Question regarding shorter copyright terms for some items in one country. Replies should probably go to wikimedia-l as well.
- d. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Hrafn Malmquist <[email protected]> Date: 29 July 2013 13:54 Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Iceland: Country specific copyright issue regarding artistic photographs To: [email protected] 49th Article of the Icelandic Copyright Act states ( http://eng.menntamalaraduneyti.is/media/MRN-pdf/he-Copyright-Act.pdf) : *Article 49* *The reproduction of photographs, which do not enjoy the protection of this Act for works of art as provided for in * *the second paragraph of Article 1, is prohibited without the consent of the photographer or the party who has * *acquired his rights. [Furthermore, the publication of such photographs without the permission of the rightholder * *shall be prohibited.]1) If such a photograph is presented to the public on a commercial basis or for profit the * *photographer, or the subsequent holder of his rights, shall be entitled to remuneration. The protection of a * *photograph in accordance with this paragraph shall apply until [50 years]2) have elapsed from the end of the year * *in which it was taken.* *The provisions of Chapter II of this Act shall also apply as appropriate to the photographs referred to in the first * *paragraph.* The second paragraph of the first article referenced provided copyright for artistic work. It is therefore my understanding that the 49th article is intended to cover non-artistic photographs. That begs the question as to how Icelandic courts define artistic photographs. In a ruling from November 27. 2008 Reykjavík District Court found that photographs taken at a public place using a mobile of the movie director Quentin Tarantino were not artistic. ( http://www.domstolar.is/domaleit/nanar/?ID=E200802042&Domur=2&type=1&Serial=1 ) *It is therefore my contention that non-artistic photographs taken before January 1. 1963 are in the public domain.* * * I have sought the advice of a lawyer specialising in copyright and he agrees with this estimate. I want to put this to the test by taking photographs taken by Ólafur K. Magnússon (1926-1997) a photographer for the newspaper Morgunblaðið taken at riots on March 30th 1949 when the Icelandic parliament voted for Iceland to be a founding member of NATO. See: http://www.mbl.is/mm/frettir/myndasyrpa.html?cat_id=4;album=634 It is obviously a central issue whether a photograph is artistic or not. Should the photos be considered artistic the copyright does not expire until (1997+70=2067). I have sent a query to Morgunblaðið, which still holds the photographs, and the man who takes care of the photographic archive did not agree that the photos are non-artistic (I suspect this is his personal opinion). There is little history of contending the 49. article, I believe the example cited above is the only one (When I contacted the curator of the Reykjavík Photographic Museum she had not heard of the 49th article). So, do I upload to Commons? the Icelandic Wikipedia with a caveat ("This photo is reproduced under the assumption that the 49th article of the Copyright Act of 1972 applies")? Both? Best, Hrafn Malmquist _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
