Damn interesting thread :) (even if IANAL) > Here is a similar example. By law, all bank notes are in the public > domain in Switzerland, so one is allowed to make copies of them. > However, it does not mean that one is allowed to copy them in order to > make counterfeit money !
What about the "specimen" text above the notes ? Do we have to put it on the pictures to avoid the "counterfeit" stuff ? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Swiss_bank_note_security_text.JPG "Banknotes are not protected by the Swiss Federal Copyright Statute. However, individual works reproduced on banknotes are subject to copyright protection provided they have not been reproduced recognisably as a part of the banknote. The works protected under copyright law may only be reproduced and adapted with the permission of the copyright holder." hmm..this is quite ambiguous. Let's take the example of the 200 note with Ramuz. The big photography of Ramuz could be copyrighted, it is a recognizable part of the note. If I can scan the whole note, I cannot put it with the PD license on Commons. > No problem from the point of view of copyright. The photograph could > still be prosecuted for violation of military secrets, but the bunker on > the photo above is probably not a secret. There has been a few examples > (including an appeal just last week) of silly cases where everyone knows > that a certain building is a hidden military bunker, but mentioning it > and publishing a picture accompanied by the location is considered a > violation of military secret. I have a better example from Commons. It is by far less visible than the other picture (though I guess everybody knows about it). Probably a "silly case" candidate : http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Panzerturm.jpg > No problem either — nobody owns the rights of what happens during > a soccer match. I asked that because I know there were some restrictions during the Olympic Games at Turin (pictures for private use only, not commercial, blabla). Same for the US Open or another major tennis tournament. > C'est du pipeau, a mon avis ! Just digitalising an image does not > produce an "original" work (quite the opposite: when you digitalise an > image, your goal is to be as close as possible to the original one), so > this is unlikely to be protected by copyright. See the "Meili" case > referenced at the page you cited above (now en:Copyright law of > Switzerland). Have you tried asking the Bpun ? I haven't tried yet, I will send a mail. Note that I have often seen these "copyright" on PD pictures or/and disclaimers. I was very interested in the pictures of the BIUM. Example : http://www.bium.univ-paris5.fr/monstres/moyen/491.jpg But : Toutes les images de la banque sont © BIUM. Leur reproduction est strictement réservée à l'usage privé du copiste et non destinée à une utilisation collective I will send a few mails there and there, also on the legal list of Wikimedia, just to see their point of view. _______________________________________________ Wikimediach-l mailing list Wikimediach-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediach-l
