Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Possible new Eu Rules to ban landmark pictures
Page <<first <prev 4 of 4
Jun 25, 2015 23:45:27   #
fantom Loc: Colorado
 
lemontart wrote:
flipping usual insane stuff from EU

Now EU wants to BAN your photos of the London Eye and the Angel of the North

TAKING photographs of the London Eye and the Angel of the North could soon be banned if the meddling European Union (EU) gets their way, it has been claimed today.

The EU is threatening to restrict the long-established principle of "freedom of panorama" - which means major landmarks will be blocked from videos and photographs for fear of infringing on the owner's copyright.

A senior French Liberal, Jean-Marie Cavada has suggested amendments to legislation that would mean recognisable views such as the Eiffel Tower, the London Eye or the Angel of the North, would no longer be free to depict.

He has suggested introducing rules, which would force photographers, artists and filmmakers to seek permission and even PAY to be able to film, paint and photograph some of Europe's most iconic landmarks.

The original proposals were submitted by Germany’s Pirate Party MEP Julia Reda to protect freedom of panorama in a report earlier this month.

However the European Parliament's legal committee, while approving most of the report, implemented several amendments – one of these reading, “The commercial use of photographs, video footage or other images of works which are permanently located in physical public places should always be subject to prior authorisation from the authors or any proxy acting for them.”

Tourists will not be able to capture recognisable views such as the Eiffel Tower, the London Eye, Angel of the North, and even the Paddington Bear statue at Paddington Station in London and use them for commerical use.

This is even if the piece of work is not the primary subject of the image, according to website Breitbart London.

UKIP's MEP for London Gerard Batten said: "As so often before when the European Union passes its laws it ignores the law of unintended consequences.
flipping usual insane stuff from EU br br Now EU ... (show quote)


These blithering idiots fail to realize that when pix of these landmarks appear in publications, TV etc they are good advertising for the attractions and actually encourage tourists to go there and SPEND MONEY. Far more $$ than they would collect on their next silly tax.

You'd think the French would have their greasy hands full just trying to control all the Arab and Middle Eastern cab drivers who are rioting against Uber.

Reply
Jun 26, 2015 00:39:11   #
rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA
 
Just because an individual member of the EU proposes a rule, doesn't mean it will ever be implemented. Politicians with nutty ideas can be found everywhere.

Reply
Jun 26, 2015 05:24:40   #
lemontart Loc: uk
 
Currently in several Cathedrals I have visited here in Uk you have to pay for a sort of pass to take pictures, not a huge amount and that goes towards the buildings up keep. At a local park you have to pay £1 or thereabouts to take pictures in the park and give your personal details but that is more to do with other issues.

Reply
 
 
Jun 26, 2015 16:11:12   #
mslubner Loc: Redskin Ridge, Texas
 
the Eiffel Tower may not be photographed after dark. The design architect that owns the lighting display on The Tower has copyrighted the lighting. Few people know this. They have a few signs posted around the area stating this. However, people find ways to sneak photos or just take them and hope no one says anything. And lots of people just don't read and don't know they are violating copyright law.

Reply
Jun 26, 2015 16:17:39   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
mslubner wrote:
the Eiffel Tower may not be photographed after dark. The design architect that owns the lighting display on The Tower has copyrighted the lighting. Few people know this. They have a few signs posted around the area stating this. However, people find ways to sneak photos or just take them and hope no one says anything. And lots of people just don't read and don't know they are violating copyright law.


That is a misconception repeated again and again. Photographs of the Eiffel Tower at night can't be printed for commercial use without permission (and presumedly some payment). It is NOT illegal to photograph the Eiffel Tower at night for personal use. Copyright law (or I believe it may be trademark law in this case) never makes it illegal to photograph anything. It's the USE of the photos that is subject to the law.

