Commons:Freedom of panorama/Americas

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Freedom of panorama
AfricaAmericasAsiaEuropeInsular OceaniaOthers

This page gives overviews of freedom of panorama rules in different countries or territories of the Americas. It is "transcluded" from individual page sections giving the rules for each territory.

Countries of the Americas[edit]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Antigua and Barbuda

Antigua and Barbuda

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK - for buildings, sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship.

Copyright in a work is not infringed by its incidental inclusion in an artistic work, sound recording, film, broadcast or cable programme.[22/2003 Section 55(a)] 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)]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Argentina

Argentina

  • OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for buildings {{FoP-Argentina}}
  • OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK for sculpture and other works

Argentina has no "freedom of panorama" provision in its copyright law, neither are buildings mentioned among works to which copyright apply. At least some think there is de facto freedom of panorama in Argentina regarding buildings:

  • It is uncontroversially accepted that buildings can be reproduced by paintings or photographs, without this reproduction infringing copyright.
  • Se ha admitido pacificamente que los edificios puedan ser reproducidos mediante pinturas o fotografías, sin estimarse que esta reproducción lesione los derechos de autor. - Dr. Emery, Miguel Angel (professor of Intellectual property law in Argentina)[1]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Bahamas

The Bahamas

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK. 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)]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Barbados

Barbados

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for 3D works and works of artistic craftsmanship, OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK 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.

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Belize

Belize

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{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.

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Bolivia

Bolivia

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-Bolivia}}

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Brazil

Brazil

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK, {{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."[2]

Examples of public places quoted in a 2017 court case include squares, gardens, sidewalks, parks, avenues, streets, museums, cultural entities.[3]

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.[4]

  • 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[edit]

Statue of Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro
  • 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.[5]
  • 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.[6]
  • 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.[7]
  • 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.[8]
  • This differs from Sival Floriano Veloso (sculptor) vs. Telemar Norte Leste SA, where a statue was detached from its surroundings on commercialized phone cards.[9]
  • 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.[10]
  • 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.[11]
  • 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.[12]
  • 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.[13]
  • 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.[14]
  • 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.[15]
  • 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.[16]
  • 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.[17]
  • 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.[18]
    • 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.[19]
    • Also, in this case, the image of the house on the commercialized product was detached from its surrounding elements.[20]
    • 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."[21]
  • 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.[22][23]
  • 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."[24]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Canada

Canada

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for 3D works and "works of artistic craftsmanship": {{FoP-Canada}}

OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK 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 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.

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Chile

Chile

  • OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for most works permanently located in "squares, avenues and public places." {{FoP-Chile}}
  • OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK for copyrighted literary works, as such works are in a separate category – Article 3(1) and (2) – as opposed to lithography (Article 3(7)), finished architectural projects (Article 3(9)), two-dimensional works (Article 3(11)), and three-dimensional works (Article 3(12)).

The Chilean copyright law 17336 provides freedom of panorama for architectural and artistic works:

  • The reproduction of architectural works by means of photography, film, television and any other analogous procedure, as well as the publication of the corresponding photographs in newspapers, magazines and books and texts intended for education, is free and is not subject to to remuneration, provided that it is not in a separate, complete or partial collection, without authorization of the author.[17.336/2017 Art.71F]
  • Art. 1 Nº 8 Likewise, reproduction through photography.[17.336/2017 Art.71F]
  • Drawing or any other procedure, of monuments, statues and, in general, artistic works that permanently adorn squares, avenues and public places, is free and is not subject to remuneration, the publication and sale of the reproductions being lawful.[17.336/2017 Art.71F]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Colombia

Colombia

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-Colombia}}

  • 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]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Costa Rica

Costa Rica

OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK: According to Law Nº 6683 as amended up to 2010, only non-commercial use is allowed:

  • It is lawful make reproductions by photographic or other pictorial processes, when this reproduction is non-commercial, of statues, monuments and other works of art protected by copyright, acquired by the government, exposed in the streets, gardens and museums.[6683/2010 Article 71]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Cuba

Cuba

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-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)]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Dominica

Dominica

OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK. 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)]

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-Dominican Republic}}

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]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Ecuador

Ecuador

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-Ecuador}}

See Andean Community:Freedom of panorama.

