Important: EU law to limit freedom of photography on the way

[1982chris911]

There are likely thousands of pictures of the night-lit Eiffel Tower on Facebook. Have any of the tourists who posted them been sued for copyright violation?

Mountain out of molehill, anyone? The OP has certainly bought into the sensationalist argument. Yes, lawyers love to collect fees, but does anyone seriously believe they'll go after Martha from Deluth who posts a pic of the London Eye to Facebook, and sue her for 100€? Heck, the postage would cost more.

They actually did a similar thing in Germany some months ago ... they even got a court ruling which backed them up. In that case ppl. where randomly fined for streaming copyrighted material (in that case porn).

First thing is that streaming by most definitions is not even making a copy (they got around this by a technical trick to define the cache of a computer as memory system and therefore got their court ruling)

Secondly the people did not even know what they had done as their IP addresses were collected using malware or sth. else (it is still not known today)

However the whole case brought in about 10-15m euro to the partnership that did this within very short time.

You can read the whole thing here in German only: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/RedTube-Abmahnaffäre

SO what I want to make clear is that when there is a law which grants such rights with copyright in place such things will very very soon start with photography... it is extremely easy to do... by the way in the above case they did not even use lawyers but an automated computer system to write the letters (as the amount was just to large to do by any person)... This is exactly what the law which the EU proposes could do to photography (and it would even be legal in that case)... In the other case it was later overruled and criminal charges were put upon the law company which wrote the latter... However if it is legal to do such thing will really start to become reality for photographers taking pictures in European Cities and of other copyrighted material (like artworks) while on vacation...

 

[zim]

There are likely thousands of pictures of the night-lit Eiffel Tower on Facebook. Have any of the tourists who posted them been sued for copyright violation?

Mountain out of molehill, anyone? The OP has certainly bought into the sensationalist argument. Yes, lawyers love to collect fees, but does anyone seriously believe they'll go after Martha from Deluth who posts a pic of the London Eye to Facebook, and sue her for 100€? Heck, the postage would cost more.

They actually did a similar thing in Germany some months ago ... they even got a court ruling which backed them up. In that case ppl. where randomly fined for streaming copyrighted material (in that case porn).

First thing is that streaming by most definitions is not even making a copy (they got around this by a technical trick to define the cache of a computer as memory system and therefore got their court ruling)

Secondly the people did not even know what they had done as their IP addresses were collected using malware or sth. else (it is still not known today)

However the whole case brought in about 10-15m euro to the partnership that did this within very short time.

You can read the whole thing here in German only: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/RedTube-Abmahnaffäre

SO what I want to make clear is that when there is a law which grants such rights with copyright in place such things will very very soon start with photography... it is extremely easy to do... by the way in the above case they did not even use lawyers but an automated computer system to write the letters (as the amount was just to large to do by any person)... This is exactly what the law which the EU proposes could do to photography (and it would even be legal in that case)... In the other case it was later overruled and criminal charges were put upon the law company which wrote the latter... However if it is legal to do such thing will really start to become reality for photographers taking pictures in European Cities and of other copyrighted material (like artworks) while on vacation...

So wait, some random computer generated letter lands on your door step saying that you watched porn and demanding money and hundreds thousands? of people paid up? hilarious, divorce lawyers must be having a field day ;D
Almost as funny as that German lederhosen porn in the 70s 8)

 

[zim]

Just another incident demonstrating how badly the EU needs to be scrapped...

+1 The sooner it goes back to a simple common market, we get our political borders back and those parasitic waste of space MEPs are made redundant the better

 

[Maiaibing]

This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

I know that this is no Canon Rumor, but it is very important and might affect nearly all amateur and professional photographers in Europe:

This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign and should be either clearly marked as such or probably even better removed.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign and should be either clearly marked as such or probably even better removed.

What, specifically, about this story is false? The parlimentary motion is certainly genuine. While I think the implications are being sensationalized, that doesn't make them false.

In the US, millions of drivers violate the law every day by exceeding the posted speed limits, even if by only 1 mph. It's the law. Doesn't mean that it's enforced.

 

[1982chris911]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

I know that this is no Canon Rumor, but it is very important and might affect nearly all amateur and professional photographers in Europe:

This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign and should be either clearly marked as such or probably even better removed.

Maybe you should have a look at any news site regarding this matter. You will find that this story is very real... Of course if you believe that all the various media reporting on this are steered by a higher power to bring up false stories about a thing that will never happen, maybe you re right. Maybe my version Google is also manipulated by anti European forces as I get 215000 hits for "Panoramafreiheit" (German term) or 47500 for "Freedom of Panorama" if I search in Google News ...