Reply
Jun 26, 2015 16:27:15   #
mslubner Loc: Redskin Ridge, Texas
 
I was a copyright expert for 6 years on a prominent and highly respected photo gallery web site. I was the one that took direction from our team of lawyers. IF you photograph it and don't get caught, they will let it slide as long as it doesn't appear on a public forum - like this, Facebook, etc. If it is only shown as a vacation photo within your family group, they will not bother you. But, as with our amateurs' photo gallery on-line, we often heard from their legal team threatening us if we did not take the photo down because of this law. From experience, I know this is truth. (BTW, that permission is more than some payment. It is very costly, requires application well in advance and they demand to see in what context it will be used.) And our gallery did not sell anything, nor did we allow posting sample brochures, or marketing pieces...

Reply
Jun 26, 2015 16:35:40   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
mslubner wrote:
I was a copyright expert for 6 years on a prominent and highly respected photo gallery web site. I was the one that took direction from our team of lawyers. IF you photograph it and don't get caught, they will let it slide as long as it doesn't appear on a public forum - like this, Facebook, etc. If it is only shown as a vacation photo within your family group, they will not bother you. But, as with our amateurs' photo gallery on-line, we often heard from their legal team threatening us if we did not take the photo down because of this law. From experience, I know this is truth. (BTW, that permission is more than some payment. It is very costly, requires application well in advance and they demand to see in what context it will be used.) And our gallery did not sell anything, nor did we allow posting sample brochures, or marketing pieces...
I was a copyright expert for 6 years on a prominen... (show quote)


You said it was illegal to TAKE the photo. Nobody is going to arrest you for taking a photo of the Eiffel Tower at night. I may not be clear about what usage they will go after, but it is the usage and not taking the photo that is subject to the law.

Reply
 
 
Jun 26, 2015 17:14:37   #
mslubner Loc: Redskin Ridge, Texas
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
You said it was illegal to TAKE the photo. Nobody is going to arrest you for taking a photo of the Eiffel Tower at night. I may not be clear about what usage they will go after, but it is the usage and not taking the photo that is subject to the law.


The signs posted say "take photos" not "use photos" so I was only saying what the signs say. If seen, the authorities will issue a warning and take your information...

I am sorry if my verbiage was not precise. The intent was the same.

Reply
Jun 26, 2015 17:17:37   #
mslubner Loc: Redskin Ridge, Texas
 
Off the top of my head, I don't remember the name of it, but there is a very large sculpture in Brussels that forbids more than 1/3 of it to be photographed at one time. You are NOT permitted to photograph the entire thing at once and if caught posting that or using it anywhere, they do prosecute. It's been 4 years since I worked with the attorneys on these issues, so I am not able to remember the names of all of them, but several places around the world have these restrictions in some form.

Reply
Jun 26, 2015 17:29:19   #
blackest Loc: Ireland
 
There are 2 countries with restrictive photography laws per say. Some sensitive places tend to be restricted. For an EU wide restriction to be added, There would need to be majority support over , what 27 countries.

The amendment is against the principles of the bill, It's highly unlikely to pass with that amendment and more likely that france and belgium may have to relax their laws, rather than the other members be forced to tighten theirs.

Reply
Jun 27, 2015 02:41:16   #
Delderby Loc: Derby UK
 
mslubner wrote:
Off the top of my head, I don't remember the name of it, but there is a very large sculpture in Brussels that forbids more than 1/3 of it to be photographed at one time. You are NOT permitted to photograph the entire thing at once and if caught posting that or using it anywhere, they do prosecute. It's been 4 years since I worked with the attorneys on these issues, so I am not able to remember the names of all of them, but several places around the world have these restrictions in some form.


Thank you for the info - yet another example of greed - not by owners but by lawyers milking the cows.

Reply
 
 
Jun 27, 2015 02:47:17   #
Delderby Loc: Derby UK
 
My young cousin used to work in chambers. Her time - every minute of 35 hours that she worked each week had to be recorded and was charged to clients. When nature called, that time was also charged - it was left to her to decide which client got the bill.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 4
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.