Calling out to protect European photogrphy rights

Macario · 06-22-2015, 03:13 AM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-06-17/In_focus

All European photograpphers, Unite and stop this.

pathdoc · 06-22-2015, 03:41 AM

It covers commercial, not personal, use. Whoever wrote this article is IMO either overlooking this fact or trying to fan flames of irrational anger.

manntax · 06-22-2015, 03:42 AM

Free societies of modern, western countries benefit immensely from a freedom to photograph everywhere and everything and everyone - despite any possible pitfalls . I hope people will realise the hidden reason behind all those callers for restrictions to photography in public space. The amount of benefits vastly outweighs every possible disadvantage the average folk could ever experience... just my 2 cents.

Macario · 06-22-2015, 04:31 AM

Originally posted by pathdoc

It covers commercial, not personal, use. Whoever wrote this article is IMO either overlooking this fact or trying to fan flames of irrational anger.

actually not completely true. If you have a blog, photo's from some buildings (in belgium) you are not allowed to put on your blog without permission. So no commercial use, just a blog.

DeadJohn · 06-22-2015, 05:56 AM

Would posting on Flickr or Google or another sharing site be "commercial" use? The poster makes no money from the photo but the sharing site makes money indirectly, selling ads or services.

How does this affect the film industry? They are definitely commercial use. If the opening scene of a show is a wide angle city panorama do the producers have to get approval of every building owner?

Macario · 06-22-2015, 06:05 AM

Originally posted by DeadJohn

Would posting on Flickr or Google or another sharing site be "commercial" use? The poster makes no money from the photo but the sharing site makes money indirectly, selling ads or services.

How does this affect the film industry? They are definitely commercial use. If the opening scene of a show is a wide angle city panorama do the producers have to get approval of every building owner?

yes they do, that is the whole problem.

Na Horuk · 06-22-2015, 06:37 AM

lol yep, you can absolutely photography anything you want as long as you never show the image to anyone, ever!

There are two problems. One is that the line between personal and commercial is highly blurred these days. Secondly, this can be used to shut people down. Someone is photographing a protest rally, but in the background is a statue or another landmark - now they can use copyright as an excuse to block and remove these photos or punish the person who took them if they ever share or publish those photos. Finally, it can be used as an extra source of revenue for cities - take a selfie with the Eiffel tower? You get a letter with a bill to pay. Take a photo with your friends in front of Big Ben? Pay up. Don't you think some mayors would use this to fill their coffers?

Keep in mind, in most big European cities there is art and "special" architecture just about everywhere. Each square, plaza, fair, train station, opera house, theater, castle or fort,.. Sure, not all of those will be actively copyrighted, but even if its a couple its annoying enough.

alexcox · 06-22-2015, 09:47 AM

Originally posted by DeadJohn

Would posting on Flickr or Google or another sharing site be "commercial" use? The poster makes no money from the photo but the sharing site makes money indirectly, selling ads or services.

How does this affect the film industry? They are definitely commercial use. If the opening scene of a show is a wide angle city panorama do the producers have to get approval of every building owner?

"If the opening scene of a show is a wide angle city panorama do the producers have to get approval of every building owner?"

Photographers don't need to ask permission. FAIR USE covers the inclusion of corporate logos and buildings in your film or photograph -- as long as their appearance is incidental. So, if you take and publish a photograph which includes Starbucks and a Shell station, you are within your rights (including a commercial use of the photo or film). But if you focus exclusively on the Starbucks or the Shell, or deliberately disparage their 'trade mark' fair use may not cover you.

Undot · 07-09-2015, 06:59 AM

A big majority of EU parliament just voted this down, so freedom of panorama doesn't get more restricted for now.

But laws in EU still vary. Right now one isn't allow to take/publish photos of the Eiffel Tower at night, because its light installation is copyrighted due to French laws, even if the tower itself isn't. Will be interesting to see if the copyright reform in fall will change any of that.