 

[1982chris911]

There are likely thousands of pictures of the night-lit Eiffel Tower on Facebook. Have any of the tourists who posted them been sued for copyright violation?

Mountain out of molehill, anyone? The OP has certainly bought into the sensationalist argument. Yes, lawyers love to collect fees, but does anyone seriously believe they'll go after Martha from Deluth who posts a pic of the London Eye to Facebook, and sue her for 100€? Heck, the postage would cost more.

They actually did a similar thing in Germany some months ago ... they even got a court ruling which backed them up. In that case ppl. where randomly fined for streaming copyrighted material (in that case porn).

First thing is that streaming by most definitions is not even making a copy (they got around this by a technical trick to define the cache of a computer as memory system and therefore got their court ruling)

Secondly the people did not even know what they had done as their IP addresses were collected using malware or sth. else (it is still not known today)

However the whole case brought in about 10-15m euro to the partnership that did this within very short time.

You can read the whole thing here in German only: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/RedTube-Abmahnaffäre

SO what I want to make clear is that when there is a law which grants such rights with copyright in place such things will very very soon start with photography... it is extremely easy to do... by the way in the above case they did not even use lawyers but an automated computer system to write the letters (as the amount was just to large to do by any person)... This is exactly what the law which the EU proposes could do to photography (and it would even be legal in that case)... In the other case it was later overruled and criminal charges were put upon the law company which wrote the latter... However if it is legal to do such thing will really start to become reality for photographers taking pictures in European Cities and of other copyrighted material (like artworks) while on vacation...

So wait, some random computer generated letter lands on your door step saying that you watched porn and demanding money and hundreds thousands? of people paid up? hilarious, divorce lawyers must be having a field day ;D
Almost as funny as that German lederhosen porn in the 70s 8)

Well that is exactly what happened - of course there was a court order with this letter (as I said they were backed up by a court and that court did not check the validity of the IP addresses) and yes they got about 10-15 million which means that about 40.000-60.000 people paid. Estimates are that about 25-35% paid and did not take any measures against this.

btw. most people are quite frightened if they get a letter from a law firm with about 10-20 partners in the heading most with multiple degrees and if this letter tells them that if they don't pay much worse things will happen...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

I know that this is no Canon Rumor, but it is very important and might affect nearly all amateur and professional photographers in Europe:

This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign and should be either clearly marked as such or probably even better removed.

Maybe you should have a look at any news site regarding this matter. You will find that this story is very real... Of course if you believe that all the various media reporting on this are steered by a higher power to bring up false stories about a thing that will never happen, maybe you re right. Maybe my version Google is also manipulated by anti European forces as I get 215000 hits for "Panaramafreiheit" (German term) or 47500 for "Freedom of Panorama" if I search in Google News ...

Hmmmm. On Google News, "anti-EU campaign" only gets 5500 hits.

 

[1982chris911]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

I know that this is no Canon Rumor, but it is very important and might affect nearly all amateur and professional photographers in Europe:

This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign and should be either clearly marked as such or probably even better removed.

Secondly I, like several other people I know, was already harassed on the claim that my photography looked professional (means commercial). Main indicator to that person was then either the size of the camera or the usage of a tripod.

This happened in London several times (especially around Moore London Buildings) in Canary Wharf, also happened in Paris at Louvre, at the Grand Arch and at Sacre Coeur and also happened in Germany. In most cases those were security forces, but I don't really wanna imagine what will happen if these people are covered by European Law... just talk about harassing photographers at about every major new building ... So by no means a law that limits this freedom of panorama should become reality... It would be an open invitation to ongoing harassment at every major city and about everyone knows that neither security forces nor police are very willing to discuss such matters. it will always be either leave or stop or even worse like questioning by police etc...

 

[Maiaibing]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign and should be either clearly marked as such or probably even better removed.

What, specifically, about this story is false? The parlimentary motion is certainly genuine.

There is no such Parliamentary motion. Its a fabrication. Please document it if you believe it exists. This is a lie to discredit the EU and nothing more.

 

[Maiaibing]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

Maybe you should have a look at any news site regarding this matter. You will find that this story is very real...

No it is not. Its a fabrication. And its sad that news run these kind of baseless stories. Please document any such EU Parliamentary draft law if you believe it exists. This is a lie to discredit the EU and nothing more.

 

[Maiaibing]

Well that is exactly what happened - of course there was a court order with this letter (as I said they were backed up by a court and that court did not check the validity of the IP addresses) and yes they got about 10-15 million which means that about 40.000-60.000 people paid. Estimates are that about 25-35% paid and did not take any measures against this.

btw. most people are quite frightened if they get a letter from a law firm with about 10-20 partners in the heading most with multiple degrees and if this letter tells them that if they don't pay much worse things will happen...

