Commons:Libertad de panorama/Américas
Esta página da visiones generales de la libertad de panorama gobierna en territorios o países diferentes de las Américas. Se "transcluye" de secciones de páginas individual sobre las reglas para cada territorio.
Países de América
COM:FOP Antigua and Barbuda
Antigua y Barbuda
- for buildings, sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship.
With buildings; sculptures, models of buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public, the copyright in such work is not infringed by making graphic work representing it; making a photograph or film of it; or broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it.[22/2003 Section 74(2)] The copyright of such a work is not infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service, of anything whose making was, by virtue of this section, not an infringement of copyright.[22/2003 Section 74(3)]
COM:FOP Argentina
Argentina
En la ley de derecho de autor, Argentina no tiene ninguna disposición sobre la "libertad de panorama", ni tampoco se mencionan edificios entre las obras a las que se aplica el derecho de autor. Por lo menos algunos piensan que hay libertad de facto de panorama en Argentina en cuanto a edificios:
- Es incuestionablemente aceptado que los edificios pueden ser reproducidos por pinturas o fotografías, sin que esta reproducción infrinja los derechos de autor.
- Se ha admitido pacíficamente que los edificios pueden ser reproducidos por medio de pinturas o fotografías, sin que se considere que esta reproducción es propiedad de los campesinos. - Dr. Emery, Miguel Angel (profesor de derecho de la propiedad Intelectual en Argentina))
- Para edificios {{FoP-Argentina}}
Para escultura y otros trabajos
As recent as 2022, this de facto freedom of panorama for Argentine architecture is brought to some skepticism, see these relevant discussions from December 2022 and from September 2023.
Infojustice.org tells of a proposal in 2017 to add more limitations/exceptions for Law No. 11.723, one of which would have been a freedom of panorama provision. Instead, most of the suggested exceptions were abolished, and the only surviving exception to be passed concerns free uses of works for persons with disabilities (PWDs), as proven by the resulting amendment law, Law No. 27.588 of November 11, 2020, on Amendments to Law No. 11.723 (WIPO copy).
COM:FOP Bahamas
Bahamas
. The Bahamas has freedom of panorama for architecture, and 2D and 3D artistic works on display in places or premises open to the public.
According to the 2010 version of Statute Law of The Bahamas - Chapter 323,
- The copyright in an architectural work that has been constructed does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs or other pictorial representations of the work, if the building in which the work is embodied is located in or is ordinarily visible from a public place.[Cap 323/2010 Sec.78 (1)]
- The copyright in an artistic work does not include the right to prevent the making, distributing or public display of pictures, paintings, photographs or other pictorial representations of the work if the work is located in or ordinarily visible from a public place.[Cap 323/2010 Sec.79 (1)] This section applies to (a) buildings; (b) sculptures, models of buildings and artistic works, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public. [Cap 323/2010 Sec.78 (2)]
- In this Act... “artistic works” include two-dimensional and three dimensional work of fine, graphic and applied art, photographs, prints and art reproductions, maps, globes, charts, diagrams, models, architectural plans and technical drawings;"[Cap 323/2010 Sec.2 (1)]
COM:FOP Barbados
Barbados
for 3D works and works of artistic craftsmanship, for 2D artwork. Use {{FoP-Barbados}} for images of compliant public artistic works of Barbados.
Under the Copyright Act 1998 revised up to 2006, copyright in a work is not infringed by its incidental inclusion in an artistic work, sound recording, film, broadcast or cable programme.[Cap.300/2006 Section 54(a)]
This section [73] applies to buildings; sculptures, models of buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or on premises open to the public.[Cap.300/2006 Section 73(1)] The copyright in a work referred to in subsection (1) is not infringed by making a graphic work representing it; making a photograph or film of it; broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it; or issuing to the public copies, or the broadcasting or including in a cable programme service anything whose making was, by virtue of this section, not an infringement of copyright.[Cap.300/2006 Section 73(2)]
Barbadian law is modelled on UK law, and in the absence of any specific case law to the contrary it is reasonable to assume that the rules will be similar. See the COM:FOP United Kingdom for more details.
COM:FOP Belize
Belice
{{FoP-Belize}}
The Belize Copyright Act of 2000 states that photographs, films, or graphic works depicting a building, sculpture, or work of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public, do not infringe the copyright of the original work.[Cap.252/2000 Section 78]
Prior to 2000, freedom of panorama was granted by the Copyright Act 1956 of the United Kingdom.
COM:FOP Bolivia
Bolivia
Law No.1322 of April 13, 1992, on Copyright does not give a freedom of panorama provision. However, Decision 351 of the Andean Community of Nations (of which Bolivia is part of) provides for a freedom of panorama provision.
COM:FOP Brazil
Brasil
, {{FoP-Brazil}} with caveats. Freedom of panorama is allowed in Brazil, including commercial use, to some extent. According to the Copyright Law 9.610 as of 2013,
- Works permanently located in public places may be freely represented by painting, drawing, photography and audiovisual processes.[9.610/2013 Article 48]
Representation is allowed, but reproduction is forbidden. Works of art placed in locations with access to the public can be freely represented by photography, painting, drawing and audiovisual means, to the extent that it does not reproduce the artwork. Commercial use is allowed, as long as the artist's work is properly attributed and the representation does not consist of a reproduction. The existing jurisprudence consistently allows commercial use of artworks under freedom of panorama, as long as the artwork is accessory, and is not detached from its surrounding elements, and therefore not unfairly used to produce revenue that by law belongs to the artist.
According to the available jurisprudence, and the ongoing debate about Article 48 in Brazil, "Public places" means "places available to the public", including private property and building interiors. Lawyer Marcelo Frullani Lopes says on the question of commercial use of representations of the Rio de Janeiro iconic landmark Christ the Redeemer: "although the area is privately owned, public access to the site is not restricted. One cannot ignore, also, that the Christ Redeemer is part of the landscape of Rio de Janeiro. From this point of view, the place where the work is located must be considered a public place."
Examples of public places quoted in a 2017 court case include squares, gardens, sidewalks, parks, avenues, streets, museums, cultural entities.
