posthumous works are treated in the same way.[1879 Article 27]
  • The editor of an anonymous or pseudonymous work has the same rights as the author as long as the author is not disclosed.[1879 Article 26]

Currency

OK. Bank of Central African States, which issues Central African CFA franc used in Equatorial Guinea, 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

Assume  Not OK. The 1879 Spanish law doesn't mention anything about the possibility of free reproduction of architecture works, and due to its articles 7 and 10, we assume that no reproduction of artistic works are OK without the permission of their owner.

Citations

  1. a b Equatorial Guinea Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-05.
  2. Law of January 10, 1879, on Intellectual Property. Equatorial Guinea (1879). 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:Eritrea

Eritrea

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Eritrea relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Eritrea must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Eritrea 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 Eritrea, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

Italian Eritrea, a colony of the Kingdom of Italy, was established in 1889. The British took over from 1941 to 1950, when Eritrea became loosely federated with Ethiopia. Eritrea broke away from Ethiopia in 1991 and declared independence in May 1993.

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed Provisional Commercial Code of Eritrea and Provisional Civil Code of Eritrea of 1993 (Extracts relating to Intellectual Property rights) as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of Eritrea.[1]

WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2]

General terms

  • The author’s right to authorize the production, reproduction or adaptation of his work may, after his death, be exercised by his heirs for a period of fifty years from the time of the publication of the work.[1993 Art.1670]
  • A work published after the death of its author is protected for a period of fifty years as from the date of publication.[1993 Art.1672]
  • Photographs are only protected if they are printed in a book or are part of a collection, or if they bear the name and address of the author or their agent.[1993 Art.1662]

Freedom of panorama

 Not OK. The 1993 Provisional Commercial Code of Eritrea contains nothing that could be considered a waiver allowing pictures of buildings or works or art in public places to be used for commercial purposes without permission of the copyright holder.

Note that due to lack of a copyright treaty, most works from Eritrea are in the public domain in the United States and most other countries. However, files uploaded to Commons must also be free in the country of origin.

Citations

  1. Eritrea Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights)[2], WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization, 2018
  2. Provisional Commercial Code of Eritrea and Provisional Civil Code of Eritrea of 1993 (Extracts relating to Intellectual Property rights)[3], Eritrea, 1993
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:Estonia

Estonia

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Estonia relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Estonia must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Estonia 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 Estonia, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

Estonia declared independence from Russia on 24 February 1918.

  • In 1940, the country was annexed and occupied by the Soviet Union, which "incorporated" into the USSR as the Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic on 21 July 1940.
  • Estonia was occupied by Germany between 1941 and 1944.
  • For a few days after the German forces left, Estonia was free.
  • The country was then reoccupied by the Soviet Union until 1991. The Soviet occupation was not recognised by the United States and a number of other Western countries.

Estonia restored its independence on 20 August 1991.

Estonia has been a member of the Berne Convention since 26 October 1994, the World Trade Organization since 13 November 1999 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 the Copyright Act of 11 November 1992 (consolidated text of February 1, 2017) as the main copyright law enacted by the legislature of Estonia.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] The Estonian Ministry of Justice provides the current consolidated text in Estonian.[3] They also provide a consolidated English translation.[4]

General rules

Under the Copyright Act of 11 November 1992 (consolidated text of February 1, 2017),

  • The term of protection of copyright is the life of the author and 70 years after his or her death except in the cases prescribed in §§39–42 of this Act.[1992/2017 §38(1)]
  • The term of protection of copyright in a work created by two or more persons as a result of their joint creative activity is the life of the last surviving author and 70 years after his or her death.[1992/2017 §39]
  • In the case of anonymous or pseudonymous works where the author does not become known, the term of protection of copyright shall run for 70 years after the work is lawfully made available to the public.[1992/2017 §40]
  • The term of protection of copyright in a collective work or work created in the execution of duties runs for 70 years after the work is lawfully made available to the public.[1992/2017 §41(1)]
  • The term of protection of copyright in an audiovisual work expires 70 years after the death of the last surviving author (director, script writer, author of dialogue, author of a musical work specifically created for use in the audiovisual work).[1992/2017 §41(1.1)]
  • If a collective work, work created in the execution of duties or audiovisual work is not made available to the public 50 years after creation, the term of protection of copyright expires 70 years after the creation of the work.[1992/2017 §41(2)]

The above terms begin on 1 January of the year following the year of the death of the author, year when the work was lawfully made available to the public or year of creation of the work, as applicable.[1992/2017 §43]

Collective works

A collective work is a work which consists of contributions of different authors which are united into an integral whole by a natural or a legal person on the initiative and under the management of this person and which is published under the name of this natural or legal person (works of reference, collections of scientific works, newspapers, journals and other periodicals or serials, etc.).[1992/2017 §31(1)] Copyright in a collective work shall belong to the person on whose initiative and under whose management the work was created and under whose name it was published unless otherwise prescribed by contract.[1992/2017 §31(2)] The authors of the works included in a collective work (contributions) shall enjoy copyright in their works and they may use their works independently unless otherwise determined by contract. Authors of contributions are not deemed to be joint authors or co-authors.[1992/2017 §31(3)]

Not protected

Under the Copyright Act of 11 November 1992 (consolidated text of February 1, 2017), copyright does not apply to ideas, images, notions, theories, processes, systems, methods, concepts, principles, discoveries, inventions, and other results of intellectual activities which are described, explained or expressed in any other manner in a work; works of folklore; legislation and administrative documents (acts, decrees, regulations, statutes, instructions, directives) and official translations thereof; court decisions and official translations thereof; official symbols of the state and insignia of organisations (flags, coats of arms, orders, medals, badges, etc.); news of the day; facts and data; ideas and principles which underlie any element of a computer program, including those which underlie its user interfaces.[1992/2017 §5]

  • {{PD-EE-exempt}} – copyright does not apply to works of folklore, legislation and administrative documents, court decisions and official translations thereof; official symbols of the state and insignia of organizations. Freedom of panorama in Estonia is restricted to non-commercial uses only, or to overview photos.

Freedom of panorama

 Not OK, only non-commercial use allowed if the work is the main subject. {{NoFoP-Estonia}}

Under the Copyright Act of 11 November 1992 (consolidated text of February 1, 2017): It is permitted to reproduce works of architecture, works of visual art, works of applied art or photographic works which are permanently located in places open to the public, without the authorisation of the author and without payment of remuneration, by any means except for mechanical contact copying, and to communicate such reproductions of works to the public except if the work is the main subject of the reproduction and it is intended to be used for direct commercial purposes. If the work specified in this section carries the name of its author, it shall be indicated in communicating the reproduction to the public.[1992/2017 §20¹]

An obviously unsuitable freedom of panorama for architecture exists, in which architecture can be freely used, but for purpose of "real estate advertisements" only.[1992/2017 §20²]

Currency

OK. Estonian currency was removed from the public domain in 2000.[5] However, Bank of Estonia (Eesti Pank), which holds the copyright to the design of the currency, has allowed reproduction under certain terms:

  • Banknotes: As long as reproductions in advertising or illustrations cannot be mistaken for genuine banknotes they can be used without prior authorisation of the Bank of Estonia. Same kind of restrictions apply to reproductions of Estonian kroon banknotes as do to euro banknotes.[6]
  • Coins: Reproduction in a non-relief (drawings, paintings, films) format is authorised, provided they are not detrimental to the image of the Estonian kroon.

Please use {{EEK banknote}} or {{EEK coin}} for Estonian currency images.

See also

Citations

  1. a b Estonia Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-11.
  2. Copyright Act (consolidated text of February 1, 2017). Estonia (2017). Retrieved on 2018-11-11.
  3. Autoriõiguse seadus (in Estonian). Justiitsministeerium. Retrieved on 2019-02-10.
  4. Copyright Act. Ministry of Justice. Retrieved on 2019-02-10.
  5. Autoriõiguse seaduse muutmise seadus (Copyright Act Amendment Act) (in Estonian) (27 September 2000).
  6. Copy of e-mail was forwarded to [email protected] on 14 July 2008. (ticket:2008071410045309)
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:eSwatini

Eswatini

Commons:Copyright rules by territory/eSwatini/en

Text transcluded from
COM:Ethiopia

Ethiopia

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Ethiopia relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Ethiopia must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Ethiopia 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 Ethiopia, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

During the late 19th-century Scramble for Africa, Ethiopia was one of two nations to retain its sovereignty from long-term colonialism by a European colonial power, although it was occupied by Italy between 1936 and 1941.

