Hi.
Most likely the Swedes can explain the exact nuances better, but from the
little I have gathered, it seems that Swedish Supreme Court today decided
that although there is Freedom of Panorama in Sweden, it cannot be extended
to publishing the images of public art on the Internet.
Now, the exact reasoning, all the consequences and WMSE's further actions
notwithstanding, my question is whether this makes Sweden the only country
in the world where such a distinction is established? If yes, this is a
very dangerous precedent. If not, I would very much want to know the
peculiarities in the other cases.
In either case, we should be prepared to counter suggestions to adapt that
distinction to the other countries in Europe.
Some links:
* WMSE's press release:
http://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/pressreleases/hoegsta-domstolen-vaeljer-att-kr…
* The same in Google Translate:
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=…
* Supreme Court's decision in Google Translate:
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&i…
* Swedish Copyright Act in English (on Unesco's homepage):
http://portal.unesco.org/culture/admin/file_download.php/se_copyright_2005_…
Some coverage in Swedish:
http://feber.se/webb/art/346833/offentligkonstse_bryter_mot_up/
http://www.svt.se/kultur/konst/brottsligt-sprida-bilder-av-offentligt-konst…
http://www.fotosidan.se/cldoc/lag-och-ratt/hd-dom-olagligt-att-publicera-bi…
http://www.friatider.se/wikipedia-f-r-inte-visa-bilder-p-konstverk
http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/konst-form/hd-brottsligt-att-sprida-bilder-av-…
http://www.kamerabild.se/nyheter/foto/hd-beslut-olagligt-att-avbilda-konst-…
One particular piece of news in translation, demonstrating the journalist's
depth of comprehension, starting with the headline "Copyright of outdoor
art also applies online":
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=…
Enjoy.
Raul