06-22-2015, 03:13 AM	#1
Macario Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Hoek van Holland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,393	Calling out to protect European photogrphy rights https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-06-17/In_focus All European photograpphers, Unite and stop this.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Calling all birders out there	stillshot2	General Photography	3	05-28-2015 07:33 PM
Calling out the bloke who rated the Q10 a "1"	luftfluss	Pentax Mirrorless Cameras	59	02-01-2015 08:49 AM
Best way to keep and protect films?	sunshine7913	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	12-18-2014 08:13 AM
People To Serve and Protect	builttospill	Post Your Photos!	12	11-19-2009 01:47 AM
I can't figure out who's calling the divorce lawyer?	Peter Zack	Photographic Technique	12	02-08-2009 01:11 AM

06-22-2015, 03:41 AM	#2
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	It covers commercial, not personal, use. Whoever wrote this article is IMO either overlooking this fact or trying to fan flames of irrational anger.

06-22-2015, 03:42 AM	#3
manntax Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,972	Free societies of modern, western countries benefit immensely from a freedom to photograph everywhere and everything and everyone - despite any possible pitfalls . I hope people will realise the hidden reason behind all those callers for restrictions to photography in public space. The amount of benefits vastly outweighs every possible disadvantage the average folk could ever experience... just my 2 cents.

06-22-2015, 04:31 AM	#4
Macario Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Hoek van Holland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,393 Original Poster	Originally posted by pathdoc It covers commercial, not personal, use. Whoever wrote this article is IMO either overlooking this fact or trying to fan flames of irrational anger. actually not completely true. If you have a blog, photo's from some buildings (in belgium) you are not allowed to put on your blog without permission. So no commercial use, just a blog.

06-22-2015, 05:56 AM	#5
DeadJohn Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: New York Posts: 4,833	Would posting on Flickr or Google or another sharing site be "commercial" use? The poster makes no money from the photo but the sharing site makes money indirectly, selling ads or services. How does this affect the film industry? They are definitely commercial use. If the opening scene of a show is a wide angle city panorama do the producers have to get approval of every building owner?

06-22-2015, 06:05 AM	#6
Macario Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Hoek van Holland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,393 Original Poster	Originally posted by DeadJohn Would posting on Flickr or Google or another sharing site be "commercial" use? The poster makes no money from the photo but the sharing site makes money indirectly, selling ads or services. How does this affect the film industry? They are definitely commercial use. If the opening scene of a show is a wide angle city panorama do the producers have to get approval of every building owner? yes they do, that is the whole problem.

06-22-2015, 06:37 AM	#7
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	lol yep, you can absolutely photography anything you want as long as you never show the image to anyone, ever! There are two problems. One is that the line between personal and commercial is highly blurred these days. Secondly, this can be used to shut people down. Someone is photographing a protest rally, but in the background is a statue or another landmark - now they can use copyright as an excuse to block and remove these photos or punish the person who took them if they ever share or publish those photos. Finally, it can be used as an extra source of revenue for cities - take a selfie with the Eiffel tower? You get a letter with a bill to pay. Take a photo with your friends in front of Big Ben? Pay up. Don't you think some mayors would use this to fill their coffers? Keep in mind, in most big European cities there is art and "special" architecture just about everywhere. Each square, plaza, fair, train station, opera house, theater, castle or fort,.. Sure, not all of those will be actively copyrighted, but even if its a couple its annoying enough.

06-22-2015, 09:47 AM	#8
alexcox Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Colestin, OR Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 79	Originally posted by DeadJohn Would posting on Flickr or Google or another sharing site be "commercial" use? The poster makes no money from the photo but the sharing site makes money indirectly, selling ads or services. How does this affect the film industry? They are definitely commercial use. If the opening scene of a show is a wide angle city panorama do the producers have to get approval of every building owner? "If the opening scene of a show is a wide angle city panorama do the producers have to get approval of every building owner?" Photographers don't need to ask permission. FAIR USE covers the inclusion of corporate logos and buildings in your film or photograph -- as long as their appearance is incidental. So, if you take and publish a photograph which includes Starbucks and a Shell station, you are within your rights (including a commercial use of the photo or film). But if you focus exclusively on the Starbucks or the Shell, or deliberately disparage their 'trade mark' fair use may not cover you.

07-09-2015, 06:59 AM	#9
Undot Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 176	A big majority of EU parliament just voted this down, so freedom of panorama doesn't get more restricted for now. But laws in EU still vary. Right now one isn't allow to take/publish photos of the Eiffel Tower at night, because its light installation is copyrighted due to French laws, even if the tower itself isn't. Will be interesting to see if the copyright reform in fall will change any of that.