共享资源:全景自由/大洋洲
此頁面提供了大洋洲不同國家或地區的全景規則自由概述。它是從各個頁面部分嵌入的，給出了每個地區的規則。
大洋洲国家
COM:FOP Australia
澳大利亚
OK用於3D作品{{FoP-Australia}}- OK用於2D藝術工藝作品{{FoP-Australia}}
不可以用於其他類型的藝術品
全景自由在《澳大利亞版權法》第65-68條中進行了處理，並以英國法律為基礎。
藝術作品是根據1968年版權法第10條定義的，這意味著
- (a) 繪畫、雕塑、素描、版畫或照片，無論該作品是否具有藝術品質；
- (b) 建築物或建築物模型，無論該建築物或模型是否具有藝術品質； 或者
- (c) 藝術工藝作品，無論 (a) 或 (b) 段是否提及；
主要的問題在於什麼是「藝術工藝作品」，成文法沒有明確定義，但在Burge v Swarbrick的判例法中定義了被[1]高等法院裁定，一件作品是否具有這種品質取決於它是否是一種工藝作品，其藝術表現形式足以不受功能考慮的約束。
在澳大利亞聯邦法律評論中，賈斯汀·皮拉 (Justine Pila) 根據高等法院在伯吉斯案中的裁決寫了一篇文章：
：“我認為對藝術質量的要求只是對藝術工藝作品不是想像的、不真實的或明顯的的要求……正如這些案例所反映的那樣，即使是從歷史角度來看，WAC也不是特殊的作品，而是相當「典型」的作品，與上述正統觀點相反。它們也具有功能性這一事實並沒有減少他們對藝術品質的需求”。[2]
此外，她指出：
：“藝術工藝作品的構成要素與其他作品的構成要素相同——它們的形式屬性和它們各自製作的歷史。”[2]
Several users claim that this implies two-dimensional flat arts like paintings and street art are considered as "works of artistic craftsmanship" in Australia, but others doubt about this interpretation and it has not been completely accepted by Wikimedia Commons community. Moreover, according to an information sheet of the Australian Copyright Council concerning street art (dated November 2019), the exception provided by Section 65 "applies only to sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship, not to other artistic works such as murals and graffiti. Therefore, the copyright in a mural or graffiti may be infringed by taking a photograph of it." It adds that licensing permission from the copyright holder is needed, for uses of Australian street art "to feature on a website; to photograph, particularly for commercial purposes (e.g. to sell as postcards or prints); to use as the location of a film shoot; or to publish in a book or magazine."[3]
In order to ensure compliance, two-dimensional artistic works in Australia should not be uploaded to Commons.
Not OK. According to the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act 2000, freedom of panorama only covers uses for personal, educational (teaching), archival, and news reporting purposes.[2000 Sec.8–13]
COM:FOP Fiji
斐濟
可以 for buildings, sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship. Under the Copyright Act, 1999,
- This section applies to (a) buildings; and (b) works (being sculptures, models for buildings, or works of artistic craftsmanship) that are permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.[1999 Section 67(1)]
- Copyright in a work to which this section applies is not infringed by (a) copying the work by making a graphic work representing it; (b) copying the work by making a photograph or audiovisual work of it; or (c) broadcasting, or including in a cable programme, a visual image of the work.[1999 Section 67(2)]
- Copyright is not infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the broadcasting or communication to the public or inclusion in a cable programme, of anything the making of which was, under this section, not an infringement of copyright.[1999 Section 67(3)]
COM:FOP Kiribati
吉里巴斯
不可以: Under the Copyright Act 2018, effective 5 November 2018, Division 2 - Exceptions to copyright infringement, there is no exemption for copies of works situated in public places.
Under the former Copyright Act 1956 of England,
- The copyright in a work 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 cinematography film or in a television broadcast.[1956 Sec.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 cinematography film or in a television broadcast.[1956 Sec.9(4)]
可以 on a high level, probably 不可以 if reproducted as audiovisual works [citation needed?]. The only "copyright protections" provided by the Unauthorized Copies of Recorded Materials Act, 1991 does not extend to any architectural or artistic works, or other type of permanently placed works, so any photograph reproductions of them are just considered acceptable, just use {{PD-Marshall Islands}} if and when appropriate.
