I agree with Raul generally, but the context/actual setting thing seems to be one of the lesser evil specimens of only slightly unclear wording. After all: It's the freedom of _panorama_ and not a carte blanche to do whatever with works sitting in public places :)
2016-05-12 18:24 GMT+02:00 L.Gelauff <[email protected]>: > Yup, it also exists in Dutch law, although I'm uncertain if the phrasing > is exactly the same. The result of it, was I think only one case where was > decided in favour of the author (architect): the Erasmus bridge in > Rotterdam. Someone tried to take a cutout of the bridge (the shape) and use > it as a logo. That was not a permitted use according to the judges, as it > was explicitely taking everything out of context. Also, a piece of art in > the public space (a couch in Enschede) was used in the design of a > newspaper, which was also not permitted. Apparently, it is also not > permitted to make a 'compilation of all works of a single architect'. > > So yeah, exceptions make life tough - but some might be acceptable if that > makes the change in law more likely to actually happen. > > Lodewijk > > 2016-05-12 12:13 GMT+02:00 Raul Veede <[email protected]>: > >> Whenever there'll be a discussion of the actual wording for FoP in EU, >> I'd say it'd be best if we explained why it is a very, very bad idea to >> include any such foggy clauses - this "natural environment", references to >> the 3-step test, the German-Czech exception, anything "fair", estimations >> by the amount of creativeness in a work, etc. The only positive effect of >> such clauses is they provide some emotional comfort to their supporters, >> while they also bring legal unclarity, court battles and repressed creative >> initiative for decades to come. Good laws are as clear and concise as >> possible. >> >> Raul >> >> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Dimitar Parvanov Dimitrov < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yes, it is full FoP for architecture and sculpture. The only restriction >>> being that images should be permanent in public places and that they need >>> to be "in their natural environment". This exists also in Dutch law if I am >>> not mistaken. Not sure how to interpret it exactly - I guess you must >>> always see at least a little bit of background. >>> >>> Dimi >>> >>> 2016-05-12 11:54 GMT+02:00 <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Can I get some more info on this (English presumably will be ok). Or >>>> just to shorten it, Is there a FoP for commercial use in Belgium being >>>> currently proposed? And will it be voted? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Aktron >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ______________________________________________________________ >>>> > Od: Robin Pepermans <[email protected]> >>>> > Komu: Publicpolicy Group for Wikimedia < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> > Datum: 12.05.2016 09:29 >>>> > Předmět: Re: [Publicpolicy] Selfies at the Atomium soon legally >>>> > >>>> There will apparently be a second reading in committee on the request >>>> of PS (Parti Socialiste). No information on when that would be, but we'll >>>> contact MPs to try to find out. >>>> >>>> The media expects this bill to pass very easily though, given the >>>> cross-party political support. >>>> Regards >>>> SPQRobin >>>> >>>> 2016-05-11 15:59 GMT+02:00 Jan Gerlach <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> This is great, Romaine! >>>>> When would you expect the vote in Parliament? >>>>> Best, >>>>> Jan >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Romaine Wiki <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> "Selfies at the Atomium soon legally" >>>>>> was the title of an article of 11 May of De Redactie at: >>>>>> http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/politiek/1.2652533 >>>>>> >>>>>> A quote translated: >>>>>> The Parliamentary Committee for Economy is almost finished with the >>>>>> introduction of the so-called "freedom of panorama". >>>>>> >>>>>> It seems the next step has been taken! >>>>>> Romaine >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------- >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Publicpolicy mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Publicpolicy mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Publicpolicy mailing list > [email protected] > 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 [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/publicpolicy