Article 48 of Law nº 9.610 of February 19, 1998 must be interpreted with other articles of the law, as established by case law.
- Article 5 of Federal Constitution of Brazil states: XXVII – the exclusive right of use, publication or reproduction of works rests with their authors and is transmissible to their heirs for the time the law shall establish.
- Under the Copyright Law as of 2013, unless otherwise agreed, the author of a work of art, when disposing of the object in which it materializes, transmits the right to exhibit it, but does not transmit to the acquirer the right to reproduce it.[9.610/2013 Article 77] Authorization to reproduce a work of art in any form must be in writing and is assumed to be costly (se presume onerosa).[9.610/2013 Article 78]
Sample freedom of panorama court cases
- In Frederico George Barros Day vs. Edipress (2016): A mural in a public alley was represented by photography in a commercial publication, deformed and without attribution. The court considered the artwork was not being used in a way that took away revenue from the artist, even by being in a commercial publication. However, it considered that the artist's moral rights were violated due to lack of attribution and misrepresentation of the work in an improper way (deformed mural), causing damage to his reputation. An indemnization was granted.
- In a more recent case involving the same artist, Frederico George Barros Day (graffiter) vs. Editora Abril (2017), the artwork was reproduced on magazine covers, without attribution and with clear commercial intent, due to freedom of panorama being confused with Public Domain. An indemnization was granted.
- In Ricardo Fernandez Costa (artist) vs. Leo Burnett Publicidade Ltda (2017): Use of mural graffiti placed in a public alley in publicity campaign for shopping center, the court considered there was no breach of moral or material rights of the author, and that the use was allowed under Article 48.
- Cleir Ávila Ferreira Júnior (artist) vs. Confederação Brasileira de Futebol - CBF & Outplan Sistemas (2017) concerned representation of the artist's sculpture "Araras" in tickets sold for a soccer game. Commercial use of the representation was considered by the court to be covered by freedom of panorama as it was not detached from its landscape.
- This differs from Sival Floriano Veloso (sculptor) vs. Telemar Norte Leste SA, where a statue was detached from its surroundings on commercialized phone cards.
- In Frederico George Barros Day (graffiter) vd. Edições Globo Conde Nast, commercial use of a representation of the mural in a fashion presentation was deemed to be correct under Article 48, as it was contained within the street landscape.
- In the Panda / Mochilheira case (2015), commercial use of a representation of a mural in a fashion presentation was deemed to be correct under Article 48. Use of the "Panda" mural as background for the Mochilheira fashion show was deemed by the court to be accessory, and therefore covered by Article 48.
- In Camila Pavanelli & others (mural artists/graffiters) vs. Lew’lara/TBWA Publicidade Propaganda, casual presence of artwork in a commercial spot was not in breach of the law under Article 48.
- In a much quoted 2011 court case, Sival Floriano Veloso (sculptor) vs. Telemar Norte Leste SA, commercial use of representations of sculptures in a public place was deemed to be unlawful in court. On the phone cards being sold, the sculptures had been detached from their surrounding elements, which was considered to be in breach of Article 48. The court case lasted from 2007 to 2011, dealing with use of representations of sculptures placed in a public place in phone cards sold by the phone operator. The sculptures had been detached from their surrounding elements, which was considered to violate the spirit of Article 48. Of the three judges that voted on the final sentence, two considered that Article 48 does not cover commercial use of representations of artworks, when that representation was only about the artwork. The third judge considered that commercial use was allowed by Article 48, even when the only represented subject was the artwork.
- Compare the above with Cleir Ávila Ferreira Júnior (artist) vs. Confederação Brasileira de Futebol, where the commercial use of an image of an artwork under copyright was considered to be covered by Article 48, as unlike this case, it had not been detached from its surrounding elements.
- The situation was repeated in 2016, when a representation of a house on a commercial product was detached from its surrounding elements and used commercially by a paint manufacturer without consent by the architect, and without proper attribution.
- Other cases, in particular related to Rio de Janeiro's iconic Christ the Redeemer which has been widely used commercially, have been quoted in court and in technical opinions to support the notion that Article 48 does indeed allow for free and unrestricted representation of works of art in public places.
- In a 2017 juridical technical opinion, statues in public squares used in selling products were presented as an example of what is covered by Article 48. Recent jurisprudence related to Article 48 reinforces the notion that freedom of panorama in Brazil cannot be used in any way that provenly takes or diverts revenue that by right would belong to the artist.
- In 2016, a controversial court case arose about a paint brand who used the representation of a copyrighted architectural work (house) to sell the paints, without attributing the work, and under the payment of a fee to the house owners (not the copyright holders). While the court considered the commercial use of the artwork representation unlawful, and granted compensation to the copyright holder, it based its sentence on the fact that there was payment for the use of the specific artwork to someone who was not the copyright holder of the work, thus taking away revenue from the artist and damaging his rights. The court also emphasized the architect's moral rights violation, from commercializing his work without properly attributing it, and said this fact alone was enough to warrant compensation.
- Use of the above decision to imply an interpretation of Article 48 as forbidding commercial use in general is disputed and contradicted by other evidence.
- Also, in this case, the image of the house on the commercialized product was detached from its surrounding elements.
- The Superior Court has written, "The point is not merely representation of the surroundings of the architectural work, but of representation of the architectural work solely for the purpose of profit."
- In any case, the ongoing debate on Brazilian jurisprudence over Article 48 is limited to the resulting financial damage to the artist, which has to be consistently demonstrated by palpable proof, and not to the use of artwork representations.
- More recently, in June 2018, a 2nd instance Brazilian court affirmed the a hospital had the right to commercially use the image of the Rio de Janeiro Monument of the Redeemer even without any landscape context. "Article 48 of Law 9.610/98 in its literal sense authorizes the free representation of works located permanently in public places, and does not require maintenance of the landscape context."