According to Intellectual Property Law (Codification No. 2006­-13), "Provided that fair use is respected and normal exploitation of the work is not adversely affected or injury caused to the right holder, exclusively the following acts ... shall be lawful: (f) the reproduction, communication and distribution of works that are permanently located in public places, by means of photography, painting, drawing or any audiovisual process, provided that the name of the author of the original work and the place where it is located are specified, and that the purpose is strictly to disseminate art, science and culture".[2006­-13 Art.83(f)]

Decision 351 of the Andean Community of Nations, which is binding on Ecuador, provides for freedom of panorama as follows: "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)]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP El Salvador

El Salvador

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK, more or less. {{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 outer walls".[2017 Article 45 (f)]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Grenada

Grenada

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK. 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]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Guatemala

Guatemala

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-Guatemala}}

Guatemala's copyright law as of 2006 says "With respect to already published works it is permitted, without the author's consent, besides what is set forth in article 32: d) The reproduction of a work of art exposed permanently in public places, or of the outer surface of buildings, realized by means of an art distinct from that used in making 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)]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Guyana

Guyana

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK 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)]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Haiti

Haiti

  • OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK - noncommercial only (but noncommercial licensing is not compatible to Commons:Licensing).
  • OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK 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 (...)".

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Honduras

Honduras

OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK – 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]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Jamaica

Jamaica

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{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)]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Mexico

Mexico

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-Mexico}}

Mexico's federal copyright law, Article 148, allows reproduction without compensation in certain circumstances:

  • Literary and artistic works that have already been disclosed may only be used in the following cases without the consent of the owner of the economic rights and without remuneration, provided that the normal exploitation of the work is not adversely affected thereby and provided also that the source is invariably mentioned and that no alteration is made to the work:"[1996-2018 Art.148]
  • Reproduction, communication and distribution by means of drawings, paintings, photographs and audiovisual processes of works that are visible from public places (lugares publicos).[1996-2018 Art.148(VII)]

The term lugares publicos has been interpreted to include both interior and exterior public places. Government-owned places such as libraries, markets, parks and public gardens have no restrictions against freedom of panorama. However, due to the ambiguity of the article, on some occasions, some establishments like the Mexico City Metro (a government-owned system) have required users to request permission to film or photograph inside the facilities. The Federal Law of Telecom and Broadcasting also uses the term "public places". It defines public places as: "...those that are in the charge of dependencies of federal, state or municipal entities, or under public programs of any one of the three orders of government..." Public places under this law (page 7) would include:

  • Schools, Universities, and every kind of building used for education;
  • Clinics, Hospitals, and every kind of building used for health care;
  • Government offices of all types;
  • Community Centers;
  • Free admission and open places such as parks, green areas and sports centers
  • Places that collaborate in public federal programs.
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Nicaragua

Nicaragua

OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK 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]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Panama

Panama

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK; 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)]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Paraguay

Paraguay

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{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]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Peru

Peru

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-Peru}}

Based on the 1996 law,

  • The following shall be permitted without the author’s consent: ... the reproduction of a work of art on permanent display in a street, square or other public place, or that of the outer façade of a building, where it is done in an art form different from that used for the making of the original, provided that the name of the author, if known, the title of the work, if any, and the place in which it is located are specified.[822/1996 Art.43(e)]
  • In all the cases specified in this Article, any use of works that competes with the author's exclusive right to exploit their work shall be equivalent to unlawful use.[822/1996 Art.43 (endnote)] Outside the copyright law, is illegal use to take economic advantage for others or not to attribute the author of the work.[29263/2003 Art.1(218)]

Notes:

  • Resolutions No 0372-2006-TPI-INDECOPI and 0760-2010-TPI-INDECOPI (El Comercio v APSAV) specifies the situations in which the work may be legitimately reproduced for acts of exhibition. A "public place" (like MVCS: "bien de dominio público", with exceptions for "dominio privado estatal", see Works by the Peruvian Government)[29151/1991, updated in D.S. 008-2021-VIVIENDA Art. 3.3.2][25] is an internal or external location that is permanently available to the public including museums. The freedom of panorama applies even to artistic works: the "permanent" status is not lost to works that have been relocated from one public place to another public place or that are in the process of temporary closure for maintenance. The places declared as cultural heritage, even if they were abandoned or never discovered, are property of the Peruvian State and match the definitions previously mentioned.[28296/2008 Title I, Art. 2, 5 and 11]
  • Previously, the 1961 law allowed the freedom of panorama for artistic and architectural works, regardless of their legal validity, in public places. There is no mention if the work must be "permanently accessible".[13714/1961 Art. 72 and 74] During the government of Alberto Fujimori, the concept of "public spaces" expands in heavy attended interiors from public institutions, free areas in private institutions and mass transport.[25357/1991 Art.2] In the case of museums, the audiovisual reproduction in newspapers, television channels and movies of works acquired inside the place is also allowed. But, should be noted that these reproductions are "copies of a work" with name of its author, for the copyrighted work itself cannot be used for trade.[13714/1961 Art. 73]
  • Copyright protection of architectural works expire 70 p.m.a of their original designer. However, for clarification, if the architectural work was inaugurated before 1960 and never attributed by any author, this lacks coverage by recent copyright laws to protect it because limitations from 1849 law that buildings are not designate as works of art.[13714/1961 Art. 7(ll) and 153] The freedom of panorama is applied in Art. 37 and 38 of the Intellectual Property Code of the Peruvian Association of Architects with condition that "the works are open to the public", even indoors unless strictly reserved by their author.[26]

