Hello, Apologies for cross-posting, but WMNL was recently approached for helping start a photo contest for WWII monuments. Based on this http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Freedom_of_Panorama_in_Europe_NC.svg We assumed that these photographs could be used on Wikipedia, but the recent discussions about the DMCA takedown notice for this http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Houseball_(Oldenburg_and_van_Brug...) indicate that FOP in Europe is not really FOP.
To be careful, we have decided to cancel the photo contest idea, though people are of course terribly disappointed about this.
Does anyone know the status of this discussion? Of course, WLM has brought in several thousand of these "possibly-not-FOP" sculptures, as they are often WLM monuments themselves, or are situated directly in front of buildings that are WLM monuments.
Thanks in advance for any info you have - we need a short and sweet way to inform the WWII monument committee and WMNL volunteers why we are cancelling. Jane
Hi Jane,
I am sorry to hear this has been a concern. My intuition is that this would be far less of a tangible risk to a team project than the fuss about this stuff might lead you to believe, so long as we can demonstrate sensible advice, review and precautions being taken.
In the UK, FOP tends to be very liberal, however memorials have special issues to consider if the intention is for a free release on Commons. I would have encouraged some guidelines for photographers/uploaders to be written up, and then continued with the event with these in place, possibly with a means of contributors asking further questions and having their uploads reviewed for compliance via an on-wiki project page.
A few nuts and bolts of it based on my experiences on Commons (from a UK perspective, so this will vary somewhat in other parts of Europe) are: 1. Any memorial must be a permanent feature. Any work of art that appears temporary is unlikely to be covered by FOP. 2. Text on a memorial may be under its own copyright even though it is on permanent public display, so the text itself must be demonstrably out of copyright. This is a separate issue from the general FOP provisions. If the text is incidental to the photograph, i.e. not a close up and the text is effectively de minimus, then FOP is likely to be valid. 3. Text which is embossed and made 3D, such as being part of an inscribed plaque, may be considered a 3D work and covered by FOP. 4. Any memorial photographed whilst standing on private land may not be covered by FOP.
The US has free speech, but is a long way from a country that accepts FOP, however so long as the photo is taken in the EU and is of a fixed and identified memorial, EU copyright law is the principle one to consider and FOP applies.
Thanks, Fae
On 2 March 2013 12:04, Fae faewik+commons@gmail.com wrote:
- Text on a memorial may be under its own copyright even though it is
on permanent public display, so the text itself must be demonstrably out of copyright. This is a separate issue from the general FOP provisions. If the text is incidental to the photograph, i.e. not a close up and the text is effectively de minimus, then FOP is likely to be valid.
One other thing to remember: most of this text is fairly uncreative - in many cases, standard phrases or dates, and lists of names. We could make a reasonably good case that they are unlikely to be copyrightable texts regardless of age.
On 2 March 2013 19:28, Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
On 2 March 2013 12:04, Fae faewik+commons@gmail.com wrote:
- Text on a memorial may be under its own copyright even though it is
on permanent public display, so the text itself must be demonstrably out of copyright. This is a separate issue from the general FOP provisions. If the text is incidental to the photograph, i.e. not a close up and the text is effectively de minimus, then FOP is likely to be valid.
One other thing to remember: most of this text is fairly uncreative - in many cases, standard phrases or dates, and lists of names. We could make a reasonably good case that they are unlikely to be copyrightable texts regardless of age.
That's true, and I have uploaded plenty of my own photos of war memorials with close up details of names, rank and so forth. However I have run into problems with memorial statements that contain poetry, simple drawings and original dedications and some of these have been deleted despite me being reasonably cautious. I still think this is solvable with some simple guidelines/principles for those taking part in an event to take care to avoid any later problems with uploads.
Cheers, Fae
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, Apologies for cross-posting, but WMNL was recently approached for helping start a photo contest for WWII monuments. Based on this http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Freedom_of_Panorama_in_Europe_NC.svg We assumed that these photographs could be used on Wikipedia, but the recent discussions about the DMCA takedown notice for this http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Houseball_(Oldenburg_and_van_Brug...) indicate that FOP in Europe is not really FOP.
To be careful, we have decided to cancel the photo contest idea, though people are of course terribly disappointed about this.
Does anyone know the status of this discussion? Of course, WLM has brought in several thousand of these "possibly-not-FOP" sculptures, as they are often WLM monuments themselves, or are situated directly in front of buildings that are WLM monuments.
Freedom of Panorama is one part of copyright law where the various European countries vastly differ in their rules, so I don't think it's possible to give a general answer.