COM:FOP Canada
Canadá
for 3D works and "works of artistic craftsmanship": {{FoP-Canada}}
usually for 2D works
Under Section 32.2 (1)(b) of the Canadian Copyright Act 1985, it is not an infringement of copyright for any person to reproduce, in a painting, drawing, engraving, photograph or cinematographic work … (i) an architectural work (defined as any building or structure or any model of a building or structure"); or
- (ii) "a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship or a cast or model of a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship, that is permanently situated in a public place or building".
Canadian law was originally derived from UK concepts and some of Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom/es may therefore be of relevance, in particular the restricted legal meaning of "work of artistic craftsmanship". Some non-sculptural works can qualify for Canadian FOP under this clause, such as Body Shop Yonge.jpg for example. The freedom provided by the quoted section does not apply to typical two-dimensional works such as paintings, murals, advertising hoardings, maps, posters or signs. These cannot be uploaded to Commons without a license from the copyright holder even if they are permanently located in a public place, unless they are in the public domain.
COM:FOP Chile
Chile
- para la mayoría de las obras situadas permanentemente en "plazas, avenidas y lugares públicos". {{FoP-Chile}}
para las obras literarias protegidas por derechos de autor, ya que dichas obras pertenecen a una categoría distinta - apartados 1 y 2 del artículo 3 -, a diferencia de la litografía (apartado 7 del artículo 3), los proyectos arquitectónicos acabados (apartado 9 del artículo 3), las obras bidimensionales (apartado 11 del artículo 3) y las obras tridimensionales (apartado 12 del artículo 3).
La ley chilena de derechos de autor 17336 establece la libertad de panorama para las obras arquitectónicas y artísticas:
- La reproducción de obras arquitectónicas por medio de fotografía, cine, televisión y cualquier otro procedimiento análogo, así como la publicación de las fotografías correspondientes en diarios, revistas y libros y textos destinados a la enseñanza, es libre y no está sujeta a remuneración, siempre que no se trate de una colección separada, completa o parcial, sin autorización del autor. [17.336/2017 Art.71F]
- Art. 1 Nº 8 Asimismo, la reproducción mediante fotografía. [17.336/2017 Art.71F]
- El dibujo o cualquier otro procedimiento, de monumentos, estatuas y, en general, obras artísticas que adornen permanentemente plazas, avenidas y lugares públicos, es libre y no está sujeto a remuneración, siendo lícita la publicación y venta de las reproducciones. [17.336/2017 Art.71F]
COM:FOP Colombia
Colombia
for public art found permanently in public outdoors and exterior architecture = {{FoP-Colombia}}; for interior architecture as well as public art found in public indoors.
- It shall be permissible to reproduce, by painting, drawing, photography or cinematography, works that are permanently located on public highways, streets or squares, and to distribute such reproductions or works and communicate them to the public. With regard to works of architecture, this provision shall be applicable solely to outward views.[23/1982–2018 Art 39]
- Notable cases
- Case 044-IP-2013 - an example of the commercial use of a property broadcast in a mass media, requiring explicit mention of its author and its publication is for "good commercial practice" (quoted as "buena fe comercial"). Otherwise, as its unlawful appropriation, this is considered as lucrative exploitation. A crucial passage at the last paragraph (P.39 Noveno) of the said ruling reads "Se advierte que las anteriores previsiones consagradas en la norma comunitaria, al ser tan generales en materia de procedimiento, dejan abierto un gran margen para que el ordenamiento interno de los Países Miembros regule los procedimientos y procesos con base en la norma comunitaria, de conformidad con el principio de complemento indispensable." Translated as: "It is noted that the previous provisions enshrined in the community standard, being so general in terms of procedure, leave open a great margin for the internal regulations of the Member Countries to regulate the procedures and processes based on the community standard, in accordance with the principle of indispensable complement." Interpreting from this, this means the FoP exception of the Decision 351 is binding in all member states, but the member states have the right to regulate or restrict the exception as being applied to them.
COM:FOP Costa Rica
Costa Rica
: Según Ley Nº 6683 cuando enmendado hasta 2010, sólo uso no comercial está dejado:
- Es lícita la reproducción fotográfica o por otros procesos pictóricos, cuando esta reproducción sea sin fines comerciales, de las estatuas, monumentos y otras obras de arte protegidas por derechos de autor, adquiridos por el poder público, expuestos en las calles, los jardines y los museos.[6683/2010 Artículo 71]
This non-commercial restriction is identical to the 2010 version of the law; in any case, image files of copyrighted Costa Rican architecture and public art are not allowed on Wikimedia Commons and must be nominated for deletion; such content does not conform to Commons:Licensing which requires commercial uses.
Original Spanish text:
Es lícita la reproducción fotográfica o por otros procesos pictóricos, cuando esta reproducción sea sin fines comerciales, de las estatuas, monumentos y otras obras de arte protegidas por derechos de autor, adquiridos por el poder público, expuestos en las calles, los jardines y los museos.
COM:FOP Cuba
Cuba
According to Law No. 14 of December 28, 1977 as amended up to 1994, it is permissible, without the author's consent and without remuneration, but with obligatory reference to his name and provided the work is public knowledge and respectful of the artist's specific values: ... to reproduce by any means, except those involving direct contact with its surface, a work of art of any type on permanent display in a public place, except those in exhibitions and museums;[14/1977-1994 Article 38(c)]
COM:FOP Dominica
Dominica
. The only reference in the 2003 Copyright Act appears to be
- The following acts shall be permitted ... for the purpose of reporting current events, the reproduction and the broadcasting or other communication to the public of short excerpts of a work seen or heard in the course of such events, to the extent justified by the purpose.[2003 Section 69(b)]
COM:FOP Ecuador
Ecuador
The Organic Code of Social Economy of Knowledge, Creativity and Innovation (2016) provides a restrictive freedom of panorama that does not allow commercial uses of images of copyrighted works permanently found in public spaces:
- The reproduction, adaptation, distribution or public communication for scientific or educational purposes and to guarantee access to people with disabilities of architectural, photographic, fine arts, applied art or other similar works, which are permanently located in places open to the public, through photography, painting, drawing, filming or any other similar technique or procedure, provided that the name of the author of the original work, if known, and the place where it is located are indicated.[2016 Art.212(7)]
The repealed Intellectual Property Law (1998, last-amended in 2014) provided a more lenient exception, under Article 83(f), permitting the use of works permanently located in public spaces as long as "the purpose is strictly the dissemination of art, science and culture." However, under the fourteenth provision of the "Disposiciones Transitorias" of the 2016 Organic Law, rules of the current copyright law are prevailing regarding uses, enjoyment, obligations, licenses, renewals, and extensions.