不可以 for art published with a copyright notice, OK for art published without a copyright notice.
Although the listed exceptions in the 2003 law (from § 107. to § 109) do not include a provision resembling freedom of panorama, a copyright notice is required according to § 115 of the law, which is mostly copied from § 401 of the Copyright Act of 1976. Like the Copyright Act of 1976, the requirement of the date of publication is exempt for pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works.
OK for buildings. Sec. 102 lists "pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works" as objects of copyright, but not architecture. It is defined in Sec. 101 as including "two-dimensional and three-dimensional works of fine, graphic, and applied art, photographs, prints and art reproductions, maps, globes, charts, technical drawings, diagrams, and models."
COM:FOP Nauru
瑙鲁
不可以: The 2019 Copyright Act repealed the Copyright Act 1956 of England. The repealed 1956 law provided freedom of panorama for works of architecture and artistic works in public spaces.[1956 Sec.9(3 and 4)]
None of the exceptions or limitations to copyright in the current law contain such freedom of panorama provision.[2019 Sec.27–40]
COM:FOP Palau
帛琉
不可以第7至13節中列出的版權例外或限制不包括允許對位於公共場所的建築或藝術作品的圖像進行商業利用的規定。
COM:FOP Samoa
萨摩亚
不可以. Only incidental copying is allowed. According to the Copyright Act 1998 (as consolidated in 2011),
- The copyright in a work is not infringed by its incidental inclusion in an artistic work, a sound recording, an audio-visual work or a broadcast or by the publication, playing, performance or other use of the work.[1998–2011 Sec.8c]
可以 for buildings, sculptures, and works of artistic craftsmanship; 不可以 for other types of artistic works (like paintings or photographs). {{FoP-Solomon Islands}}. Under the Copyright Act [Cap 138]:
- The copyright in– (a) any sculpture; or (b) any work of artistic craftsmanship of the kind described in the definition of "artistic work" in subsection (1) of section 2, 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.[138/1987–1996 Section 7]
- 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.[138/1987–1996 Section 8]
- De minimis inclusion of other types of artistic works only on audio-visual media
- Without prejudice to the provisions of subsections (7) and (8), 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 that inclusion is only by way of background or is otherwise only incidental to the principal matters represented in the film or broadcast.[138/1987–1996 Section 9]
- Publication of images resulting from the aforementioned actions
- 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 subsections (7) or (8) or (9) the making of that painting, drawing, engraving, photograph or film did not constitute an infringement of the copyright.[138/1987–1996 Section 10]
COM:FOP Tonga
東加
不可以 for private, personal use of reproductions only. The Copyright Act (Act No. 12 of 2002) does not provide a freedom of panorama provision for images of architecture and public art.
- Notwithstanding the provisions of section 6(1)(a), and subject to the provisions of subsection (2), the private reproduction of a published work in a single copy shall be permitted without the authorisation of the author or owner of copyright, where the reproduction is made by a person exclusively for his own personal purposes.[2002 Sec.8(1)]
For works of architecture, this permission does not extend to the reproduction "of a work of architecture in the form of building or other construction."[2002 Sec.8(2)] There is no specific provision in the copyright law allowing the free uses of images of such works.
COM:FOP Tuvalu
吐瓦魯
可以：根據英國1956年版權法，
- 永久位於公共場所或向公眾開放的場所的作品的版權不受作品的繪畫、素描、雕刻或照片的製作，或將作品包含在電影或電視廣播。[1956 Sec.9(3)]
- 建築作品的版權不因作品的繪畫、素描、雕刻或照片的製作，或將作品包含在電影或電視廣播中而受到侵犯。[1956 Sec. 9(4)]
COM:FOP Vanuatu
萬那杜
不可以 "Part 3 - Acts Not Constituting Infringment of Copyright" (sections 10 to 18) does not include a provision that allows commercial uses of images of architectural or artistic works situated in public places.
See also: Category:Vanuatuan FOP cases。
COM:FOP New Zealand
新西兰
- OK for 3D works {{FoP-New Zealand}}
- OK for 2D "works of artistic craftsmanship" {{FoP-New Zealand}}
- Not OK for 2D "graphic works". For image files such works, please file deletion requests and tag the resulting case pages with
<noinclude>[[Category:New Zealand FOP cases/pending]]</noinclude>.