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for 3D works. According to the Chapter 18.08 Copyright Act of 2002,

  • Copyright in a work shall not be infringed (a) by its incidental inclusion in an artistic work, sound recording film, broadcast or cable programme; or (b) by the issue to the public of copies of the playing, showing, broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service of anything whose making was not an infringement of copyright by virtue of paragraph (a) of this section.[18.08/2000 Section 55]
  • 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)]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Saint Lucia

Saint Lucia

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK. 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)]

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for 2D copies of 3D works. Unclear whether 2D works may be copied. According to the Copyright Act 2003 (Act No. 21 of 2003), Issue 1/2009,

  • Copyright in a work is not infringed by its incidental inclusion in an artistic work, sound recording, film, broadcast or cable programme.[1/2009 Section 53]
  • 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]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Suriname

Suriname

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK. Under the Law of 1913, as amended up to the act of 17 April 2015,

  • There is no infringement by a report that records, reproduces and publicly communicates a limited portion of a work of literature, science or art insofar as this is necessary to show the event that is the actual subject matter of the report.[23/1981 Article 16bis]
  • There is no infringement of copyright in reproduction of a work 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]

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{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]

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for buildings only {{FoP-US}}

Buildings are works subject to copyright in the U.S. 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 U.S. 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 U.S., such works do not have a copyright and therefore may be photographed freely, whether or not from a public place. They do have copyrights in many other countries.

Originality requirement

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.[27] and earlier in L. Batlin & Son, Inc. v. Snyder.[28] 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 OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK. {{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 U.S. 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 1927 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 U.S. sculptures is the Smithsonian Art Inventories Catalog.)

Applicable templates:

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.

For further information, refer to Commons:Public art and copyrights in the US 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, U.S. courts might apply U.S. 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 U.S. 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. See also: Category:United States FOP cases

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Uruguay

Uruguay

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK {{FoP-Uruguay}} Reproduction is not unlawful: ... The photographic reproduction of paintings, monuments, or allegorical figures exhibited in museums, parks or promenades, provided that the works thereof are considered to be solidly lying in the private domain.[18.046/2006 Article 45.8]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Venezuela

Venezuela

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK. {{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)]

Other areas[edit]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Anguilla

Anguilla

OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK 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)]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Aruba

Aruba

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK 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]

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Bermuda

Bermuda

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK 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)]

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship. OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK 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.

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for 3D works
OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for 2D "works of artistic craftsmanship"
OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK for 2D "graphic works" {{FoP-UK}}

The relevant law is section 62 of the United Kingdom's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.[29] 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#FOP

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Curaçao

Curaçao

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK

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.[30]

No information available

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK (for architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship) and OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK (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)]
  • 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)]
Text transcluded from
COM:FOP French Guiana

French Guiana

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/France#FOP

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Greenland

Greenland

Greenlandic freedom of panorama, found at Section 24 (2 and 3) is identical to the Danish freedom of panorama. OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for buildings, and OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK for any public art still in copyright (for noncommercial only, incompatible with Commons:Licensing).

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Guadeloupe

Guadeloupe

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/France#FOP

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Martinique

Martinique

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/France#FOP

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Montserrat

Montserrat

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship. OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK 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.

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Puerto Rico

Puerto Rico

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States#FOP

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/France#FOP

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/France#FOP

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/France#FOP

Text transcluded from
COM:FOP Sint Maarten

Sint Maarten

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for buildings and most 2D and 3D artwork

OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK 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]

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Falkland Islands#FOP

OOjs UI icon check-constructive.svg OK for architecture, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship. OOjs UI icon close-ltr-destructive.svg Not OK 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)]

Further information: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States#FOP

