[Foundation-l] Bridgeman v. Corel worldwide for Wikimedia Commons - yes or no?

[teun spaans]

I just photographed individual plants, so layout does not come into
question.

There was no sign  with a copyright claim or remark about photographs at the
entrance - in fact it was hard to find an entrance at all. The only sign we
found was a wooden sign "botanical garden" - that direction.

In hindsight, there may have been a text or direction on the walls of the
refugio (mountain hut), some 100 meters away, but we were glad to have
located the botanical garden at all, and didnt think of it.


On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:42 AM, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk at eunet.yu> wrote:

> Cary Bass wrote:
> > teun spaans wrote:
> >> While on holiday in Italy i took some pix of plants in a botanical
> garden.
> >> There was no admittance fee, it was publicly accessible.
> >>
> >> Can i upload the pix of the plants I took there, or does the owner of
> the
> >> botanical garden has some form of ownership?
> >
> > This is not to say that the botanical garden doesn't claim restriction
> > on the use of images taken within its walls (in my experience,
> > non-commercial clauses are the norm).  In fact, such restrictions are
> > quite commonplace for botanical gardens, zoological parks, and many
> > other facilities.  This should not be mistaken for a claim of copyright;
> > and at most they might do is deny you access to their property in the
> > future.
>
> Actually, I think that a botanical garden could claim copyright on plant
> layout or somesuch. I'm not aware that this has ever happened, however,
> and of course panorama freedom would apply. Also not a problem when
> photographing individual plants, unless they are [[living sculpture]]s.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>