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Copyright and Neighboring Rights Protection Proclamation No. 410/2004 as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of Ethiopia.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] The law was amended in some aspects by the Copyright and Neighboring Rights Protection (Amendment) Proclamation No. 872/2014.[3]

Applicability

"Work" means a production in the literary, scientific and Artistic fields. It includes in particular: a) books, booklets, articles in reviews and newspaper, computer programs; b) speeches, lectures, addresses, sermons, and other oral works; c) dramatic, dramatico-musical works, pantomimes, choreographic works, and other works created for stage production; d) musical compositions; e) audiovisual works; f) works of architecture; g) works of drawing, painting, sculpture, engraving, lithography, tapestry, and other works of fine arts; h) photographic works; i) illustrations, maps, plans, sketches, and three dimensional works related to geography, topography, architecture or science.[410/2004 Article 2(30)]

The following are also protected as works: a) translation, adaptations, arrangements and other transformations or modifications of works, b) collection of works such as encyclopedia or anthologies or databases whether in machine readable or other form provided that such collections are original by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents.[410/2004 Article 4] The author of a work shall be entitled to protection for his work without any formality where it is original and fixed. Photographic works, in addition to the above, shall be protected where they a) form part of a collection or are published in a book or b) bear the name and address of the author or his agent.[410/2004 Article 6]

General rules

Under the Proclamation No. 410/2004 on Copyright and Neighboring Rights Protection (Federal Negarit Gazeta):

  • Economic rights shall belong to the author during his lifetime and to the heirs or legatees for 50 years from the date of death of the author.[410/2004 Article 20/1]
  • In case of a work of joint authorship, the term of 50 years shall commence from the death of the last surviving author.[410/2004 Article 20/2]
  • The term of 50 years of a posthumous work shall commence to run from the date of publication of the work.[410/2004 Article 20/3]
  • Where the work is a work of collective work, other than an audiovisual work, the economic rights shall be protected for 50 years from the date on which the work was either made or first made available to the public, or first published, whichever date is the latest.[410/2004 Article 20/4]
  • Where the work is a work published anonymously or under a pseudonym, the economic rights shall be protected for 50 years from the date on which the work was either made or first made available to the public or first published, whichever date is the latest.[410/2004 Article 20/5]
  • The economic rights relating to a photographic work shall be protected for 25 years from the making of the work.[410/2004 Article 20/7]
  • The economic rights relating to an audiovisual work shall be protected for 50 years beginning from the date of making of the work or communication of the work to the public, whichever date is the latest.[410/2004 Article 20/8]
  • Any official text of a legislative, administrative or of legal nature, as well as official translations thereof, is not protected.[410/2004 Article 5(b)]

Commissioned works

Under the Proclamation No. 410/2004 on Copyright and Neighboring Rights Protection (Federal Negarit Gazeta):

  • Where the work is a work created by an author employed or Commissioned by a person in the course of his employment or contract of service, unless agreed otherwise, the original owner of the rights shall be the employer or the person who commissioned the work.[410/2004 Article 21/4]

Lack of treaties

  • {{PD-Ethiopia}} – copyright term is generally 50 years after the author's death, or from the making of an audiovisual work or communication of said work to the public, whichever date is the latest. Copyright of a photographic work is 25 years from the making of the work.[410/2004 Article 20/1,7,8]

Currency

 Not OK. Ethiopia's copyright law excepts "any official text of a legislative, administrative or of legal nature, as well as official translations thereof".[410/2004 Article 5(b)] The term "official text" does not seem to include banknotes. Note that, as of May 2016, Ethiopia is not a party to the Berne Convention, so Ethiopian banknotes are not protected by US copyright law. However, Commons' policy is that works must be free in both the US and the source country.

Freedom of panorama

 Not OK. {{NoFoP-Ethiopia}} Ethiopian law includes buildings and sculptures and fine arts works among the works subject to rights of copyright (Part 1 - article 3 : Scope of application ) and there is no "freedom of panorama" exception.

Note that due to lack of a copyright treaty, most works from Ethiopia are in the public domain in the United States and most other countries. However, files uploaded to Commons must also be free in the country of origin.

Stamps

. There are no specific laws on the copyright status of stamps. Ethiopian stamps are in the public domain 50 years after the date of issue, per the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Protection Proclamation No. 410/2004, which states that "Economic rights shall belong to the author during his lifetime and to the heirs or legatees for fifty years from the date of death of the author" (Art. 20) and "The economic rights relating to an audiovisual work shall be protected for fifty years beginning from the date of making of the work or communication of the work to the public, which ever date is the latest."

See also

Citations

  1. Ethiopia Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
  2. Copyright and Neighboring Rights Protection Proclamation No. 410/2004. Ethiopia (2004). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
  3. Copyright and Neighboring Rights Protection (Amendment) Proclamation No. 872/2014. Ethiopia (2014). 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:European Union

European Union

"COM:EU" redirects here. For the discontinued extended uploaders program, see Commons:Extended uploaders.

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of the European Union relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in the European Union must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both the country of origin 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 European Union, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

The European Union (EU) is a political and economic union of member states that are located primarily in Europe. The EU has developed an internal single market through a standardised system of laws that apply in all member states in those matters, and only those matters, where members have agreed to act as one. A monetary union was established in 1999 and came into full force in 2002 and is composed of 19 EU member states which use the euro currency.

The Copyright Directive (officially the Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society), is a directive of the European Union enacted to implement the WIPO Copyright Treaty and to harmonise aspects of copyright law across Europe, such as copyright exceptions.[1] The European Union has been a Contracting Party to the WIPO Copyright Treaty with effect from 14 March 2010.[2]

EU members are:

In addition to the normal copyright, there are some related rights that may apply:

  • The publication right lasts 25 year from first publication of a previously unpublished work the copyright term of which has ended. The publisher gets exclusive copyright-like rights to the work.
  • The database right is an exclusive right to some aspects of copying any significant portion of facts from a compilation, lasting 15 years, but new versions of the collection are equally protected for 15 years.

The following tags apply to works published in any country which has copyright legislation harmonized to the European Union directives.

  • {{PD-old-70}} – for works in the public domain because their copyright has expired in countries and areas copyrighting works for life plus 70 years or less.
  • {{PD-anon-70-EU}} – anonymous work more than 70 years old (European Union).
  • {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}} – anonymous work published more than 70 years ago without a public claim of authorship and no subsequent claim of authorship in the 70 years following its first publication (European Union).
  • {{PD-EEA}} – Image in the public domain because it is extracted from the European Environment Agency Website, whose material is in the public domain unless otherwise stated.
  • {{Attribution-Eur-Lex}} – for works of law of the European Union, as recorded on Eur-Lex
  • {{Attribution-Eurostat}} – for works from the European Union's statistical agency, Eurostat
  • {{PD-European-Commission}} – for works produced by the commission without specified restrictions; works on ec.europa.eu or its portal are CC-BY-4.0.

Individual countries of the European Union may also have country-specific tags.

Currency

Euro banknotes

OK. Under conditions. (use {{Money-EU}} for images of Euro banknotes). The rules for reproducing Euro banknotes were published in the Official Journal of the European Union, L078 of 25 March 2003.[3] In summary, Euro banknotes are copyright of the European Central Bank, and the following rules apply to one-sided reproductions, such as pictures on websites:

  • The size of the reproduction must be at least 125% or not greater than 75% of both the length and width of the banknote.
  • Reproductions depicting a part of either side of the note should be smaller than one-third of the original side.
  • On intangible reproductions (e.g. websites), the word SPECIMEN must be printed diagonally across the reproduction in Arial font or similar, in a non-transparent color contrasting with the dominant color of the note. The length of the word must be at least 75% of the length of the reproduction, and the height of the word must be at least 15% of the width of the reproduction. The resolution of the image must not exceed 72 dots per inch (dpi).
Euro coins

OK. Common side, under conditions. Copyright of the common side of the coin lies with the Commission of the European Union, which has determined that reproduction in a format without relief (e.g. drawing, pictures), provided that they are not detrimental to the image of the euro, is authorized.[4][5][6] A deletion request was made in 2010 regarding them (Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Euro coin common face 2) and the conclusion was to keep them but they were deleted regardless. They were reinstated after a deletion review.