Good that not all people are completely gullible...

 

[Maiaibing]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

This happened in London several times (especially around Moore London Buildings)

Exactly. Complain to your MPs and direct your attention to where it needs to be when it comes to vacation photography: National Parliaments.

 

[1982chris911]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

Maybe you should have a look at any news site regarding this matter. You will find that this story is very real...

No it is not. Its a fabrication. And its sad that news run these kind of baseless stories. Please document any such EU Parliamentary draft law if you believe it exists. This is a lie to discredit the EU and nothing more.

You can just look it up here:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+COMPARL+PE-549.469+01+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN

it is on page 70/131 of this report

 

[1982chris911]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

Maybe you should have a look at any news site regarding this matter. You will find that this story is very real...

No it is not. Its a fabrication. And its sad that news run these kind of baseless stories. Please document any such EU Parliamentary draft law if you believe it exists. This is a lie to discredit the EU and nothing more.

Motion for a resolution
16. Calls on the EU legislator to ensure that the use of photographs, video footage or other images of works which are permanently located in public places is permitted;

was changed to:

Amendment

16. Considers that 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;

So there is not any fabrication here as this directly out of very real EU document

and as already discussed Facebooks usage of pictures there could already be coined as commercial - especially if they use your pictures to make advertisements (a right which you grant to them in their service's terms & conditions) which was singed by all users.

 

[Maiaibing]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

You can just look it up here:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+COMPARL+PE-549.469+01+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN
it is on page 70/131 of this report

Exactly. There is no draft EU law that would make our vacation photos illegal or payable towards royalties etc. Thank you for documenting this to everyone here.

The question they are debating is if all and anything displayed in public should be available for commercial photography purposes for free (as suggested in the original draft text).

 

[Maiaibing]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

"With this, Street-, Travel- and Architecture-Photography would be dead as we know it. It is impossible to find out the architect of every public building in order to ask for permission before you can publish and possibly sell the photo."

The above quote is simply a lie hidden behind the afterthought following the death of street, travel and architecture photography "and possibly sell" which is the opposite of the truth. And since you have found the proof yourself I suggest you help counter it whenever it reappears (as I am sure it will like so many other internet myths).

At least this story has not gotten 1/100 of the spread that the girl-who-nearly-died-wearing-skinny-jeans-got as it was only widely reported in the UK (so far).

There are other - very real - freedom of speech (photography) concerns out there. I would wish people would focus on those in stead of chasing red herrings.

 

[1982chris911]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

You can just look it up here:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+COMPARL+PE-549.469+01+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN
it is on page 70/131 of this report

Exactly. There is no draft EU law that would make our vacation photos illegal or payable towards royalties etc. Thank you for documenting this to everyone here.

The question they are debating is if all and anything displayed in public should be available for commercial photography purposes for free (as suggested in the original draft text).

and here is the problem. Commercial use by the intend of Mr. Cavada starts already if you post sth. on Facebook ... also every kind of architectural photography (if it is sold by someone), use in postcards, prints, city guides, photo contests, pages like trip advisor etc are considered commercial.

You can read Mr Cavada's statement here: and it is very clear that he intends to basically ban all photography of modern landmarks from the social part of the internet or wants to impose fees either for the photographers highly likely or Facebook and other (which won't work due to Terms you need to sign when using the service) ...

You can read it here: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fjeanmariecavada.eu%2Fma-position-sur-le-droit-de-panorama%2F&hl=de&langpair=auto|en&tbb=1&ie=UTF-8

Original in French: http://jeanmariecavada.eu/ma-position-sur-le-droit-de-panorama/

 

[Maiaibing]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

Facebooks usage of pictures there could already be coined as commercial - especially if they use your pictures to make advertisements (a right which you grant to them in their service's terms & conditions) which was singed by all users.

I trust you do not believe this stupidity yourself.

I am leaving this discussion now. Everyone can now easily draw the right conclusion from the above exchange.

 

[1982chris911]

Re: This story is false and part of an anti-EU campaign

You can just look it up here:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+COMPARL+PE-549.469+01+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN
it is on page 70/131 of this report

Exactly. There is no draft EU law that would make our vacation photos illegal or payable towards royalties etc. Thank you for documenting this to everyone here.

Ok so in order to only make simple vacation pictures me and everyone else here should better not use a professional or semiprofessional Canon camera in any European city... Hopefully that will save the P&S camera market ... Or who explains to the nice security people and police persons who question you whether this very professional looking gear is used commercial or not ... that you are just a tourist... Well hopefully they then also ban all painters from the streets ... they could by accident paint something copyrighted and try to sell it ... Goodbye Freedom... Hello North Korea