Decision 351 of the Andean Community of Nations provides for freedom of panorama: "Without prejudice to that put forth in the Chapter 5 and in the previous article, it will be legal to realize, without authorization from the author and without the payment of any remuneration, the following acts:...h) undertake the reproduction, transmission by broadcasting or cable distribution to the public of the image of an architectural work, work of fine art, photographic work or work of applied art located permanently in a place open to the public".[351/1993 Article 22(h)]
Nevertheless, the member states such as Ecuador have the leeway to restrict FoP rules. According to Cerda Silva (2012), "the Decision only set forth a minimum legal standard, allowing the standard to be heightened by domestic law. This is the case for moral rights recognized for authors, economic exclusive rights, term of protection, and exceptions and limitations to copyright."[24]
See Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2024/05#Ecuadorian FoP in the new law for the discussion.
See also: Category:Ecuadorian FOP cases.
COM:FOP El Salvador
El Salvador
for exterior architecture and most types of public art. {{FoP-El Salvador}}
- "The following shall be allowed without the consent of the author or remuneration: . . . the reproduction of a work of art on permanent display in a street, square or other public place in an artistic medium different from that used for the making of the original; with regard to buildings, this right shall be limited to the exterior façade".[2017 Article 45 (f)]
Spanish text:
Respecto de las obras ya divulgadas lícitamente, es permitida sin autorización del autor ni remuneración: . . . La reproducción de una obra de arte expuesta permanentemente en las calles, plazas u otros lugares públicos, por medio de un arte diverso al empleado para la elaboración del original. Respecto de los edificios, dicha facultad se limita a la fachada exterior.
COM:FOP United States
Estados Unidos
for buildings only {{FoP-US}}
Buildings are works subject to copyright in the US according to 17 USC 102(a)(8) since the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act was passed in 1990. It applies to all buildings that were completed after December 1, 1990, even if begun before, or where the plans were published after that date.
However, the US federal copyright law explicitly exempts "pictures, paintings, photographs, or other pictorial representations" of copyrighted buildings from the copyright of the building in 17 USC 120(a). Anyone may paint, draw, or photograph buildings from public places. This includes such interior public spaces as lobbies, auditoriums, etc. The creator holds the exclusive copyright to such an image (the architect or owner of the building has no say whatsoever), and may publish the image in any way. 17 USC 120 applies only to architectural works, not to other works of visual art, such as statues or sculptures.
This means that for buildings completed before December 1, 1990, there is complete FoP, without regard to whether the building is visible from a public place, because the building is public domain, except for the plans. For photos of such buildings, the license tag {{PD-US-architecture}} can be used (along with a license tag for the photo.) For buildings completed after December 1, 1990, freedom is given only to photograph such a building. This includes style elements such as gargoyles and pillars, which are protected only from three-dimensional reproduction (Leicester v. Warner Bros.).
Note that copyright applies only to "buildings".
- "The term building means structures that are habitable by humans and intended to be both permanent and stationary, such as houses and office buildings, and other permanent and stationary structures designed for human occupancy, including but not limited to churches, museums, gazebos, and garden pavilions."
All such works are copyrighted and, therefore, covered by the FOP exemption only if they are visible from a public place.
- "Bridges, cloverleafs, dams, highways or walkways are not ‘buildings’ under the definition of architectural works."
In the US, such works do not have a copyright and therefore may be photographed freely, whether or not from a public place. For images of such works, {{PD-structure|USA}} can be used. They do have copyrights in many other countries.
Originality requirement for architecture
This discussion must be considered qualified by the requirement under US law that a work, including a derivative work, must display originality to be protectable under copyright law. See Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co. in the English Wikipedia. More specifically, in the case of derivative works, it has been held, in Durham Industries, Inc. v. Tomy Corp.[25] and earlier in L. Batlin & Son, Inc. v. Snyder.[26] that a derivative work must be original relative to the underlying work on which it is based. Otherwise, it cannot enjoy copyright protection and copying it will not infringe any copyright of the derivative work itself (although copying it may infringe the copyright, if any, of the underlying work on which the derivative work was based). For further discussion of this issue, see the Wikipedia article Derivative work.
For a legal discussion, see Wikilegal/Pictorial Representations Architectural Works.
Artworks and sculptures
. {{NoFoP-US}} (category-only template)
Note: Please tag United States no-FoP for public art deletion requests: <noinclude>[[Category:United States FOP cases/pending]]</noinclude>
For artworks, even if permanently installed in public places, the US copyright law has no similar exception, and any publication of an image of a copyrighted artwork thus is subject to the approval of the copyright holder of the artwork. However, public artwork installed before 1929 is considered to be public domain, and can be photographed freely. In addition, any public artwork installed before 1978 without a copyright notice is also in the public domain (unless the copyright owner actively prevented anyone from copying or photographing the work until 1978). In these situations, document the date of installation and the creator (sculptor) of the pictured work as much as possible. (A good resource for finding information about US sculptures is the Smithsonian Art Inventories Catalog.)
Applicable templates:
- For public artwork installed before 1929, use {{PD-US}} or {{PD-US-expired}}.
- For public artwork installed between 1929 and 1977 inclusive, use {{PD-US-no notice}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}}.
The line of argument that a large sculpture or memorial is a building and therefore covered by the FOP exemption was specifically rejected in Federal claims court (Gaylord v. The United States, 2008), which noted that the building exemption to the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act (AWCPA) does not extend to "The Column" sculpture in the Korean War Veterans Memorial because "[t]he structures used in the definition of 'building' by the Copyright Office are intended to house individuals; either for the sake of providing shelter or for another purpose such as religious services."[1] While the court ruled in favor of the defendant under a fair use rationale it was later overturned in favor of the plaintiff; the photograph was deemed a derivative work. The court also contended that had Congress intended to extend the AWCPA to monuments and memorials, the law would have been drafted to reflect that in the first place.