"Reproduction of all or part of the common face design of the euro coins is authorised without recourse to a specific procedure in the following cases ... for photographs, drawings, paintings, films, images, and generally reproductions in flat format (without relief) provided they are in faithful likeness and are used in ways which do not damage or detract from the image of the euro."[6]

 Not OK. National side may not be acceptable. Copyright of the national side of the coin is determined by the individual Member States in accordance with national legislation. It is copyrighted in some of them. For more information see Copyright of the national sides of euro circulation coins (ec.Europa.eu: XLSX format file).[7]

De minimis

The Copyright Directive (Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society allows for de minimis exception in Art. 5(3)(i):[8]

  • Member States may provide for exceptions or limitations to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 in the following cases: […] incidental inclusion of a work or other subject-matter in other material.

Under the generic conditions of Article 5(5):

  • The exceptions and limitations provided for in paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4 shall only be applied in certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work or other subject-matter and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rightsholder.

Freedom of panorama

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

"Member States may provide for exceptions or limitations to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 in the following cases: (...) (h) use of works, such as works of architecture or sculpture, made to be located permanently in public places".[9]

Citations

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:Faroe Islands

Faroe Islands

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of the Faroe Islands relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in the Faroe Islands must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both the Faroe Islands 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 Faroe Islands, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

The Faroe Islands is an autonomous country of the Kingdom of Denmark.

The Danish copyright law, Consolidated Act on Copyright (Consolidated Act No. 1144 of October 23, 2014), does not extend to the Faroe Islands but may by Royal Ordinance be brought into full or partial operation in the Faroe Islands, subject to such modifications as required by the special conditions obtaining in the Faroe Islands.[1144/2014 Art.93]

The prevailing copyright law in the islands is Løgtingslóg nr. 30 frá 30. apríl 2015 um upphavsrætt.[1]

General rules

According to the Faroese law of 2013, since amended[1]:

  • Works are protected for the term of life of the author plus 70 years (= {{PD-old-70}}) (§ 53, 1)
  • Anonymous works are protected with a copyright term of 70 years after the work was made available to the public if the author never disclosed their identity (= {{Anonymous-EU}}) (§ 53, 2)
  • Photographic images are protected for the rest of the year they were created + 50 full years. (§ 58)

Freedom of panorama

According to Løgtingslóg nr. 30 frá 30. apríl 2015 um upphavsrætt (in Faroese text):

  • "Tá listaverk varandi er sett upp við veg ella á plássi, har atkomuligt er hjá almenninginum, kann listaverkið verða avmyndað. Ásetingin í 1. pkt. er tó ikki galdandi, um listaverkið er høvuðsevnið í myndini, og myndin verður tikin við vinningi fyri eyga."[30/2015 §24.2.]
  • "Bygningar kunnu frítt avmyndast."[30/2015 §24.3.]

Listaverk - work/s of art. Bygningar - building/s.

Stamps

Public domain use {{PD-Faroe stamps}}

See also

Citations

  1. a b Løgtingslóg nr. 30 frá 30. apríl 2015 um upphavsrætt[4], 2013
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:Fiji

Fiji

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Fiji relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Fiji must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Fiji 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 Fiji, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Background

The British established the crown colony of Fiji in 1874. Fiji gained independence in 1970. Fiji has been a member of the Berne Convention since 9 October 1970.[1] By letter dated 1 December 1971, the Government of Fiji deposited a declaration of continued application of the Brussels Act of the Berne Convention.[2] Fiji joined the World Trade Organization since 14 January 1996.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Copyright Act, 1999 as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of Fiji.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[3]

Applicability

According to the Copyright Act, 1999, copyright is a property right that exists in accordance with this Act in original works of the following descriptions: (a) literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic works; (b) sound recordings; (c) audio visual works; (d) broadcasts; (e) cable programmes; (f) typographical arrangements of published editions.[1999 Section 14(1)]

Durations

Under the Copyright Act, 1999,

  • Subject to the following subsections, copyright in a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work expires at the end of 50 years after the end of the calendar year in which the author dies.[1999 Section 22(1)]
  • If the work is a photograph, copyright expires at the end of 50 years after the end of the calendar year in which the photograph is taken.[1999 Section 22(2)]
  • If the work is computer-generated, copyright expires at the end of 50 years after the end of the calendar year of authorised publication of the work, or, if there is no authorised publication within 50 years after the making of the work, at the end of 50 years after the end of the calendar year of its making.[1999 Section 22(3)]
  • If the work is of unknown authorship, copyright expires at the end of 50 years after the end of the calendar year of authorised publication of the work, or if there is no authorized publication within 50 years after the making of the work. at the end of 50 years after the end of the calendar year of its making.[1999 Section 22(4)] If the identity of the author of a work of unknown authorship becomes known after the copyright has expired, the copyright is not revived.[1999 Section 22(5)]
  • With a work of joint authorship, the reference to the death of the author is to be construed as a reference to the death of the last of the authors whose identity is known.[1999 Section 22(6)]
  • Copyright in a sound recording or audio visual works expires at the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work is made, or is first made available to the public, or is first published, whichever is the latest.[1999 Section 23(1)]
  • Copyright in a broadcast or a cable programme expires at the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the broadcast is made or the cable programme is communicated to the public.[1999 Section 24(1)]
  • Copyright in a typographical arrangement of a published edition expires at the end of the period of 25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the edition is first published.[1999 Section 25]
  • Where a work is made by or under the direction or control of the State, the State is the first owner of any copyright in the work.[1999 Section 26(1)] State copyright expires
    • in the case of a typographical arrangement of a published edition - at the end of the period of 25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work is made;[1999 Section 26(3a)]
    • in the case of any other work - at the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work is made.[1999 Section 26(3b)]

Not protected

Under the Copyright Act, 1999, no copyright exists in any of the following works: (a) any Bill introduced into the House of Representatives; (b) any Act as defined in the Interpretation Act (Cap 7); (c) any subsidiary legislation as defined in the Interpretation Act (Cap 7); (d) the debates of the Parliament of the Fiji Islands; (e) a report of a Royal Commission, Commission of Inquiry, ministerial inquiry or statutory inquiry; (f) a judgment of any court or tribunal.[1999 Section 27(1] This applies to works made before or after this Act comes into force.[1999 Section 27(2]

  • {{PD-Fiji}} – for photographs at least 50 years after production.

Freedom of panorama

OK for buildings, sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship. Under the Copyright Act, 1999,

  • This section applies to (a) buildings; and (b) works (being sculptures, models for buildings, or works of artistic craftsmanship) that are permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.[1999 Section 67(1)]
  • Copyright in a work to which this section applies is not infringed by (a) copying the work by making a graphic work representing it; (b) copying the work by making a photograph or audiovisual work of it; or (c) broadcasting, or including in a cable programme, a visual image of the work.[1999 Section 67(2)]
  • Copyright is not infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the broadcasting or communication to the public or inclusion in a cable programme, of anything the making of which was, under this section, not an infringement of copyright.[1999 Section 67(3)]

Citations

  1. a b c Fiji Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-04.
  2. Berne Notification No. 33 ... Accession of Fiji to the Stockholm Act[5], WIPO, (Please provide a date or year)
  3. Copyright Act, 1999. Fiji (1999). 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:Finland

Finland

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Finland relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Finland must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Finland 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 Finland, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Governing laws

Finland has been a member of the Berne Convention since 1 April 1928, 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 the Copyright Act (Act No. 404/1961 of July 8, 1961, as amended up to Act No. 972/2016 of November 18, 2016) as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of Finland.[1] WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] The Finnish Ministry of Justice website holds an English translation of the Copyright Act 404/1961, with amendments up to 608/2015 on its website.[3] Finlex holds up-to-date Finnish and Swedish versions of the act.[4][5]

General rules

Under the Copyright Act 404/1961, with amendments up to 608/2015,

  • Copyright subsists until 70 years have elapsed from the year of the author's death or, in the case of a work of joint authorship, from the year of death of the last surviving author.[404/1961–2015 Sec.43(1)]
  • Copyright in a cinematographic work subsists until 70 years have elapsed from the year of the death of the last of the following to survive: the principal director, the author of the screenplay, the author of the dialogue and the composer of music specifically created for use in the cinematographic work.[404/1961–2015 Sec.43(1)]
  • Copyright in a musical work with lyrics, when the lyrics and music have been specifically created for the work, subsists until 70 years have elapsed from the death of the last surviving lyricist or composer, whether or not they have been appointed as the authors of the musical work with lyrics.[404/1961–2015 Sec.43(2)]
  • Copyright in a work made public without mention of the author's name or generally known pseudonym or pen name shall subsist until 70 years have elapsed from the year in which it was made public.[404/1961–2015 Sec.44(1)]
    • If the identity of the author is disclosed during the period referred to in subsection 1, the provisions of section 43 shall apply.[404/1961–2015 Sec.44(2)]
    • The copyright in a work not made public, whose author is unknown, shall subsist until 70 years have elapsed from the year in which the work was created.[404/1961–2015 Sec.44(3)]
  • Anyone who for the first time publishes or makes public a previously unpublished work for which the protection has expired obtains a right that subsists until 25 years have elapsed from the year in which the work was published.[404/1961–2015 Sec.44a]

Photographs that are not works of art

The right to a photographic picture [that does not qualify as a "work of art"] shall be in force until 50 years have elapsed from the end of the year during which the photographic picture was made.[404/1961–2015 Sec.49a]

Photographs considered to be "works of art" are protected normally for 70 years after the death of the work's creator.[404/1961–2015 Sec.43] The difference between a photograph and a photographic work of art is not precisely defined. To qualify as a work of art, the photograph must express personal vision such that no other person can be expected to have produced a similar image. As an example, the (legally not binding) statement by the Finnish Copyright Council states that this photograph of Paavo Nurmi "— is, despite its historical importance, a regular photograph of contemporary events. The photograph does not demonstrate original and personal contribution on the part of the photographer and so it cannot be regarded as a photographic work (of art)."[6]

An amendment to the Copyright Act (1991) extended the copyright time from 25 years (according to the 1961 copyright law) to 50 years. However, material already released to public domain according to the 1961 law remain in public domain and therefore all photographs (but not photographic works of art) released before 1966 are in the public domain (and were in the public domain at the URAA date).

Photographs featuring works of art exhibited in public spaces can only be used for non-commercial purposes other than in certain contexts (similar to "fair use"), unless it is clear that the work is not the main subject in the photo (freedom of panorama). Taking photographs of buildings (works of architecture) is explicitly allowed, but photographing single, private homes or yards may be illegal based on privacy laws.

Photographs of people

The law regarding images of living people is unclear and the advice below is mostly deduced from recommendations, case law and legal literature. Possible consequences of the Data Protection Directive of the EU and related domestic legislation have not been considered below.

Domestic privacy (kotirauha, hemfrid): people in private yards, homes or similar places (which includes temporary overnighting facilities, such as tents) may not be observed by technical means, nor photographed, other than rightfully (which may open for de minimis defence in some cases).

Photos of people who are of public interest (famous politicians, artists, sportsmen) and who are carrying out their public duties or going about their usual work may be published without consent. In case of politicians, public officials and important persons in economical life, photos of private life may also be published in certain cases, where the information is important for their role and for public interest.

Photos of regular people in public places may only be published without their consent if the person is clearly not the main subject of the image and the picture does not cause damage, suffering or despise to the person in the picture. Photographs of public events or regular life in the streets should be unproblematic, unless some individual people are shown prominently or somebody is doing something stupid. In the latter case, whether showing the incident is unimportant, and whether the person did not intend the action to be public, should be considered.

However, if the person can be identified, the image may not be used in advertisement (commercially or non-commercially) without consent. Even when a person is not clearly identifiable, using a picture with the person as the main subject may require their consent. The images should be marked with {{Personality rights}} as the uploader may be held responsible for allowing such use.

Not protected

Under the Copyright Act 404/1961, with amendments up to 608/2015, there shall be no copyright:[404/1961–2015 Sec.9(1)]

  • In laws and decrees;
  • In resolutions, stipulations and other documents which are published under the Act on the Statutes of Finland (188/2000) and the Act on the Regulations of Ministries and other Government Authorities (189/2000);
  • Treaties, conventions and other corresponding documents containing international obligations;
  • Decisions and statements issued by public authorities or other public bodies;
  • Translations of documents referred to above made by or commissioned by public authorities or other public bodies.

As of the 2005 revision, copyright protection continues to apply to independent works contained in the documents referred to in the list above.[404/1961–2015 Sec.9(1)] A work that is part of or attached to a decision or something similar is often such that it was not produced specifically as a part of the decision or as an attachment to it. In such a case, it is not reasonable that the attached work should also automatically lose copyright protection. An example is a work of fine art included in currency. This applies to independent works included in both the text of the document and its appendices. These independent works could be reproduced in connection with the document in question and used separately from the document for the purpose to which the document is related, but due to these restrictions the document or the protected independent work it contains cannot be uploaded to Commons.[7]

The textual, and in many cases the graphical, representations of Finnish coat of arms of municipalities, regions and provinces are considered to be part of decisions of public bodies and therefore they are not protected by copyright. According to the opinions of the Finnish Copyright Council even the graphical representation is thought (at least in these cases) not to be protected by copyright.[8][9]

Either the graphical representations were part of the decisions of the municipalities (whether they could be considered works of art was thought to be irrelevant), or the alterations made did not meet the requirements for an original work of art. The coats of arms of historical provinces and other historical coats of arms are not protected by copyright: if there has been any copyright, it has expired.

Coats of arms of new entities should be analysed on a case-by-case basis. Usually they are based on old coats of arms and not eligible, but there is no guarantee unless they are included in public decisions. Some unofficial coats of arms, e.g. for former municipalities, which never had official coats of arms, are private creations under copyright, provided they reach the threshold of originality.

National recommendations (JHS 189) for open licensing in Finland is CC-BY and most of the open digital archives are following it. A digitised work (particularly of a three-dimensional object) could lead to protection by a related right as a non original photograph. The Copyright council has stated that the start time of copyright protection of a photograph is when the photograph is taken. Reproductions of out of copyright photographs are copies and do not get new copyright protection.[10]

  • {{PD-Finland50}} – for photographic simple images in the public domain according to Finnish law.
  • {{PD-Finland}} – for works of art (photographic included) in the public domain according to Finnish law. Same as {{PD-old-70}} for Finnish works.
  • {{PD-FinlandGov}} – for laws, statements and decisions of Finnish officials.
  • {{PD-Coa-Finland}} – for Finnish coats of arms of municipalities, districts or administrative or historical provinces.
  • {{PD-FinlandStamp}} – for postage stamps published before January 1, 1990.
  • {{PD-Kansallisarkisto}} – for archives material from the digital database of Finnish National Archives Service
  • {{PD-Raita}} – for records from the Raita database.[11]

Currency

 Not OK. Some exceptions do apply. The Bank of Finland claims that using images of banknotes and Euro coins is subject to permission. For Euro banknotes and the shared side of Euro coins: see COM:CRT/European Union:Currency. For markka banknotes, permission has been granted given provided certain guidelines are followed, see below. There is a statement from the Finnish Copyright Council (a semi-official body giving advice on copyright) that the use of an image on a markka coin is not subject to copyright, as the designs of coins were part of decrees. The statement could apply more broadly.

Decisions by governmental institutions are excepted from copyright. This includes images that are part of the decisions (see e.g. statement 1989:13 of the Finnish Copyright Council, on using the image of a coin), unless those are separate works, which is thought to apply only in unusual cases. In the old law on money there was no mention of copyright. Thus the images on markka banknotes and coins should be in the public domain, and likewise the images on the national side of euro coins.

There might be copyright issues, independent of the copyright by governmental bodies, if a design element is a derived work of a pre-existing work. The last 20 mark and 100 mark banknotes are known to be encumbered by this.

Counterfeit legislation does apply: it is criminal to publish images that are confusingly similar to legal tender (chapter 37, article 7 of the penal code). For instructions about Euro notes and coins see above.

The Bank of Finland claims it has copyright on Finnish (i.e. mark) banknotes and states that illegal reproduction of banknotes is punishable as counterfeit or fraud according to chapter 33 and 36 of the Penal Code (these seem not to apply to good faith use), or as breach of copyright.