Freedom of panorama
AfricaAmericasAsiaEuropeInsular OceaniaOthers
Some citation text may not have been transcluded
  1. Emery, Miguel Angel (1999) Propiedad Intelectual (4th ed.), Astrea Editors, p. 40
  2. Marcelo Frullani Lopes (23 August 2014). Representação do Cristo Redentor em filme não pode ser vetada (in Portuguese). "apesar de a área ser de propriedade privada, o acesso público ao local não é restrito. Não se pode ignorar, também, que o Cristo Redentor integra a paisagem do Rio de Janeiro. Por esse ponto de vista, o local em que a obra se encontra deve ser considerado logradouro público para fins de aplicação desse dispositivo."
  3. Superior Tribunal de Justiça STJ - RECURSO ESPECIAL : REsp 1438343 MS 2013/0095665-3 - Inteiro Teor (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  4. RECURSO ESPECIAL Nº 951.521 - MA (2007/0103380-7) (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  5. Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo TJ-SP - Apelação : APL 10052213320138260020 SP 1005221-33.2013.8.26.0020 - Inteiro Teor (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  6. Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo TJ-SP - Apelação : APL 10052213320138260020 SP 1005221-33.2013.8.26.0020 - Inteiro Teor (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  7. Página 775 da Judicial - 1ª Instância - Capital do Diário de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo (DJSP) de 29 de Maio de 2017 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  8. Superior Tribunal de Justiça STJ - RECURSO ESPECIAL : REsp 1438343 MS 2013/0095665-3 - Inteiro Teor (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  9. Superior Tribunal de Justiça STJ - RECURSO ESPECIAL : REsp 951521 MA 2007/0103380-7 - Inteiro Teor (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  10. Página 545 da Judicial - 1ª Instância - Capital do Diário de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo (DJSP) de 29 de Janeiro de 2016 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  11. Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo TJ-SP - Embargos de Declaração : ED 10016691920158260011 SP 1001669-19.2015.8.26.0011 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  12. 1007409-55.2015.8.26.0011 Camila Pavanelli e outro v. Lew’lara/TBWA Publicidade Propaganda Ltda. e outros (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  13. Superior Tribunal de Justiça STJ - RECURSO ESPECIAL : REsp 951521 MA 2007/0103380-7 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  14. Superior Tribunal de Justiça STJ - RECURSO ESPECIAL : REsp 1438343 MS 2013/0095665-3 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  15. Uso de casa para publicidade deve ter consentimento de proprietário e arquiteto (in Portuguese) (8 December 2016). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  16. Superior Tribunal de Justiça STJ - RECURSO ESPECIAL : REsp 951521 MA 2007/0103380-7 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  17. Samory Santos Advocacia e Consultoria. Doutor, violaram meus Direitos Autorais, e agora? (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  18. Superior Tribunal de Justiça STJ - EMBARGOS DE DECLARAÇÃO NO RECURSO ESPECIAL : EDcl no REsp 1562617 SP 2015/0250795-0 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  19. Marcelo Frullani Lopes (1 March 2017). O STJ e a questão da proteção autoral de obras arquitetônicas (footnote 3) (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  20. Uso de casa para publicidade deve ter consentimento de proprietário e arquiteto (in Portuguese) (8 December 2016). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  21. Página 2657 do Superior Tribunal de Justiça (STJ) de 30 de Novembro de 2016 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12. "A hipótese, todavia, não é de mera representação a paisagem, em que inserida a obra arquitetônica, mas sim de representação unicamente da obra arquitetônica, com a finalidade lucrativa."
  22. Página 545 da Judicial - 1ª Instância - Capital do Diário de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo (DJSP) de 29 de Janeiro de 2016 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  23. Andamento do Processo n. 1008991-90.2015.8.26.0011 - Procedimento Ordinário - Direito Autoral - 01/09/2015 do TJSP (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12.
  24. Página 203 da II - Judicial - 2ª Instância do Diário de Justiça do Rio de Janeiro (DJRJ) de 29 de Junho de 2018 (in Portuguese). Retrieved on 2019-03-12. "Acórdão claro com relação à aplicação do artigo 48 da Lei nº 9.610/98 em sua literalidade, o qual autoriza a livre representação de obras situadas permanentemente em logradouros públicos, não se exigindo a manutenção do contexto paisagístico."
  25. Decreto Supremo que aprueba el Reglamento de la Ley Nº 29151, Ley General del Sistema Nacional de Bienes Estatales (in Spanish). El Peruano.
  26. Código del derecho de propiedad intelectual de los arquitectos. Colegio de Arquitectos de Perú (2003).
  27. 630 F.2d 905 (2d Cir, 1980), available at http://www.altlaw.org/v1/cases/551553 and http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/630/905/238194/
  28. 536 F.2d 486 (2d Cir.) (en banc), available at http://www.altlaw.org/v1/cases/554959 and http://www.coolcopyright.com/cases/fulltext/batlinsnydertext.htm
  29. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named UK1988
  30. "Als inbreuk op het auteursrecht op een werk, als bedoeld bij artikel 10, 6º., hetwelk blijvend op of aan den openbaren weg zichtbaar is gesteld, wordt niet beschouwd de verveelvoudiging, welke door hare grootte of door de werkwijze, volgens welke zij vervaardigd is, een duidelijk verschil vertoont met het oorspronkelijk werk, en zich, wat bouwwerken betreft, tot het uitwendige daarvan bepaalt."