For further legal discussion, see Wikilegal/Copyright of Images of Memorials in the US.
Examples
Charging Bull
- Arts, Briefly; Sculptor Files Lawsuit Against Wal-Mart (September 23, 2006 article by New York Times)
- Suit Alleges Illegal Use of 'Charging Bull' Image (September 22, 2006 article by Los Angeles Times)
- Artist sues Random House in NYC over book cover (August 4, 2009 article by Auction Central News)
Cloud Gate
- Kapoor v. NRA: A Fair Use Analysis (by Creative Law Center)
Graffiti by street artist Revok
- H&M's battle with the artist Revok shows how street art is being taken seriously (March 16, 2018 article by The Washington Post)
- In settlement, Revok and H&M pledge donations to Detroit arts groups (September 6, 2018 by Detroit Free Press)
Korean War Veterans Memorial
- Korea memorial sculptor wins copyright case (September 20, 2013 article by USA Today)
- Gaylord v. United States, 595 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (by US Copyright Office)
- FRANK GAYLORD v. UNITED STATES, No. 06-539C (by United States Court of Federal Claims)
Portlandia
- So Sue Us – Why the Portlandia statue failed to become an icon (September 9, 2014 article by Willamette Week archived on November 27, 2022)
Statue of Liberty replica, New York-New York Hotel & Casino, Las Vegas
- The United States v Davidson—Copyright infringement of a Replica Statue of Liberty. Copyright for creative copycats? (by Infusion Lawyers)
- Judge Eric Bruggink's opinion (by United States Court of Federal Claims)
Three Servicemen or Three Soldiers
- THE THREE SERVICEMAN STATUE USE REQUEST (by Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund)
- Unusual Arrangement Gives Royalties to Sculptor of Vietnam Vets Statue (1987 article by The Associated Press)
For further information, refer to Commons:Arte público y derechos de autor en los E.E.U.U. and the following resources:
For foreign works considered under US law:
Use {{Not-free-US-FOP}}.
Foreign works from countries that have a relevant freedom of panorama may fall under US law for copyright issues within the US. Under the choice-of-law principle lex loci protectionis, US courts might apply US freedom of panorama standards in such cases, rather than the standards of the source country. However, in practice, it is unsettled whether and how this approach would be applied in real-world US legal cases involving freedom of panorama elements.
See {{Not-free-US-FOP}} and Commons:Requests for comment/Non-US Freedom of Panorama under US copyright law.
COM:FOP Grenada
Granada
. Under the Copyright Act (Cap. 67, Act No. 21 of 2011),
- Copyright is a property right which subsists in literary and artistic works.[21/2011 Section 5(1)] This includes works of architecture.[21/2011 Section 5(1)(g)]
- The inclusion of an artistic work in a work, broadcast or communication to the public shall not be considered an infringement if the artistic work (a) is permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public; or (b) is included in the work, broadcast or communication to the public by way only of background or as incidental to the essential matters represented.[21/2011 Section 19]
COM:FOP Guatemala
Guatemala
. Pictorial representations of public art and architecture are permitted for personal use only. Effectively disallows commercial uses, which Commons:Licensing requires.
Section 64 of Guatemala's copyright law as of 2006 says:
"With respect to already published works, is permitted, without the author's consent, besides what is set forth in article 32: [...]
d) The reproduction for personal use of a work of art permanently exhibited in public places or on the exterior façade of buildings, made by means of an art different from that used in the making of the original, provided that the name of the author, if known, the title of the work, if it has one, and the place it is located are indicated".[33-98/2006 Art.64(d)]
Original language (Spanish) text:
ARTÍCULO 64. Respecto de las obras ya divulgadas también es permitida, sin autorización del autor, además de lo dispuesto en el artículo 32: [...]
d) La reproducción para uso personal de una obra de arte expuesta en forma permanente en lugares públicos o en la fachada exterior de edificios, ejecutada por medio de un arte que sea distinto al empleado para la elaboración del original, siempre que se indique el nombre del autor, si se conociere, así como el título de la obra, si lo tiene, y el lugar donde se encuentra.
COM:FOP Guyana
Guyana
for buildings, sculpture and applied art, not for paintings, drawings, engravings or photographs.
- The copyright of a sculpture or work of artistic craftsmanship other than a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph which is permanently situated in a public place, or in premises open to the public, is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the work, or the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast.[74/1956 Section 9(3)]
- The copyright in a work of architecture is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the work, or the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast.[74/1956 Section 9(4)]
- Without prejudice to the two last preceding subsections, the copyright in an artistic work is not infringed by the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast, if its inclusion therein is only by way of background or is otherwise only incidental to the principal matters represented in the film or broadcast.[74/1956 Section 9(5)]
COM:FOP Haiti
Haití
- - noncommercial only (but noncommercial licensing is not compatible to Commons:Licensing).
- if the work is not the main subject (in other words, de minimis).
According to Article 15 on page 9 the Décret du 12 Octobre 2005 sur les Droits d'Auteur, a reproduction of an architectural work of art, a fine arts work, a photographic work of art or an applied arts work that is situated in permanence in a location open to the public is allowed, except if the work of art is the primary subject of said reproduction and said reproduction is used for commercial purposes.[2005 Article 15]
Nonobstant les dispositions de l'article 7, il est permis, sans l'autorisation de l'auteur et sans paiement d'une rémunération, de reproduire, de radiodiffuser ou de communiquer par câble au public une image d'une oeuvre d'architecture, d'une oeuvre des beaux-arts, d'une oeuvre photographique et d'une oeuvre des arts appliqués qui est située en permanence dans un endroit ouvert au public, sauf si l'image de l'oeuvre est le sujet principal d'une teIle reproduction, radiodiffusion ou communication si elle est utilisée à des fins commerciales.