Sources:

  • On copyright protection of the common face design of the euro coins.[12]
  • Bank of Finland 2015 guide how to use pictures of the notes.[13]
  • Decision of the European central bank of 19 April 2013 on the denominations, specifications, reproduction, exchange and withdrawal of euro banknotes (recast)[14]
  • The penal code chapter 37, article 7, and chapter 33 and 36.[15]
  • Statement of the Finnish Copyright Council on using an image of the markka coin[16]
  • Statement of the Finnish Copyright Council on using an image of the Finnish flag, about coins is summarized[17]
  • Statement of the Finnish Copyright Council on coats of arms of municipalities, where the applicability of article 9 of the copyright law is discussed[18]
  • Old law on money[19]

De minimis

Under the Copyright Act 404/1961, with amendments up to 608/2015,

  • Works of art made public may be reproduced in pictorial form in material connection with the text: 1) in a critical or scientific presentation; and 2) in a newspaper or a periodical when reporting on a current event, provided that the work has not been created in order to be reproduced in a newspaper or a periodical.[404/1961–2015 Sec.25(1)]
  • When a copy of a work of art has, with the consent of the author, been sold or otherwise permanently transferred, the work of art may be incorporated into a photograph, a film, or a television programme if the reproduction is of a subordinate nature in the photograph, film or programme.[404/1961–2015 Sec.25(2)]

Freedom of panorama

Under the Copyright Act 404/1961, with amendments up to 608/2015,

  • A work of art may be reproduced in pictorial form ... if the work is permanently placed at, or in the immediate vicinity of, a public place. If the work of art is the leading motive of the picture, the picture may not be used for the purpose of gain. A picture having a material connection to the text may, however, be included in a newspaper or a periodical.[404/1961–2015 Sec.25a(3)][20]
  • A building may be freely reproduced in pictorial form.[404/1961–2015 Sec.25a(4)]

Buildings (works of architecture) are the only copyrighted works in public space from Finland that can be hosted on Wikimedia Commons. Non-commercial licensing is not accepted on Commons as per Commons:Licensing (which is backed by the Definition of Free Cultural Works). Images of works of art permanently located in public places in Finland can only be used non-commercially or as illustrations to texts in newspapers and periodicals. Published works of art may also be used as illustrations to scientific texts or criticism, according to Article 25.

Stamps

Åland has its own laws on postal matters; the discussion below does not concern stamps of Åland.

Maybe copyrighted Stamps issued before 1990

Before 1990 stamps were issued by a public body whose decisions and statements are not protected by copyright. See #Not protected (above). If an image of a stamp was included in a public body's decision or statement and the stamp is not an independent work, the image would be free of copyright as part of the document, the document can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and the image can be cropped from this document. Use {{PD-FinlandStamp}} in these cases.

It is uncertain how the above affects the copyright of stamps depicted in other places. The precautionary principle is that we assume a stamp is copyrighted unless proven otherwise. A copyrighted stamp will lose copyright protection 70 years after the author's death or 70 years after publication if the author is anonymous. Information on the author of a stamp will often be available at Postimuseo's Postimerkkiselain, and should be included in the stamp description where available. Use {{PD-old-70}} or {{PD-anon-70}} in these cases.

Copyrighted Stamps issued from 1990

Posts and Telecommunications of Finland became a state-owned enterprise known as Posti-Tele in 1990. It is not clear whether this entity and its successors retained the status of public bodies. The precautionary principle is that we assume it did not, and any new stamps issued from 1990 onward remain copyrighted.

Threshold of originality

For works of visual art, the threshold of originality is relatively low.[21] Simple logos, however, are generally below the threshold of originality.[22] In particular, the threshold is high when only basic colors and shapes (such as triangles, squares and circles or capital letters) are used.[23][21]

OK
Simple photograph with limited copyright period – not a photographic work of art. (TN 2003:6)
OK
Differences compared to the coat of arms of the historic region did not meet threshold of originality. (TN 1998:5)
 Not OK Commons:Deletion_requests/Aalto_vases "The wave-like forms of the [original Aalto vases] do not... result from the intended use of the object but the creative mental effort of the author. [Therefore the original vases] are independent and original enough to be considered works of art as meant in 1 § of [the Finnish Copyright law]" (p. 4). (TN 2010:10)
OK A specific house type (Eurohouse S 2, court ruling)
OK
The logo is below the threshold of originality because it is "ordinary and [does] not express an independent and original result of a creative process of its author. Somebody else in undertaking a comparable task could have contrived a similar ... logo". (TN 2000:1)
 Not OK Save the Children Fund logo The logo is above the threshold of originality, because its "visual manifestation is the creative work of its author, whereby the ideological basis of the fund has been successfully conformed with in an independent and original manner... [N]o one else undertaking a comparable task could have reached a similar outcome". (TN 2010:3)
OK

and

The logos are "in their literary and visual manifestation simple and ordinary to the degree that they are not to be regarded as original works in their own regard." (TN 2009:2)
OK
The logo is "is not original and independent in such a way that it would be protected ... by copyright". (TN 2011:7)
OK
The logo is below the threshold of originality because "its central elements and the way in which they have been combined are commonly used in logos and are thus ordinary". (TN 2000:1)
 Not OK "Silmu" logo Although the logo consists of a "stylized, albeit fairly simple, red tulip", it is above the threshold of originality for works of visual art. (TN 2001:12)


See also

Citations

  1. a b Finland Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-11.
  2. Copyright Act (Act No. 404/1961 of July 8, 1961, as amended up to Act No. 972/2016 of November 18, 2016). Finland (2016). Retrieved on 2018-11-11.
  3. Copyright Act (404/1961, amendments up to 608/2015). Finnish Ministry of Justice. Retrieved on 2019-02-11.
  4. Tekijänoikeuslaki (Copyright Act) (in Finnish). Finlex (4 February 2019). Retrieved on 2019-02-11.
  5. Upphovsrättslag (Copyright Act (in Swedish). Finlex (4 February 2019). Retrieved on 2019-02-11.
  6. 2003:6 Onko kuva valokuva vai teos See partial English translation.
  7. “Tekijänoikeus lakeihin, asetuksiin ym. (9 §)”, in Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle laeiksi tekijänoikeuslain ja rikoslain 49 luvun muuttamisesta[6] (in fi), 2004, page 50–51
  8. 1997:11
  9. 1998:5
  10. TN 2017:15 Valokuvan valmistamisen ajankohta (in Finnish). Minedu. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  11. [https://oa.doria.fi/handle/10024/29298 Raita database
  12. On copyright protection of the common face design of the euro coins (2001/C 318/03) (in Finnish)
  13. Bank of Finland 2015 guide how to use pictures of the notes
  14. Decision of the European central bank of 19 April 2013 on the denominations, specifications, reproduction, exchange and withdrawal of euro banknotes (recast) (ECB/2013/10) (Finnish)
  15. Penal code Finnish / Swedish/English translation
  16. Statement 989:13 of the Finnish Copyright Council
  17. statement 2001:3 (pdf, Finnish), statement 1989:13
  18. 1997/tn9711 (Finnish)
  19. rahalaki/myntlagen
  20. Tekijänoikeuslaki 25 a § (14.10.2005/821) (in Finnish). finlex. Retrieved on 2019-05-25.
  21. a b TN 2011:7
  22. TN 2014:13
  23. TN 2001:12
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
Text transcluded from
COM:France

France

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of France relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in France must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both France 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 France, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Governing laws

France 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.[1]

The relevant laws are in the first book of the Code of Intellectual Property.[2][3] The code includes dispositions transposed from the 1993 European directive on Copyright.[4]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed the Intellectual Property Code (consolidated version as of September 7, 2018) as the main IP law enacted by the legislature of France.[1]WIPO holds the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[5]

General

  • Standard copyright term: Life + 70 years, (except posthumous works, musical works, and works whose author "died for France")
  • Wartime copyright extensions may apply to musical works: + 6 years 152 days for musical work published through 1920 (Art. L123-8); + 8 years and 120 days for musical work published through 1947 (Art. L123-9); these extensions are cumulative with each other and with the "died for France" extension.
  • Anonymous works: 70 years after publication (if author never disclosed)
  • Posthumous works: Life + 70 years if published within 70 years of the author's death, otherwise, 25 years from publication[12]
  • Government works: not free except for video, text and graphics published on the gouvernement.fr site between March 2014 and September 2014 (Please use {{Gouvernement.fr}})

The normal duration of copyright is 70 years following the end of the year of death of the author (or the death of the last author for multiple authors); if the work is anonymous, pseudonymous or collective, it is 70 years following the end of the year of publication of the work (unless the authors named themselves). This applies only if publication occurs within 70 years of creation (see Article L123-3).

