Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Freedom of Panorama  (Read 6371 times)

Jonathan Cross

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 645
Freedom of Panorama
« on: July 03, 2015, 02:43:17 pm »

The EU will vote on July 9th to remove the Freedom of Panorama across the European Union.  This will almost certainly mean that a photograph including any public building cannot be used without authorisation.  This will compromise photographers across the European Union and there is a  petition with over 250,000 signatures to try to stop this. More info is at
https://www.change.org/p/european-parliament-save-the-freedom-of-photography-savefop-europarl-en?recruiter=50071730&utm_campaign=signature_receipt&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

Also see the EU press release
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/content/20150615IPR66497/html/EU-copyright-reform-must-balance-rightholders%E2%80%99-and-users%E2%80%99-interests-say-MEPs

Jonathan
Logged
Jonathan in UK

Iluvmycam

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 533
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2015, 02:53:25 pm »

Is that the full view of the building or snippets? Being a street photog I seldom if ever get the full building in a pix.

Also, how will this effect Americans? Are they going to sue us all?
Logged

Jonathan Cross

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 645
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2015, 04:52:44 pm »

The Royal Photographic Society in the UK has sent round this statement:
Over the past few days you may have read or been emailed about the threat to ‘freedom or panorama’ which is included in a draft report being promoted by a Member of the European Parliament (MEP).
 
In the UK (and in some other countries) we enjoy the right to photograph buildings and sculptures ‘if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public’ for our own enjoyment and even for commercial use. The MEP’s proposal is to adopt the model that operates in France and a number of other European countries which gives other creators e.g. architects and sculptors, protection against having their work being reproduced without payment. In those countries  permission is required to photograph or exploit images containing those works. The more sensationalist press reports have suggested that the public’s holiday snaps might be threatened - the reality is that it would mostly affect groups such as travel book, postcard and poster publishers, in particular. Either way, it is a significant concern to The Society.
 
Jonathan

Logged
Jonathan in UK

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4768
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #3 on: July 03, 2015, 10:54:11 pm »

If part of one's visual field is no longer available, shouldn't a payment for that have taken place. When someone buys my car, I can no longer use it. When someone buys my house, I can no longer walk in. So if someone puts up a building, I can no longer take a photo in that direction? Is this really what this means?

I already found it objectionable that I could not use a photo that happened to have a trademarked logo in it, just because someone put that logo in my field of view.

There has got to be more to this.
Logged
--
Robert

Jonathan Cross

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 645
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #4 on: July 04, 2015, 07:01:15 am »

Also see dpreview.com report of today 4th July.
Logged
Jonathan in UK

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8961
    • site
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #5 on: July 04, 2015, 01:51:03 pm »

And this leading article in The Times, 24th June (copied without permission, I have to confess).

Next time you take a photo of the London Eye, or the Angel of the North, or any monument, artwork or building in a public place, know this: you are exercising a freedom that is under threat. This is the freedom of panorama — enshrined in British copyright law since 1911, but now in the sights of European Union legislators.

While the freedom of panorama is granted in the majority of EU member states, there is a minority, including France and Italy, where it is restricted. For example, the Eiffel Tower may be photographed in daylight, because its age exempts it from copyright law, yet snapping it at night with any intention of distributing the image violates the copyright held by the designers of its nocturnal illuminations.

Enter Julia Reda. Ms Reda is the sole MEP of the European Pirate Party, not a crew of seafaring politicians, but a pan-European movement advocating reform of copyright and patent law. Whatever the desirability of her broader manifesto, Ms Reda is right on one thing: she is seeking to extend freedom of panorama across the EU.
This extension is being resisted by a group of MEPs who agree that European law on photography ought to be unified, but want to unify it around the French example. This group’s success could mean that taking photos in public places would be impossible without having provided a range of assurances, obtained a variety of permissions and paid a range of fees beforehand.

The freedom of panorama may be little known, but it is a fundamental liberty all the same. It is absurd that the commendable effort of a sole MEP to extend a British freedom across the continent has metamorphosed into a threat to that very freedom on British soil. The French can unify nonsense all they want, but it is still nonsense. On this, The Times sails with the pirate.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #6 on: July 04, 2015, 03:24:04 pm »

So... photographing a person's face in public is allowed (at least in most freedom-respecting countries), but the moment they put a make-up on it, it is forbidden (to draw a parallel with the Eiffel Tower)? The world is becoming more and more totalitarian (and it is not Soviets' fault).

AreBee

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 638
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2015, 05:16:35 am »

Logged

JohnBrew

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 868
    • http://www.johnbrewton.zenfolio.com
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #9 on: July 10, 2015, 08:08:51 am »

Golly, common sense finally won one. We should celebrate as our politicos seem determined to head for ever more dafter legislation curbing our (photography) rights.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2015, 01:30:23 pm by JohnBrew »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2015, 11:22:31 pm »

I really question the sanity of elected folks submitting such motions for voting.

Cheers,
Bernard

John Camp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2171
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #11 on: July 14, 2015, 01:03:08 am »

I'm pretty much an absolutist on what you're allowed to photograph (Everything!) but that list of Thom's posted by Rob B. has some bans that I support. I think any enclosed place should be able to ban selfie sticks -- all you need to do is see somebody waving a selfie stick around delicate artworks in the Museum of Modern Art, or a crowded bar, to know that some bans are needed. I also support the banning of drones in many places -- like over my yard, and in public parks, especially those parks that are supposed to be supportive of wildlife. Nothing like trying to look at animals in the wild -- or just experience the peace of the outdoors -- and have a drone chattering away overhead. I also favor banning of drones in crowded urban areas, or anywhere near an airport -- I refer to a report not long ago of an airliner reporting that it encountered a drone at several thousand feet above a large urban area. I consider drones to be somewhat like guns -- amusing for some, but a potential danger for many. So why not get rid of them? On the other hand, if you ARE a gun supporter, why not make it legal to be able to discharge a shotgun at any drone you see? Entertainment for everyone.

http://abc7news.com/travel/southwest-pilot-spots-drone-flying-near-oakland-airport/784955/.

The camera bans in support of "security" are usually in support of job security for security officers, who are often refugees from the local McDonalds -- neither the bans nor the officers provide much security for the rest of us. I've read about people being told that they can't shoot photos of the Houses of Parliament, when you can buy identical photos at a Kiosk across the street, or, if you wish, get a nice tight aerial view from Google Earth -- and, if you have a mortar, and wish to attack the Houses, you can measure distances and angles with the handy little measuring stick in Google Earth. A guy on the street with a camera, taking a picture of a facade is a threat? I don't think so. I think a lot of this impulse comes from two places: 1) From politicians who wish to control their images, and 2) From the fear that somebody, somewhere, might make a buck.

As a protest, I'd propose that we promote a "Take a Photo of the Eiffel Tower at Night" event, with an award for the best copyright violation.

Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Re: Freedom of Panorama
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2015, 05:17:06 am »

As a protest, I'd propose that we promote a "Take a Photo of the Eiffel Tower at Night" event, with an award for the best copyright violation.

Excellent idea, John!   ;D
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up