— in: 2005 Article 15
Notwithstanding the dispositions of article 7, it is permitted, without the authorisation of the author and without payment of a remuneration, to reproduce, broadcast over radio or communicate via cable to the public an image of an work of architectural art, a work of fine arts, a work of photographic art or a work of applied arts if it is situated in permanence in a location open to the public, except if the work of art is the primary subject of said image, radiodiffusion or communication if it is used for commercial purposes.
— Translation of Article 15
The "Article 7" being referenced is simply a list of a copyright holder's exclusive rights. It says that "With the exception of the dispositions of articles 8 to 19, the author of a work of art has the exclusive right to perform or authorize the following acts (...)".
COM:FOP Honduras
Honduras
– Personal use only, in media different from the original.
The 2006 revision of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights, article 52, states:
- It is lawful, for personal use, to reproduce a work of art permanently exhibited in the streets, squares or other public places, by means of an art different from that used for making the original. With respect to buildings, this is limited to the exterior façade.[16-2006 Article 52]
COM:FOP Jamaica
Jamaica
, except murals and other 2D "graphic works" ( ). {{FoP-Jamaica}}
- This section applies to buildings; sculptures, models of buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.[13/2015 Section 74(1)]
- The copyright in such a work is not infringed by making a graphic work representing it; making a photograph or film of it; or broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it.[13/2015 Section 74(2)]
- The copyright of such a work is not infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service, of anything whose making was, by virtue of this section, not an infringement of copyright.[13/2015 Section 74(3)]
See also: Category:Jamaican FOP cases.
COM:FOP Mexico
México
{{FoP-Mexico}}
La ley federal de derechos de autor de México, Artículo 148, permite la reproducción sin compensación en ciertas circunstancias:
- Las obras literarias y artísticas que ya hayan sido divulgadas sólo podrán ser utilizadas en los siguientes casos sin el consentimiento del titular de los derechos patrimoniales y sin remuneración, siempre que no se perjudique la normal explotación de la obra y siempre que, además, se mencione invariablemente la fuente y que no se hace ninguna alteración a la obra:"[1996-2018 Art.148]
- Reproducción, comunicación y distribución mediante dibujos, pinturas, fotografías y procesos audiovisuales de obras visibles desde lugares públicos.[1996-2018 Art.148(VII)]
Se ha interpretado que el término lugares públicos incluye lugares públicos interiores y exteriores. Los lugares de propiedad del gobierno como bibliotecas, mercados, parques y jardines públicos no tienen restricciones contra la libertad de panorama. Sin embargo, debido a la ambigüedad del artículo, en algunas ocasiones, algunos establecimientos como el Metro de la Ciudad de México (un sistema propiedad del gobierno) han requerido a los usuarios que soliciten permiso para filmar o fotografiar dentro de las instalaciones. La Ley Federal de Telecomunicaciones y Radiodifusión también utiliza el término «lugares públicos» y los define como: "...los que se encuentran a cargo de dependencias de entidades federales, estatales o municipales, o bajo programas públicos de cualquiera de los tres órdenes de gobierno..." Los lugares públicos bajo esta ley (página 7) incluirían:
- Escuelas, Universidades y todo tipo de edificación destinada a la enseñanza;
- Clínicas, Hospitales y todo tipo de edificación destinada a la atención de la salud;
- Oficinas gubernamentales de todo tipo;
- Centros comunitarios;
- Lugares abiertos y de entrada libre como parques, áreas verdes y centros deportivos.
- Lugares que colaboran en programas públicos federales.
COM:FOP Nicaragua
Nicaragua
{{NoFoP-Nicaragua}} As per Nicaragua Law No. 577 on Amendments and Additions to Law No. 312 on Copyright and Related Rights, "Works located permanently in parks, streets, squares or other thoroughfares may be reproduced, without the author’s authorization, by means of painting, sketching, photographs and audiovisual recordings for personal use. In respect of works of architecture, the previous article shall only apply to their external aspect.[77/2006 Article 43]
This article had previously read, "Works permanently located in parks, streets, squares or other public roads can be reproduced, without the author's authorization, by means of painting, drawing, photography and audiovisual recordings. As for architectural works, the previous article will only apply to its external appearance.[312/1999 Article 43]
COM:FOP Panama
Panamá
; in regard to buildings, for the outer façade only. {{FoP-Panama}}
Under the Law No. 64 of October 10, 2012, reproduction, broadcasting or public transmission by cable of the image of an architectural work, of a work of the fine arts, of a photographic work or of a work of applied arts that is located permanently in a place open to the public is allowed. With buildings, this is limited to the exterior façade.[64/2012 Article 69(3)]
COM:FOP Paraguay
Paraguay
{{FoP-Paraguay}} The following is permitted without authorization by the author or payment of remuneration in relation to works already disclosed:
- Reproduction of a work of art on permanent display in streets, squares or other public places, or on the outer walls of buildings, where the artistic medium used is different from that used for the making of the original, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work, if known, and the place in which it is located are mentioned.[1328/1998 Article 39.4]
- Where the work is used as a sign, emblem or distinctive mark of a political party or non-profit-making civil association or entity.[1328/1998 Article 39.7]
"Reproductions admitted in this article will be permitted only if they do not cross the normal exploitation of the work or cause an unjustifiable damage to the legitimate interests of the author".[1328/1998 Article 39]
COM:FOP Peru
Perú
{{FoP-Peru}}
Basado en la ley de 1996,
- Respecto de las obras ya divulgadas lícitamente, es permitida sin autorización del autor ... La reproducción de una obra de arte expuesta permanentemente en las calles, plazas u otros lugares públicos, o de la fachada exterior de los edificios, realizada por medio de un arte diverso al empleado para la elaboración del original, siempre que se indique el nombre del autor si se conociere, el título de la obra si lo tuviere y el lugar donde se encuentra.[822/1996 Art.43(e)]
- En todos los casos indicados en este artículo, se equipara al uso ilícito toda utilización de los ejemplares que se haga en concurrencia con el derecho exclusivo del autor de explotar su obra.[822/1996 Art.43 (nota final)] Lejos de la mencionada ley, tomar ventaja comercial de otros o no atribuir al autor del trabajo es castigado penalmente.[29263/2003 Art.1(218)]
Notas:
- Las resoluciones Nº 0372-2006-TPI-INDECOPI y Nº 0760-2010-TPI-INDECOPI (El Comercio contra APSAV) precisan las situaciones que la obra puede reproducirse lícitamente para actos de exhibición. Un "lugar público" (como MVCS: "bien de dominio público", con excepciones para el "dominio privado estatal", véase Obras del Gobierno Peruano)[29151/1991, updated in D.S. 008-2021-VIVIENDA Art. 3.3.2][27] es un lugar interno o externo que está permanentemente a disposición del público, incluyendo los museos. La libertad de panorama se aplica incluso a las obras artísticas: la condición de "permanente" no desaparece cuando las obras han sido trasladadas de un lugar público a otro lugar público o que están en proceso de cierre temporal para su mantenimiento. Los lugares declarados como patrimonio cultural, aunque hayan sido abandonados o nunca descubiertos, son propiedad del Estado peruano y se ajustan a las definiciones antes mencionadas.[28296/2008 Título I, Art. 2, 5 y 11]
- Previamente, la ley de 1961 permitió la libertad de panorama para obras artísticas y arquitectónicas, sin importar su vigencia legal, en lugares públicos. No existe mención si son "permanentemente accesibles".[13714/1961 Art. 72 and 74] Adicionalmente, durante el gobierno de Alberto Fujimori, el concepto de "espacios públicos" se extiendió a interiores de gran concurrencia desde instituciones públicas, áreas libres de instituciones privadas y transporte colectivo.[25357/1991 Art.2] Para el caso de los museos, la reproducción en medios periodísticos, televisivos y cinematográficos de obras adquiridas dentro del lugar también están permitidas libremente. La condición obligatoria es mencionar que aquellas son "copias de la obra" con el nombre de su autor, para el trabajo original en sí no podrá usarse para el comercio.[13714/1961 Art. 73]
- La protección de obras de arquitectura expiran a los 70 p.m.a de su diseñador original. Aun así, para aclaración, si el trabajo arquitectónico estuvo inaugurado antes de que 1960 y nunca fue atribuido por algún autor, carecerá de amparo por las leyes de derechos de autor vigentes debido a las limitaciones de la ley de 1849 en que los edificios no son asignados como obras de arte.[13714/1961 Art. 7(ll) y 153] La libertad de panorama se aplica en los Art. 37 y 38 del Código del Derecho de Propiedad Intelectual del Colegio de Arquitectos del Perú con la condición que "los trabajos estén abiertos al público", incluyendo interiores salvo reserva de su autor.[28]
COM:FOP Dominican Republic
República Dominicana
The reproduction, distribution and communication to the public of news of the day and other information relating to facts or events in the news that have been publicly disseminated by the press or by means of broadcasting shall be lawful. It shall also be lawful to reproduce and make accessible to the public, in connection with the reporting of current events by means of photography, broadcasting or communication to the public by cable or other analogous means, works seen or heard in the course of such events, to the extent justified by the informatory purpose.[65-00/2000 Article 34]
Works permanently located on public thoroughfares, streets or squares may be reproduced by means of painting, drawing, photography or audiovisual fixations, and such reproductions may be distributed and communicated publicly. With regard to works of architecture, this provision shall apply only to their external aspect.[65-00/2000 Article 39]
COM:FOP Saint Kitts and Nevis
San Cristóbal y Nieves
for 3D works. According to the Chapter 18.08 Copyright Act of 2002,
- Representation of artistic works on public display: This section shall apply to (a) buildings; and (b) sculptures, models of buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.[18.08/2000 Section 74(1)]
- The copyright in the work referred to in section 74(1) shall not be infringed by (a) making a graphic work representing it; (b) making a photograph or film of it; (c) broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it; or (d) the issue to the public of copies, or the broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service, of anything whose making was, by virtue of this section, not an infringement of copyright.[18.08/2000 Section 74(2)]
COM:FOP Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
San Vicente y las Granadinas
for 2D copies of 3D works. Unclear whether 2D works may be copied, but assume as the clause follows the the United Kingdom freedom of panorama model. According to the Copyright Act 2003 (Act No. 21 of 2003), Issue 1/2009,
- When an artistic work is on public display, including buildings; sculptures, models of buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public, the copyright in such a work is not infringed by making a graphic work representing it; making a photograph or film of it; or broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it.[1/2009 Section 75]
COM:FOP Saint Lucia
Santa Lucía
. For 2D copies of 3D works. According to the Copyright Act 1995 (Act No. 10 of 1995),
- This section applies to (a) buildings; (b) sculptures, models of buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.[10/1995 Section 81(1)]
- The copyright in such a work is not infringed by (a) making a graphic work representing it; (b) making a photograph or film of it; or (c) broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it.[10/1995 Section 81(2)]
- The copyright in such a work is not infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service, of anything whose making was, by virtue of this section, not an infringement of copyright.[10/1995 Section 81(3)]
COM:FOP Suriname
Surinam
for works under 6° of Article 10. for others like maps, photographs, or designs related to sciences like architecture or geography. Under the Law of 1913, as amended up to the act of 17 April 2015,
- There is no infringement of copyright in reproduction of a work, as referred to in Article 10, 6°, that is permanently displayed or visible from a public road if the reproduction by its size or by the method in which it is made is clearly different from the original work. With buildings, this is limited to the exterior.[23/1981 Article 18]
Works listed under 6° of Article 10: drawings, paintings, architecture, sculptures, lithographs, engravings, and other sheet metal works.
COM:FOP Trinidad and Tobago
Trinidad y Tobago
{{FoP-Trinidad and Tobago}}
The 2008 Copyright Act states, "Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 8(1) and 16, the inclusion of an artistic work in a work, broadcast or communication to the public shall not be considered an infringement if the artistic work (a) is permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public; or (b) is included in the work, broadcast or communication to the public by way only of background or as incidental to the essential matters represented.[5/2008 Section 17]
COM:FOP Uruguay
Uruguay
{{FoP-Uruguay}} Reproduction is not unlawful: ... The photographic reproduction of paintings, monuments, or allegorical figures exhibited in museums, parks or public promenades, provided that the works in question are considered to be outside the private domain.[18.046/2019 Article 45.8]
Uruguayan freedom of panorama is applicable to images of copyrighted architecture, monuments, and public art found in public spaces as well as within museums, provided that the said works are dedicated for public view and not confined to a particular private owner ("dominio privado").