Images from public web sites

Note that French government services often use professional photographers who are not government employees to make official photographs. These photographers then typically sell usage rights of the photograph to the government. In such circumstances, the government does not own the copyright to the photograph, and thus could not give us a license to use it even if it wanted to.

The rules for protection of works by the government are somewhat fuzzy, and one should assume by default that anything from a government entity is copyrighted. One should refer to the Law of 17 July 1978 and Decree of 30 December 2005.[6][7]

Laws, decrees, court decisions and other similar government texts (but not the translations or commentaries thereof), possibly found on the Légifrance website, are in the public domain. This seems acknowledged by Légifrance's copyright terms.

Video, text and graphics published on the gouvernement.fr website are now licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND but where in 2014 under CC BY 3.0 FR. Be careful, since this does not apply to photographs. However, it is possible to import images taken from videos. Please use {{Gouvernement.fr}} Unless you really know what you're doing, please abstain from copying photos from French government web sites to Commons. Thanks.

On February 27, 2007, the Court of Cassation, supreme jurisdiction, first civil chamber, ruled in the Hazan case (arrêt n° 280 du 27 février 2007) that articles L123-8 and L123-9, extending the duration of protection to compensate for periods of wartime, were not applicable to works for which an extended protection period (beyond 70 years) had not started to elapse on July 1, 1995.[8][9] The judgment regarding Giovanni Boldini's work was broke too, by the same court.[10]

Previously, French law granted extensions to copyright because of the World Wars.[5] The extensions were:

Several extensions can be added together, by example: Alain-Fournier, « Mort pour la France » on 1 January 1915 : +50 years, +30 years, +6 years +152 days, +8 years +120 days = 30 September 2009.

In practice, copyright extensions today only apply for authors "Mort pour la France", but even this is subject to debate.


It was previously assumed that the European directive on copyright did not necessarily suppress these extensions:

  • Article 10 – Where a term of protection, which is longer than the corresponding term provided for by this Directive, is already running in a Member State on the date referred to in Article 13 (1), this Directive shall not have the effect of shortening that term of protection in that Member State.

According to the French Ministry of Culture, the legal status of these extensions, adopted when copyright was 50 years after death, was unclear in the context of the new 70-year law; the Ministry called for erring on the side of caution and assuming they are valid.[11]

It was also assumed that copyright holders do try to enforce these extensions. In 2005, right holders demanded payment for a movie where a character whistled The Internationale, whose author died in 1932. (See also Template:PD-Internationale for further information.) On the other hand, the Paris Appeal Court ruled against applying the extensions in 2004. However, on 12 October 2005, another section of the same court applied the extension so that the works of the painter Giovanni Boldini who died in 1931 will not enter the public domain before late 2016.

Works of arts, including architecture, exhibited in public spaces

The architect of a notable building owns copyright over the representations of that building, including postcards and photographs. For instance, the architect of the pyramid in the courtyard of the Louvre Museum may claim copyright over images of the pyramid. This, for instance, extends to the designer of lighting systems; for instance, the company operating the Eiffel Tower claims copyright of images of the tower when lighted at night.

Place des Terreaux, Lyon

However, ruling #567 of March 15, 2005 of the Court of Cassation denied the right of producers of works of arts installed in a public plaza over photographs of the whole plaza:

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

The court draws a distinction between depictions of a work of art, and depictions of whole settings of which the work of art is a mere part, and denies the right of the artist over such images.

While architects may have rights to works derived from their work of art, this is not the case of the owners of works of art or buildings, in general. The summary of the conclusions of a May 7, 2004 ruling by the Court of Cassation was:[12]

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

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

The Court already ruled on [June 5, 2003], that the right of property comprised absolutely no right to the image of this property.[13] However, they also upheld the right to privacy of the homeowners: in this case, not only a photograph of a house was published, but also its exact location and the name of the owners. Earlier rulings similarly rejected requests based on ownership without a justification of an abnormal disturbance.[14]

Historical terms

In 1866, France enacted a copyright term of life + 50 years for most works. On January 1, 1986, the term for musical compositions was increased to life + 70 years. On July 1, 1995, the copyright term for most works was increased to life + 70 years (in harmonization with the rest of the European Union).

Prior to July 1, 1995, posthumous works were protected for 50 years from the date of publication.[15]

  • {{PD-France}} – Public domain because the author(s) died more than 70 years ago and did not benefit from any copyright extension, or it is an anonymous, pseudonymous or collective work and more than 70 years have passed since its publication, or it is the recording of an audiovisual or musical work already in the public domain, and more than 50 years have passed since the performance or the recording.
  • {{PD-Archivesnormandie}} – for pictures from the site Archives Normandie 1939-45. Pictures credited to the National Archives USA or the National Archives Canada and tagged "libres de droits" are in the public domain.
  • {{PD-JORF}} – for French official legal texts as published in the Journal officiel de la République Française or reprinted on Légifrance; note: not all texts on Légifrance are out-of-copyright, many others are copyrighted under free licenses, and sometimes under unfree licenses).
  • {{PD-JORF-nor-conso}} – with NOR (identification number) and index of the updated text.
  • {{PD-ID-France}} – Ineligible for copyright and therefore in the public domain because it is a legally valid French identity photograph.
  • {{Licence Ouverte}} and {{Licence Ouverte 2}} – For documents issued under the Licence Ouverte (for example from http://data.gouv.fr).
  • {{Gouvernement.fr}} – For extracts from a video, text or infographic issued on the French government's website.

Currency

OK Regarding former French currency (francs), case law states that copyright exists, but is paralysed by the ‘allocation to the general interest and character of public service’ of currency. See, for instance, Cour de Cassation 5 February 2002.[16]

Please use {{Money-FR}}.

De minimis

This photograph is not a copyright violation since it is of the entire plaza, and not just the Louvre Pyramid.
The white triangle in this derivative work covers the copyright protected region of the top image.

French case law admits an exception if the copyrighted artwork is "accessory compared to the main represented or handled subject" (CA Paris, 27 octobre 1992, Antenne 2 c/ société Spadem, « la représentation d'une œuvre située dans un lieu public n'est licite que lorsqu'elle est accessoire par rapport au sujet principal représenté ou traité »). Thus ruling #567 of March 15, 2005 of the Court of Cassation denied the right of producers of works of arts installed in a public plaza over photographs of the whole plaza:[17]

  • Because the Court has noticed that, as it was shown in the incriminated images, the works of Mr X... and Z... blended into the architectural ensemble of the Terreaux plaza, of which it was a mere element, the appeals court correctly deduced that this presentation of the litigious work was accessory to the topic depicted, which was the representation of the plaza, so that the image did not constitute a communication of the litigious work to the public.[18]


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

  • It can be considered as an illicit representation of a statue by Maillol, the broadcasting of a commercial in which it appears, as it was not included in a film sequence shot in a natural setting—which would explain the brief and non-essential to the main subject, appearance of the sculpture, which is set in the Tuileries gardens, but used as an element of the setting.

Freedom of panorama

 Not OK {{NoFoP-France}}

Please, tag France no-FoP deletion requests: <noinclude>[[Category:French FOP cases/pending]]</noinclude>.

