Author Topic: Freedom of panorama: any Italians around? (Read 2726 times)

ShadySue · « **on:** August 24, 2011, 16:45 »

(corrected in next post. sorry.)

ShadySue · « **Reply #1 on:** August 24, 2011, 16:47 »

Quote from: ShadySue on August 24, 2011, 16:45

From the iStock thread about The Weltzeituhr in Alexanderplatz, http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=332700&page=1, I found this Wikipedia link about Freedom of Panorama. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama

Inter alia, it says:
"Freedom of panorama, often abbreviated as FOP, is a provision in the copyright laws of various jurisdictions that permits taking photographs or video footage, or creating other images (such as paintings), of buildings and sometimes sculptures and other art which are permanently located in a public place, without infringing any copyright that may otherwise subsist in such works, and to publish such images. Panorama freedom statutes and/or case law limit the right of the copyright owner to take action for breach of copyright against the creators and distributors of such images. It is an exception to the normal rule that the copyright owner has the exclusive right to authorize the creation and distribution of derivative works. The phrase is derived from the German term Panoramafreiheit ("panorama freedom").
...
Laws around the world
Many countries have similar provisions restricting the scope of copyright law in order to explicitly permit photographs involving scenes of public places or scenes photographed from public places. Other countries, though, differ widely in their interpretation of the principle.

In the European Union, Directive 2001/29/EC provides for the possibility of member states having a freedom of panorama clause in their copyright laws, but does not require such a rule.

Panoramafreiheit is defined in article 59 of the German Urheberrechtsgesetz, in article 27 of the Swiss Urheberrechtsgesetz, in section 62 of the United Kingdom Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, and it exists in several other countries.

On the other hand, there are also European countries such as Italy, where there is still no freedom of panorama at all. In Italy, despite many official protests and a national initiative led by the lawyer Guido Scorza and the journalist Luca Spinelli (who highlighted the issue), the publishing of photographic reproductions of public places is still prohibited, in accordance with the old Italian copyright laws.

<snip>

Anyone know about this Italian legal let-out? There are many 'out and about' ancient buildings photos (a very few of them mine) in Italy in iStock's main collection, and we know how they tend to 'err on the side of caution'. I'm going to Florence in a couple of months and should have some photo time. I'm guessing there's more to it than the last paragraph above.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #2 on:** August 24, 2011, 17:09 »

No photos of anything, it's all protected. (joking!) It sure seems restrictive. Maybe you should go to Scotland where almost everything is protected by the NT and you can't use that either. Oh wait, you're already there.

ANother link about creative commons and the same subject: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:FOP

Interesting idea that you can shoot scenic photos and not have to worry about copyrights for everything in them... except in Italy!

Here's one is 1988 the Earl's Palace Birsay Orkney. About as far North as you can get without falling into the North Sea. (or Brough of Birsay or Norwegian Sea?) Tip of Orkney. Just got a film scanner and I was playing on Monday. I'm beginning to think it's going to be nothing scanned is suitable for stock.

You could see Scrabster or John O'Groats on the way?

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #3 on:** August 24, 2011, 18:04 »

I'm Italian but I am afraid I can't help you...

The issue has been the subject of a question-time in Italian parliament in 2008, and the conclusion was that freedom of panorama doesn't exist (since there are no exceptions to the copyright law for photography) but it is allowed (since it is not explicitly forbidden). No law has followed since.

So the answer is both yes and no. I know this has no rhyme or reason... welcome to Italy!

http://www.patrimoniosos.it/rsol.php?op=getarticle&id=38498 (in Italian)

My feeling is that - being posed as a copyright issue and not a property issue - old buildings in Italy are safe. Modern architecture (if you can find any) is not. But I am not a lawyer.

Anyway, most agencies have an equally confused idea of freedom of panorama. Only Panthermedia seems to fully understand the subject, based on German law.

ShadySue · « **Reply #4 on:** August 25, 2011, 12:08 »

Tx. I know that France is iffy, so deliberately chose not to go to France, but somehow Italy had slipped under my radar.