Under the Copyright Act 1994 as of December 2018, Section 73,
- This section applies to the following works: (a) buildings (b) works (being sculptures, models for buildings, or works of artistic craftsmanship) that are permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public.[1994-2018 Sec.73(1)]
- Copyright in a work to which this section applies is not infringed by (a) copying the work by making a graphic work representing it; or (b) copying the work by making a photograph or film of it; or (c) communicating to the public a visual image of the work.[1994-2018 Sec.73(21)]
- Copyright is not infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the communication to the public, of anything the making of which was, under this section, not an infringement of copyright.[1994-2018 Sec.73(3)]
Copyright legislation in New Zealand also follows that of the United Kingdom. In the absence of any specific case law to the contrary it is reasonable to assume that the rules will be identical. See 共享资源:各地著作权法规/英国 for more details.
Real life New Zealander FOP cases
- Murals by Xoë Hall
- Artist Xoë Hall outraged over work featured on calendar's cover (by Charlotte Cook of Radio New Zealand, 30 December 2019)
- Yes, street art is on public display - but that doesn’t mean we should share it without credit (by Mike Dickison and Bruce White of Stuff.co.nz, 10 July 2020)
其他地区
COM:FOP Guam
關島
COM:FOP Cook Islands
库克群岛
不可以 2013 年法律中没有关于全景自由的规定。
The 1962 law broadly followed the Copyright Act 1956 (UK), which did allow Freedom of Panorama. The 2013 law applies to any works whose copyright had not expired when it came into effect.[8/2013 Sec.53]
可能類似於COM:FOP US。
The absence of copyright law applying to the territory means that photos that would be affected by freedom of panorama could be uploaded. However, as the copyright of any American Samoan architect living in the United States would be protected according to US federal law, realistically such photos would be protected similarly to American FOP.
COM:FOP Niue
紐埃
可以 For a work of architecture and for a work of sculpture, artistic craftsmanship or mural if permanently located in (or visible from) a public place.
不可以 用於繪畫、素描、雕刻或照片
Under the 1962 Act, Section 20. General exceptions from protection of artistic works:
- (4) The copyright in a work of architecture is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving, or photograph of the work or any part thereof, or the inclusion of the work or any part thereof in a cinematograph film or television broadcast.
- (5) The copyright in a sculpture, or in a work of artistic craftsmanship (not being a work of architecture and not being a painting, drawing, engraving, or photograph), or in a mural, 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 television broadcast if the work is permanently situated in or in view of a public place within the meaning of the Police Offences Act 1927 or in any premises open to the public.
- (6) 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 subsection (3), subsection (4) or subsection (5) of this section, the making of that painting, drawing, engraving, photograph, or film did not constitute an infringement of the copyright.
COM:FOP Tokelau
托克劳
COM:FOP Hawaii
夏威夷州
部分
COM:FOP Indonesia
印度尼西亚
不可以 ({{NoFoP-Indonesia}})，教育目的和非商業用途除外。但是，尚未確定2014年版權法有任何明確規定使全景自由不存在。
印度尼西亞知識共享組織在2018年11月關於印度尼西亞全景自由地位的聲明中維持了這一立場。[4]
Several users and contributors have claimed that freedom of panorama exists by virtue of Article 43(d). However, the 2018 statement of Creative Commons Indonesia asserts that this is a restrictive provision, in which every image showing copyrighted architecture and public art must bear a statement claiming that the use is not for profit. Otherwise, direct permission from the creator or copyright holder is totally required when the use involves commercial interest, to avoid acts of copyright infringement.[4] The provision in question:
- The production and distribution of the copyrighted content through information technology and communication media that are not commercial and/or lucrative for the Author or related parties, or the Author expresses no objection to the manufacture and dissemination in question.[28/2014 Article 43(d)]
It should be noted that Commons:Licensing forbids fair use and non-commercial licensing, as these types of licenses prevent files from "being used by anyone, anytime, for any purpose."
整個2020-21年，關於全景自由在印度尼西亞的地位的廣泛討論可以找到這裏和這裡。
Some citation text may not have been transcluded
|
|---|
|