On 7 October 2016, the French parliament approved a law recognizing a limited version of the freedom of panorama that authorizes the reproduction by individuals (not organizations) of buildings and sculptures permanently located in public space, but only for non-commercial utilizations.[19][20]

  • Reproductions and representations of architectural works and sculptures, permanently placed on public roads, carried out by natural persons, to the exclusion of any commercial use.[L.122 5]

On 4 April 2001, a court emphasized that "droit d'auteur unquestionably applies to the reproduction of artworks placed in public space" (« le droit d'auteur s'étend incontestablement à la reproduction de l'œuvre installée dans un espace public »). Concerning buildings, case law defines several criteria for originality:[21]

  • "a definite artistic character" (« un caractère artistique certain »), as opposed to the building being purely functional, and not being part of a series (as is the case in housing development) (CA Riom, 26 May 1966) [ this decision has been criticised as the law explicitly states copyright protection is granted regardless of merit, art.L.112-1 of the French copyright act but another decision of French supreme court concludes on 20 october 2011 that creation must be original as required by art 111-1 of French copyright act and that it is up to appeal court to decide if it is original work or not.[22]
  • a harmonious combination of its composing elements, like volumes and colours (TGI Paris, 19 June 1979)
  • an “esthetic preoccupation”, here the choice of a sphere and of a mirror surface (CA Paris, 23 October 1990, about en:La Géode)
  • a choice which cannot be ascribed to purely technical reasons (CA Paris 20 November 1996, about stairs and a glass roof)
  • Works are protected if the creation is original, but not if the realization is purely technical.[23]
  • Works without a particular or original character, which are a trivial reproduction of building types largely found across the country, are not protected. (#13).[24]
  • It is up to the author or an architectural, art or picture work to prove that it is original and not just application of a technical knowledge.[22]

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

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

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

Courts are traditionally lenient with pictures showing urban landscapes, cf. Tour Montparnasse, C.A. Paris - 7 novembre 1980.[25]

  • Copyright protection expires 70 years after the death of the original author (who is defined as the creator or designer) here. On January 1st of the following year (ie. January 1 of the 71st Year), freely licensed images of the author's 3D works such as sculptures, buildings, bridges or monuments are now free and can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. The lack of Freedom of Panorama is no longer relevant here for states with no formal FOP since the author's works are now copyright free.
Two-dimensional public art

The non-commercial freedom of panorama exception only covers works of architecture and sculptures in public spaces. A case file from 2023 (Combo v. Melénchon), concerning a politician's use of a street art in their ad campaign, sets a precedence that all street art is not covered by the panorama exception. Therefore, all 2D art is  Not OK, even for non-commercial uses. Another precedence is that graphic works are not permanent because these are always exposed to hazards, like bad weather or damage by passersby.[26]

Illegal graffiti are also protected under French copyright law. One image of an illegal graffiti was deleted after a cease-and-desist letter was sent to Wikimedia France in 2012.

Local transfer to French Wikipedia

If the subject of the picture is either a building or an architectural artwork, and if the picture is already used on the French-speaking Wikipedia, w:fr:Utilisateur:Le plus bot can transfer the picture from Commons to this local Wikipedia under a local exception, as voted by the community in 2006 and 2011 (see w:fr:Wikipédia:Exceptions au droit d'auteur#Exceptions).

  • This minimal exception is only for the illustration of the most directly related article in French Wikipedia (this illustration is not usable elsewhere), or outside French Wikipedia.
  • Their licencing terms must not permit their extension to derived works (for example, sales of these pictures is not authorized, as well as offline republication or online republication via external proxies and aggregators)
  • The copyrighted protection must be stated explicitly in their description page, with relevant licencing templates tracking usage of these images in French Wikipedia.
  • The image description page will also display the full list of local pages (most often only one) embedding for their illustration a very limited number of such medias (images in galleries showing all artistic and creative aspect of the same copyrighted subject should not be integrated in these French Wikipedia articles: generally a single illustration is enough). These images should not be integrated in templates reusable in an unbound number of pages.
  • Most free images currently hosted on French Wikipedia should be transferred to Commons, so that French Wikipedia will only host non-free copyrighted materials subject to these restrictions: this will allow remote proxies or Wikipedia contents aggregators, or other linguistic editions of Wikipedia to block these images, even if they display the rest of articles embedding these non-free illustration images, only by looking at the prefix of their URL on the image servers (instead of displaying these images, they can display only their textual description with a direct link to the French Wikipedia article showing these images covered by this exception).
  • Do not transfer these non-free images currently hosted by French Wikipedia (including corporate logos unless they are accessory to the rest of the image and unavoidable) to any other editions of Wikipedia or to other Wikimedia sites (including Commons, as stated by licencing templates shown in their description pages in French Wikipedia).
  • Even if these non-free images are now tolerated in French Wikipedia articles, the legitimate copyright holders can send their veto so that these images will be deleted on French Wikipedia too. The same deletion will occur when receiving a French court order: their long-term presence is not warranted as long as the copyright protection persists.

Stamps

According to La Poste, French stamps have the same legal status as any other work of art. Stamps by designers deceased more than 70 years ago are public domain.[27] The names of the artists are generally printed at the bottom of the stamps or its main picture. Check the individual artists death dates in the frwiki category: Dessinateur de timbres/Stamp designers and also the French Phil-ouest website that lists many more than have wiki articles.[28]

On 1st January 2015, it appears that all postage stamps of France issued until 1922 are in the public domain (doubts about the 1919 stamp known as "The Two Orphans" – cause: no information found on the date of death of Surand and Jarraud).

The following list of artists whose works are in public domain in France (but not necessarily in the United States) because they died before 31 December 1953 is non-exhaustive:

Works by the following artists will be in public domain in France (but not necessarily in the United States) on 1 January following 70 years after their death:

  • Feltesse, Émile Henri (1881–1955) @2026
  • Barlangue, Gabriel Antoine (1874–1956) @2027
  • Dufresne, Charles Paul (1885–1956) @2027
  • Lemasson, Henri (1870–1956) @2027
  • Cheffer, Henry (1880–1957) @2028
  • Rigal, Louis Pierre (1888–1959) @2030
  • Munier, Pierre (1889–1962) @2033
  • Cocteau, Jean (1889–1963) @2034
  • Kieffer, Clément (1881-1964) @2035
  • Mazelin, Charles (1882–1964) @2035
  • Louis, Robert (1902–1965) @2036
  • Serres, Raoul (1881–1971) @2042
  • Cami, Robert (1900–1973) @2044
  • Lemagny, Paul Pierre (1905–1977) @2048
  • Spitz, André (1883–1977) @2048
  • Piel, Jules (1882–1978) @2049
  • Picart Le Doux, Jean (1902–1982) @2053
  • Monvoisin, Michel (1932–1982) @2053
  • Miró, Joan (1893–1983) @2054
  • Fernez Louis (1900–1984) @2055
  • Decaris, Albert (1901–1988) @2059
  • Delpech, Jean (1916–1988) @2059
  • Haley, Claude (1923–1988) @2059
  • Gandon, Pierre (1899–1990) @2061
  • Pheulpin, Jean (1907–1991) @2062
  • Cottet, René (1902–1992) @2063
  • Combet, Jacques (1920–1993) @2064
  • Lengellé, Paul (1908-1993) @2064
  • Peynet, Raymond (1908–1999) @2070
  • Hundertwasser, Friedensreich (1928–2000) @2071
  • Leguay, Marc (1910–2001) @2072
  • Durrens, Claude (1921–2002) @2073
  • Hertenberger, Claude (1912–2002) @2073
  • Bridoux, Charles (1942–2003) @2074
  • Dessirier, René (1919–2003@2074
  • Guillame, Cécile (1933–2004) @2075
  • Folon, Jean-Michel (1934–2005) @2076
  • Forget, Pierre (1923–2005) @2076
  • Lacaque, Eugène (1914–2005) @2076
  • Slania, Czeslaw (1921–2005) @2076
  • Schach-Duc, Yvonne (1933–2009) @2080
  • Sainson, Huguette (1929–2011) @2082
  • Mathieu, Georges (1921–2012) @2083
  • Béquet, Pierre (1932–2012) @2083
  • Leliepvre, Eugène (1908–2013) @2084
  • Wou-Ki, Zao (1920–2013) @2084
  • Markó, Serge (1926–2014) @2085
  • Taraskoff, Mark (1955–2015) @2086
  • Quillivic, René (1925–2016) @2087
  • Andréotto, Claude (1949–2017) @2088

Threshold of originality

French law asserts that a work is copyrightable when it bears the "imprint of the personality of the author". In practice, it depends on the work in question, but this has left the bar quite low for many works where an artistic intent can be shown. For an art exhibition, a man placed the word paradis with gold lettering above the bathroom door of the old dormitory of alcoholics at a psychiatric facility, and termed it artwork; the French courts agreed with him that it was copyrightable based on the aesthetic choices made ("affixing the word paradise in gold with patina effect and a special graphics on dilapidated door, the lock-shaped cross, encased in a crumbling wall with peeling paint").[31]

France has "a slightly higher threshold of originality in general, and particularly so in the context of photographic works".[32]

A decision from Supreme court (Cour de Cassation) on October 2011 agreed with appeal court decision saying that a quite artistic picture of two fish on a yellow plate about a traditional Marseille meal could not be protected by French law because of lack of originality.[22] According to this decision, level of originality required by this appeal court is very high. This decision was criticized but French supreme court does not control facts but only controls interpretation of the law. In 2017, copyright protection on this image of Jimi Hendrix was restored after a court initially denied protection.