Koufax73 · « **Reply #5 on:** August 25, 2011, 14:37 »

I'm Italian and I think this is one of 1.000.000 things in Italy that, formally, are forbidden, but no one really would bother you.
I've been in Florence three days ago, I've shoot all I wanted (or, I'd better say, everything), no one said me anything. I've seen also a couple of photographers with tripods (formally, it would be prohibited because it is illegal occupation of public soil) and I can say this: in the Museum of Uffizi taking pictures is explicitly forbidden, but everybody, of every nationality, takes pictures and nobody says nothing. I was so surprised that I didn't take pictures anyway.

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #6 on:** August 25, 2011, 15:04 »

Yes, that's the way things work in Italy: everything is strictly forbidden (severamente vietato) - because just forbidden means nothing anymore - but nobody cares anyway.
Just don't ask the security if you can take pictures, as they will certainly say no - without having the fainstest idea of why it's forbidden of course.

And it's not just about photography unfortunately. Sometimes I'm really tired of living in this rough country, and I need to spend at least a few months every year in more civilised countries in Europe, as a sort of rehab. Luckily, stock photography allows me to do this.

But don't be scared, just spending a few days as a visitor is bearable and I'm sure you will enjoy your trip.

Batman · « **Reply #7 on:** August 25, 2011, 19:55 »

Good topic Sue and good answers all.

ShadySue · « **Reply #8 on:** August 27, 2011, 11:35 »

Thanks all. I wasn't really worried about taking the photos - I'm good at 'acting the tourist' - it was selling them that was giving me pause.

Koufax73 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 27, 2011, 16:08 »

Quote from: ShadySue on August 27, 2011, 11:35

Thanks all. I wasn't really worried about taking the photos - I'm good at 'acting the tourist' - it was selling them that was giving me pause.

I'm pretty sure that no one will sue you if you sell images of palaces or statues of XVI century... To make an example Shutterstock, who's really severe with copyright infringiments, accepted five of five images I've submitted.
About the landscapes: if it's against law to sell photos of Italian landscapes, I know 100 people who's gonna be arrested...

kingjon · « **Reply #10 on:** August 28, 2011, 19:03 »

This is an interesting topic. I wasn't aware that photographing monuments from public places isn't permitted in Italy. I just took a gander on IS and there are probably thousands of images of Italian monuments - many weren't even taken from public areas (e.g. shots clearly taken from inside the Colosseum). I can't imagine there's much money to be made with all the similar images already online.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #11 on:** August 28, 2011, 19:23 »

Quote from: kingjon on August 28, 2011, 19:03

This is an interesting topic. I wasn't aware that photographing monuments from public places isn't permitted in Italy. I just took a gander on IS and there are probably thousands of images of Italian monuments - many weren't even taken from public areas (e.g. shots clearly taken from inside the Colosseum). I can't imagine there's much money to be made with all the similar images already online.

Hi all back from the weekend, and the campground didn't have internet.

What happens here is the same as many other subjects. You can have a law interpretation, even a judges ruling (like the Eiffel Tower lights at night, but read the last part) Until there's a trial and a court case, we don't really know. If no one in a position of authority ever charges anyone with shooting a public scene, that maybe contains an old building or statue or fountain, then, it's never going to be decided in court. Sometimes things don't go to court because the law may change for our benefit. If it's settled out of court, the law is not tested.

I'm not a lawyer, but you can see why companies will sometimes pay a claim, even a seemingly friviulous one, because if they go to court and lose, there's case law for a thousand more people to make a claim. If there's a settlement with NDA then the next person needs to come up with their own case and attorney and go through all the time and expense or bringing it to trial.

SO lets say Cousin Boffo in Italy takes a photographer to court for shooting and selling a picture of the fountain in some obscure mountain village. And the photographer wins! Now there's case law on the side of the photographers, to shoot everything public.

Just one reason why it may never be a problem. No one wants to risk losing their protection for something larger or more valuable than a panorama of a village with some old buildings or a statue.