Commons talk:Copyright rules by territory/Austria

This talk page may have a limited number of watchers. Issues concerning the copyright rules of Austria may get more attention if a notice of the discussion here is given at a general page like Commons:Village pump/Copyright or Commons talk:Freedom of panorama.

Updating Austrian copyright law on FoP?

due to this discussion I am trying to find out find out if there is FoP for the interior of buildings in Austria or not. While in FoP Austria it says FoP does apply for the interiors of buildings, a bit further down it says it does not apply for the interior of buildings. Interestingly, both statements are unsourced. This source prohibits photographs of the interiors of private buildings, and provides as example railway stations of the Austrian railway. Then in the source already present in the copyright rules in Austria excludes commercial rights for works. Vervielfältigung zum eigenen und zum privaten Gebrauch Art. 42. To reproduce works of arts in the interior of buildings, only the organizer of the event is entitled to make audio-visual recordings of the event. Freie Nutzungen, Art. 71. So this is what I so far have assembled and I would be glad if anyone could help me to find a more detailed law. As for me it seems there is FoP in Austria that fits the needs of Commons, but I might also just be wrong. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 07:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

The relevant clause is Art.54(5):

• 5. Werke der Baukunst nach einem ausgeführten Bau oder andere Werke der bildenden Künste nach Werkstücken, die dazu angefertigt wurden, sich bleibend an einem öffentlichen Ort zu befinden, zu vervielfältigen, zu verbreiten, durch optische Einrichtungen öffentlich vorzuführen, durch Rundfunk zu senden und der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung zu stellen; ausgenommen sind das Nachbauen von Werken der Baukunst, die Vervielfältigung eines Werkes der Malkunst oder der graphischen Künste zur bleibenden Anbringung an einem Orte der genannten Art sowie die Vervielfältigung von Werken der Plastik durch die Plastik.

Which Google Translate renders as:

• 5. Works of architecture based on a completed building or other works of fine art based on workpieces that were created to be permanently located in a public place, to reproduce, distribute, publicly display by optical devices, broadcast by radio and make available to the public; excluding the reproduction of works of architecture, the reproduction of a work of painting or graphic art for permanent installation in a place of the type mentioned and the reproduction of works of sculpture by sculpture.

I do not see any mention of interiors, just public places, which presumably would include public art galleries, museums, or even railway stations. It does not allow people to make buildings or sculptures that are copies of buildings or sculptures in public places, which is normal. We can upload photographs of them, which can be used freely. It also does not allow reproduction of a two dimensional work for the purpose of permanent display in a public place. That may be enough to prohibit uploading pictures of 2D art to Commons, since it restricts the way the image can be used. Pinging User:Liuxinyu970226, User:JWilz12345, User:Jeff G. Any thoughts? Aymatth2 (talk) 12:02, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@Aymatth2 perhaps peeps like @Ciell, Rosenzweig, and Ellywa: may check about the Austrian FoP status? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:52, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Some possible reference may be Commons talk:Freedom of panorama/Archive 5#Austrian FOP. The discussion is relatively short though and did not touch more things. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Public interiors also being covered by Austrian freedom of panorama is case law, a decision by Austria's Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof). [1] or de:Panoramafreiheit#Erfasste Werke und privilegierte Nutzungen in context. This includes parts of the building like windows (including stained glass windows in churches), which is a major difference to German freedom of panorama. --Rosenzweig τ 13:36, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

To further clarify, that does not include any statues etc. inside public buildings, only interior views of the buildings themselves, the interior architecure and any "works which themselves are components of the structure, including windows in churches and such" (COM:FOP Austria). --Rosenzweig τ 13:41, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

@Rosenzweig: Surely the interior of a building that is open to the public is a public place. But the work must have been made to be in a public place, such as a tapestry commissioned to decorate an entrance hall, or a monument built as the centrepiece of a park, not just something that is being exhibited. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

@Aymatth2: Yes. As I wrote above: Any statues etc. inside public buildings are not included by fop per the court decision. --Rosenzweig τ 05:47, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

@Rosenzweig: To be clear, if a statue or other type of work was designed to be permanently located in a public building, photographs or drawings of it could be used freely if the photographer or artist consented. The question is not whether they are indoors or outside, but whether they were designed to be permanently located in a public space. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Wow, thanks @Rosenzweig, the German version about Panoramafreiheit in Austria is much more detailed than the one on commons. I suggest we add some text from there also to commons. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

"Simple" photographs (Lichtbilder) and photographic works (Lichtbildwerke)

Case law from Austria's highest court [2][3][4] says that photos, regardless if by professional or by amateur photographers, are photographic works (with 70 years pma) „wenn man sagen kann, ein anderer Fotograf hätte das Lichtbild möglicherweise anders gestaltet“ (“if you can say that another photographer might have possibly designed the photograph differently”). So basically every single image, except the ones which are already mentioned as simple photographs ("simple passport photos from Photo booths, photos from satellites, pictures from radiography").

Apparently the current wording of the paragraph on photographs (and also Template:PD-Austria) is sometimes misunderstood, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:RM F32717 Rudolf and Rudolfine Menzel at dog show in Austria.jpg. Are there any objections to adding the two sentences above to both? Possibly reworked a bit? --Rosenzweig τ 11:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)