See also

Citations

  1. a b France Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights)[7], WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization, 2018
  2. Code de la propriété intellectuelle (in French). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  3. Code of Intellectual Property.
  4. Council Directive No. 93/98/EEC of 29 October 1993 harmonizing the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights. WIPO. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  5. a b Intellectual Property Code (consolidated version as of September 7, 2018)[8], France, 2018
  6. Loi n° 78-753 du 17 juillet 1978 portant diverses mesures d'amélioration des relations entre l'administration et le public et diverses dispositions d'ordre administratif, social et fiscal Version consolidée au 25 mars 2019 (in French). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  7. Décret n°2005-1755 du 30 décembre 2005 relatif à la liberté d'accès aux documents administratifs et à la réutilisation des informations publiques, pris pour l'application de la loi n° 78-753 du 17 juillet 1978. Version consolidée au 25 mars 2019 (in French). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  8. 04-12.138 Arrêt n° 280 du 27 février 2007 (in French). Cour de cassation - Première chambre civile. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  9. Communiqué relatif aux arrêts n°280 et n°281 rendus le 27 février 2007 (in French). Cour de cassation. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  10. Arrêt n° 281 du 27 février 2007 (in French). Cour de cassation. Archived from the original on 15 November 2008. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  11. Numérisation (in French). Ministère de la Culture. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  12. N° de pourvoi: 02-10450 (in French). Cour de cassation (7 May 2004). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  13. N° de pourvoi: 02-12853 (in French). Cour de cassation (5 June 2003). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  14. N° de pourvoi: 99-10709 (in French). Cour de cassation chambre civile 1 (May 2, 2001). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  15. [9]
  16. Clotilde Alric. La Cour de cassation confirme que les billets de banque ne sont pas protégés par le code de la propriété intellectuelle (in French). LegalNews. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  17. 03-14.820 Arrêt n° 567 du 15 mars 2005 (in French). Cour de cassation. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  18. ... Attendu qu’ayant relevé que, telle que figurant dans les vues en cause, l’oeuvre de MM. X... et Z... se fondait dans l’ensemble architectural de la place des Terreaux dont elle constituait un simple élément, la cour d’appel en a exactement déduit qu’une telle présentation de l’oeuvre litigieuse était accessoire au sujet traité, résidant dans la représentation de la place, de sorte qu’elle ne réalisait pas la communication de cette oeuvre au public ...
  19. Manara, Cedric, La Nouvelle « Exception De Panorama ». Gros Plan Sur L’Article L. 122-5 10° Du Code Français De La Propriété Intellectuelle (The New 'Panorama Exception' in French Copyright Law) (August 20, 2016). Forthcoming, Revue Lamy Droit de l'Immatériel, 2016. Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2828355
  20. Marc Rees (30 June 2016). Loi Numérique : la liberté de panorama limitée, mais consacrée (in French). NextImpact.
  21. Résumé de la décision : TGI Lyon, 4 avril 2001, Buren et a. c/ Tassin et a. (in French). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  22. a b c Joëlle Verbrugge (28 October 2011). Originalité, bouillabaisse et contrefaçon. "l’originalité s’entend du reflet de la personnalité de l’auteur ou de la révélation d’un talent créateur ... l’originalité ne se confond pas avec la compétence professionnelle . En d’autres termes, la simple notoriété et compétence d’un photographe ne fait pas de chacune de ses créations une œuvre originale susceptible de protection. le photographe ne rapportait pas à suffisance la preuve d’une « activité créatrice révélant sa personnalité, nonobstant la position en arc de cercle des poissons et l’angle de prise de vue utilisé« , avant de considérer, sur le plan technique que « ce cliché n’est révélateur d’aucune recherche dans les éclairages adéquats, la tonalité des fonds, l’environnement mobilier et les angles de prise de vue. Il ne constitue ainsi qu’une prestation de services techniques ne traduisant qu’un savoir faire."
  23. Jacques-Franck (21 July 2008). "Les architectes face au droit d'auteur", par Agnès Tricoire, avocat. (in French). Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  24. archive copy at the Wayback Machine Etendue et limites du droit d’auteur de l’architecte sur l’œuvre architecturale
  25. « s’agissant d’un élément d’un ensemble architectural qui constitue le cadre de vie de nombreux habitants d’un quartier de Paris (…), le droit à protection cesse lorsque l’œuvre en question est reproduite non pas en tant qu’œuvre d’art, mais par nécessité, au cours d’une prise de vue dans un lieu public ; sur la carte postale litigieuse, la Tour Montparnasse n’a pas été photographiée isolément mais dans son cadre naturel qui ne fait l’objet d’aucune protection. » Source: [10].
  26. Zajdela, Agathe (September 13, 2023). L’EXCEPTION DE PANORAMA NE PERMET PAS LA REPRODUCTION D’UNE OEUVRE DE STREET ART (in fr). Village de la Justice. Retrieved on June 1, 2024.
  27. REPRODUCTION DES TIMBRES-POSTE. La Poste. Retrieved on 2019-01-29.
  28. Les artistes graveurs ou dessinateurs et leurs timbres (in French). Phil-Ouest. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  29. Cortot, Henri (1892-1950) (in French). catawiki.fr.
  30. User talk:Stan Shebs#French stamps / Les 72 timbres, blocs-feuillets, carnets français ou timbres à date de Georges Hourriez - Page 1–2 (in French). Phil Ouest. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  31. Paradis. Photobucket. Retrieved on 2019-03-25.
  32. Mathilde Pavis (University of Exeter) (15 July 2015). Forgive my French: copyright ‘a la carte’ for photographic works. Retrieved on 2019-01-29.
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: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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  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

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

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

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]

Freedom of panorama

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

Citations

  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

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

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

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]

  • {{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

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

 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

use {{PD-GE-exempt}}.

See also

Citations

  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

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.

Standard term for works

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

Anonymous and pseudonymous works

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]

  • 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

Section 5(1) works

Not protected

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

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.


  • {{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

 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

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

OK {{FoP-Germany}}

See also: de:Panoramafreiheit#Deutschland

General

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review.

Threshold of originality

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

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

Notes

  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

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

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]

Previous duration

The Copyright Law, 1985 (P.N.D.CL. 110) had a shorter duration of copyright at 50 years. More specifically,

  • The rights of the copyright are protected during the life of the author and 50 years after his death.[P.N.D.CL. 110 Section 10(1)]
  • Where a work is of joint authorship, the rights of the author referred to in subsection (1) of section 6 of this Law are protected during the life of the last surviving author and 50 years after his death. [P.N.D.CL. 110 Section 10(2)]
  • Where the copyright in a work is owned by a public corporation, the term of protection shall be 50 years commencing from the date on which the work was made public. [P.N.D.CL. 110 Section 11]
  • Works published anonymously or pseudonymously are protected for 50 years from publication. [P.N.D.CL. 110 Section 12]
  • Cinematographic works, sound recordings, and broadcasts are protected for 50 years from publication or 50 years from creation if not published within 50 years. [P.N.D.CL. 110 Section 13]
  • Programme-carying signals are protected for 50 years from its transmission. [P.N.D.CL. 110 Section 14]
  • Photographic works are protected for 50 years from their creation. [P.N.D.CL. 110 Section 15]

The extension in 2005 is not retroactive: "The provisions of this Act applies to works, performances, and sound recordings which were made prior to the date of the coming into effect of this Act, if the term of protection had not expired under the Copyright Law, 1985"[690/2005 Section 78]

Public domain: non-free

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

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

 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

  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

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]

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

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

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

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

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.

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

Currency

 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

 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

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

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

Citations

  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

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

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

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

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

  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

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

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

 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

Citations

  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:Guernsey

Bailiwick of Guernsey

Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Guernsey/en

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

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

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

 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

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

  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. [11]
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

Template:Copyright rules by territory/Country Template:Copyright rules by territory/Country Template:Copyright rules by territory/Country Template:Copyright rules by territory/Country Template:Copyright rules by territory/Country Template:Copyright rules by territory/Country Template:CRT alpha index