See also Commons talk:Freedom of panorama/Archive 7#Statues images for the discussion on the Uruguayan FoP.
See also: Category:Uruguayan FOP cases.
COM:FOP Venezuela
Venezuela
. {{FoP-Venezuela}} Under the 1993 Law on Copyright,
- The following shall be considered lawful reproductions: ... the reproduction of a work of art permanently displayed in a street, square or other public place by means of a technique different from that used for the making of the original; with respect to buildings, the said right shall be limited to the external elevations.[1993 Article 44(9)]
Otros territorios
COM:FOP Anguilla
Anguila
The Copyright Act as of 2002 makes no provision for freedom of panorama.
Under Section 7, subsection (1), a single reproduced copy of a published work is permitted without permission from the author or copyright holder, if the reproduction is done privately by a natural person for personal purposes only.[C120-2002 Sec.7(1)]
COM:FOP Aruba
Aruba
There is no infringement of copyright in copies of a work that is permanently displayed in public where the size of the copy and the way in which it is made are clearly different from the original work, and in the case of buildings is limited to the exterior.[2003 Article 18]
COM:FOP Bermuda
Bermudas
for 2D copies of 3D works. Under section 86 of the Copyright and Designs Act 2004,
- This section applies to (a) buildings; and (b) sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.[2004 Sec.86(1)]
- The copyright in such a work is not infringed by (a) making a graphic work representing it; (b) making a photograph or film of it; or (c) broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it.[2004 Sec.86(2)]
- Nor is the copyright infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service, of anything whose making was, by virtue of this section, not an infringement of the copyright.[2004 Sec.86(3)]
COM:FOP Dutch Caribbean
Caribe neerlandés
COM:FOP Curaçao
Curazao
According to the Auteursverordening 1913 - article 18, Freedom of Panorama is allowed as long as the reproduction is clearly different from the original work by its size or the way in which it was made, and in the case of buildings only the exterior is shown.[29]
COM:FOP Greenland
Groenlandia
Greenlandic freedom of panorama, found at Section 24 (2 and 3) is identical to the Danish freedom of panorama. for buildings, and for any public art still in copyright (for noncommercial only, incompatible with Commons:Licensing).
COM:FOP Guadeloupe
Guadalupe
COM:FOP French Guiana
Guayana Francesa
COM:FOP Cayman Islands
Islas Caimán
- for 3D works
- for 2D "works of artistic craftsmanship"
- for 2D "graphic works" {{FoP-UK}}
The relevant law is section 62 of the United Kingdom's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.[30] The Copyright (Cayman Islands) Order 2015 and Copyright (Cayman Islands) (Amendment) Order 2016 do not modify this section.
Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom/es#FOP
COM:FOP South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
Islas Georgias del Sur y Sandwich del Sur
COM:FOP Falkland Islands
Islas Malvinas
(for architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship) and (for other types of artistic works), in the similar manner and rules as the United Kingdom freedom of panorama.
The Copyright Act 1956 c. 74 provides freedom of panorama at Section 9, General exceptions from protection of artistic works.
- The copyright in a work to which this subsection applies which is permanently situated in a public place, or in premises open to the public, is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the work, or the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast.[1956 Sec.9(3)]
- (This subsection [Sec.9(3)] applies to sculptures, and to such works of artistic craftsmanship as are mentioned in paragraph (c) of subsection (1) of section three of this Act.)
- The copyright in a work of architecture is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the work, or the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast.[1956 Sec.9(4)]
- Without prejudice to the two last preceding subsections, the copyright in an artistic work is not infringed by the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast, if its inclusion therein is only by way of background or is otherwise only incidental to the principal matters represented in the film or broadcast.[1956 Sec.9(5)] (de minimis inclusion of works not permanently situated in public spaces only in television and films)
- The copyright in an artistic work is not infringed by the publication of a painting, drawing, engraving, photograph or cinematograph film, if by virtue of any of the three last preceding subsections the making of that painting, drawing, engraving, photograph or film did not constitute an infringement of the copyright.[1956 Sec.9(6)]
COM:FOP Turks and Caicos Islands
Islas Turcas y Caicos
for architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship. for other types of artistic works.
Under the Copyright Act 1911,
- The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyright ... The making or publishing of paintings, drawings, engravings, or photographs of a work of sculpture or artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situate in a public place or building, or the making or publishing of paintings, drawings, engravings, or photographs (which are not in the nature of architectural drawings or plans) of any architectural work of art.[1911 Sec.2(iii)]
COM:FOP British Virgin Islands
Islas Vírgenes Británicas
for architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship. for other types of artistic works. The Copyright Act 1956 contains freedom of panorama provisions at Section 9, subsections 3–6, with similar rules as those of the United Kingdom freedom of panorama.
COM:FOP United States Virgin Islands
Islas Vírgenes de los Estados Unidos
COM:FOP Martinique
Martinica
COM:FOP Montserrat
Montserrat
for architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship. for other types of artistic works. The Copyright Act 1956 contains freedom of panorama provisions at Section 9, subsections 3–6, with similar rules as those of the United Kingdom freedom of panorama.
COM:FOP Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico
COM:FOP Saint Barthélemy
Saint-Barthélemy
COM:FOP Saint-Martin (France)
San Martín
COM:FOP Sint Maarten
San Martín
for buildings and most 2D and 3D artwork
for photographs, maps, applied art, industrial design, and models
Under the Author's Regulation of 1913 as amended 2006,
- Reproduction or publication of pictures made in order to be put on permanent display in public places, of a work such as is normally found in such places, or of a work relating to architecture, will not be regarded as an infringement of the copyright of the author.[1913–2006 Art.18]
COM:FOP Saint-Pierre and Miquelon