Hi all, @Jens: Thx for the warm welcome. The settling in is not quite done yet. I'm still watching/learning and trying to tend to urgent things on the way. The justice ministry is high on the meeting agenda, a direct contact to the head of their copyright unit exists. Their ideas and initiatives around exceptions & limitations definitely touch on Wikiprojects. Any concrete suggestions welcome. Main items on this year's WMDE work plan regarding lawmaking are public works, freedom of panorama, database directive and ancillary publichers right, the three last of which happen mainly on the EU level as yet. Best John 2016-06-01 8:01 GMT+02:00 Mathias Schindler < mathias.schindler(a)gmail.com&gt;gt;: > Hi, > > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Jens Best &lt;best.jens(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > > > I heard that the German ministry of justice is reevaluating the > > "Schrankenregeln" (kind of the German version of fair use) as one > aspect of > > this year's copyright laws reevaluation. Wouldn't that be a possible > focus > > which relates to the volunteer work of the Wikiprojects? > > a more precise translation of Schrankenregeln is "limitations and > exceptions" in copyright. EU member states can implement exceptions > listed in the InfoSoc Directive, they are not allowed to implement > exceptions not listed there. The current German government has > announced to adjust certain exceptions dealing with education. Other > than that, the introduction of a fair use clause in German copyright > would require some legislation on the EU level* > > Mathias > > > * (Martin Senftleben is slightly more optimistic here > http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1959554) > > _______________________________________________ > Publicpolicy mailing list > Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy > -- Referent für Politik und Recht Legal and Policy Advisor Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49 (0)30 219 158 26-0 http://wikimedia.de Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei! http://spenden.wikimedia.de/ Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207. _______________________________________________ Publicpolicy mailing list Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy

Hi Raul, Changing the topic, as this becomes a quite specific discussion. What would be the better definition in your opinion? The burden of proof is always on the copyright holder, I'd think. But somehow, you need to define what is this 'panorama'. What you could see from a public space, is one definition. What is yours? Lodewijk 2016-06-01 14:20 GMT+02:00 Raul Veede &lt;raul.veede(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: > Hi. > > Has there been any discussion about possibly (re)opening the question > of the clause limiting FoP that demands that the pictures should be taken > _from_ a public place? It could be argued this creates complications for > businesses (as clearly demonstrated by the Hundertwasser case) and has > potential for unlimited amount of uncertainty (the place where the > photographer stood usually remains unseen on the picture itself, so the > legality is hard to determine afterwords, especially on the Internet, e.g. > on Commons). Most jurisdictions with FoP can get very well by without such > a clause, and it is hard to see what benefit it creates for the public, or > actually even for any private rightsholders. > > Best, > > Raul, > working on FoP in Estonia > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:57 PM, John Hendrik Weitzmann < > john.weitzmann(a)wikimedia.de&gt; wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> @Jens: Thx for the warm welcome. The settling in is not quite done >> yet. I'm still watching/learning and trying to tend to urgent things on the >> way. The justice ministry is high on the meeting agenda, a direct contact >> to the head of their copyright unit exists. Their ideas and initiatives >> around exceptions & limitations definitely touch on Wikiprojects. Any >> concrete suggestions welcome. Main items on this year's WMDE work plan >> regarding lawmaking are public works, freedom of panorama, database >> directive and ancillary publichers right, the three last of which happen >> mainly on the EU level as yet. >> >> Best >> John >> >> >> 2016-06-01 8:01 GMT+02:00 Mathias Schindler < >> mathias.schindler(a)gmail.com&gt;gt;: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Jens Best &lt;best.jens(a)gmail.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >>> > I heard that the German ministry of justice is reevaluating the >>> > "Schrankenregeln" (kind of the German version of fair use) as one >>> aspect of >>> > this year's copyright laws reevaluation. Wouldn't that be a >>> possible focus >>> > which relates to the volunteer work of the Wikiprojects? >>> >>> a more precise translation of Schrankenregeln is "limitations and >>> exceptions" in copyright. EU member states can implement exceptions >>> listed in the InfoSoc Directive, they are not allowed to implement >>> exceptions not listed there. The current German government has >>> announced to adjust certain exceptions dealing with education. Other >>> than that, the introduction of a fair use clause in German copyright >>> would require some legislation on the EU level* >>> >>> Mathias >>> >>> >>> * (Martin Senftleben is slightly more optimistic here >>> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1959554) >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>> Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Referent für Politik und Recht >> Legal and Policy Advisor >> >> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin >> Tel. +49 (0)30 219 158 26-0 >> http://wikimedia.de >> >> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge >> allen Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei! >> http://spenden.wikimedia.de/ >> >> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. >> V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg >> unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt >> für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Publicpolicy mailing list >> Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Publicpolicy mailing list > Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy > > _______________________________________________ Publicpolicy mailing list Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy

that is unambiguous. I'm not so much asking because of the German situation - I totally agree it would be odd to go in strong for what is in the end a detail - but it might be helpful when working in other countries, what are the best practices, what ideal FoP would look like. If you put the building at the center, which part of the building? And which buildings? You say located at a street, but what if there's a garden (field of grass) in between? Or a low building? The only better definition I could think of, is to apply it to all architecture. But whether that is realistic? Lodewijk 2016-06-01 17:04 GMT+02:00 Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov < dimitar.parvanov.dimitrov(a)gmail.com&gt;gt;: Hello, everybody! > > I personally don't see this particular wording in German law as very > problematic. Sure, it would be nice to have it written otherwise, but > is it > a priority issue? Definitely not! > > If we ever got the chance it without a fight, I would simply go for > changing the perspective to the one of the building. Something like > buildings/plots/statutes that are permanently located in/at parks, > streets > and squares. This way drones or pictures from aircrafts won't be > problematic. > > Of course "parks, streets and squares" is not exhaustive enough, but > you > get my point. > > Dimi > > > > 2016-06-01 16:31 GMT+02:00 L.Gelauff &lt;lgelauff(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: > > Hi Raul, >> >> Changing the topic, as this becomes a quite specific discussion. >> >> What would be the better definition in your opinion? The burden of >> proof is always on the copyright holder, I'd think. But somehow, you >> need >> to define what is this 'panorama'. What you could see from a public >> space, >> is one definition. What is yours? >> >> Lodewijk >> >> 2016-06-01 14:20 GMT+02:00 Raul Veede &lt;raul.veede(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: >> >> Hi. >>> >>> Has there been any discussion about possibly (re)opening the question >>> of the clause limiting FoP that demands that the pictures should be >>> taken >>> _from_ a public place? It could be argued this creates complications >>> for >>> businesses (as clearly demonstrated by the Hundertwasser case) and >>> has >>> potential for unlimited amount of uncertainty (the place where the >>> photographer stood usually remains unseen on the picture itself, so >>> the >>> legality is hard to determine afterwords, especially on the >>> Internet, e.g. >>> on Commons). Most jurisdictions with FoP can get very well by >>> without such >>> a clause, and it is hard to see what benefit it creates for the >>> public, or >>> actually even for any private rightsholders. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Raul, >>> working on FoP in Estonia >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:57 PM, John Hendrik Weitzmann < >>> john.weitzmann(a)wikimedia.de&gt; wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> @Jens: Thx for the warm welcome. The settling in is not quite done >>>> yet. I'm still watching/learning and trying to tend to urgent >>>> things on the >>>> way. The justice ministry is high on the meeting agenda, a direct >>>> contact >>>> to the head of their copyright unit exists. Their ideas and >>>> initiatives >>>> around exceptions & limitations definitely touch on Wikiprojects. >>>> Any >>>> concrete suggestions welcome. Main items on this year's WMDE work >>>> plan >>>> regarding lawmaking are public works, freedom of panorama, database >>>> directive and ancillary publichers right, the three last of which >>>> happen >>>> mainly on the EU level as yet. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> 2016-06-01 8:01 GMT+02:00 Mathias Schindler < >>>> mathias.schindler(a)gmail.com&gt;gt;: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Jens Best &lt;best.jens(a)gmail.com&gt; >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I heard that the German ministry of justice is reevaluating the >>>>>> "Schrankenregeln" (kind of the German version of fair use) as one >>>>>> >>>>> aspect of >>>>> >>>>>> this year's copyright laws reevaluation. Wouldn't that be a >>>>>> >>>>> possible focus >>>>> >>>>>> which relates to the volunteer work of the Wikiprojects? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> a more precise translation of Schrankenregeln is "limitations and >>>>> exceptions" in copyright. EU member states can implement exceptions >>>>> listed in the InfoSoc Directive, they are not allowed to implement >>>>> exceptions not listed there. The current German government has >>>>> announced to adjust certain exceptions dealing with education. >>>>> Other >>>>> than that, the introduction of a fair use clause in German >>>>> copyright >>>>> would require some legislation on the EU level* >>>>> >>>>> Mathias >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> * (Martin Senftleben is slightly more optimistic here >>>>> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1959554) >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>>>> Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Referent für Politik und Recht >>>> Legal and Policy Advisor >>>> >>>> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin >>>> Tel. +49 (0)30 219 158 26-0 >>>> http://wikimedia.de >>>> >>>> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge >>>> allen Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei! >>>> http://spenden.wikimedia.de/ >>>> >>>> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. >>>> V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts >>>> Berlin-Charlottenburg >>>> unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das >>>> Finanzamt >>>> für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>>> Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>> Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Publicpolicy mailing list >> Publicpolicy(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >> >> >> >