Freedom of panorama

       Written with the active assistance of aGRa .
    Each time you photograph a building, monument or other object of architecture, you create a derivative work from this object itself. This means that part of the copyright belongs, in addition to you, to the architect who built this building. That is, by default, you have the right to publish photographs of buildings, the copyright of which has not expired, only with the consent of the architect.
    Fortunately, in the legislation of most countries this case is specifically stipulated. Such reservations permitting the free use of photographs of objects located in public places are called “freedom of panorama”. Legislation on it varies from country to country ( comparison of laws of different countries ).
    In Russia, freedom of panorama is regulated by article 1276 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation:
    Reproduction, broadcasting or cable of a photographic work, architectural work, or fine art work that is permanently located in a place open for free access is allowed without the consent of the author or other copyright holder and without payment of a fee, unless the image of the work in this way is the main subject of this reproduction is a broadcast or cable or when the image of the work is used for commercial purposes.
    As you can see, this article has two limitations. Let’s figure out what each of them means.

    It is impossible to use a photograph commercially if at least a piece of a building fell on it, the architect of which died less than 70 years ago and did not deign to give permission. In particular:
    • Such photos should not be placed on Habrahabr (see the advertisement above,% username%?)
    • On Wikipedia, you will hardly find such either, since she adheres to a policy of minimal use of everything that cannot be used commercially (freedom 0)
    • If you use a photo in a video that is preceded by an advertisement
    • Anyway, if you put a photo containing the image of the building in the place from which you receive at least a ruble of income, then you are already liable. Perhaps criminal - if the architect (or his relative, if he himself, God forbid, died) considers that he did not receive from you hard-earned 50 thousand rubles of income.
    Moreover, it is sufficient that only a piece of the building is shown in the image, commercial use is prohibited by law, regardless of whether the object is fully used or partially. Now imagine that you have a video or panorama?

    But this is not the worst. You do not even have the right to “non-commercial” use a photograph (well, perhaps, just for personal purposes: for yourself and your family members), if it is “the main object of this reproduction, broadcasting or cable communication”. The condition itself is ambiguous, as it is interpreted in various ways in various sources:
    • An object is basic if the main purpose of the image is to illustrate this object
    • An object is the main one if it occupies the largest place in the frame.
    • An object is the main one, if the main goal of a complex work is to illustrate this object (that is, if you simply illustrate an article with a photograph, then everything is OK)
    But in any case, if you took a picture of the building, and sent the photo to a friend, you have a chance to get a legal trial. Wonderful, isn't it?

    Also popular now: