Should we really be worried about freedom of panorama?
Freedom of panorama is a term that comes from implementation in the German law of the exception that allows people to take photographs or create other images of buildings, sculptures, or other public places, without infringing copyright. Freedom of panorama is based on common sense to prevent the owners of works on public display from taking legal action against anybody photographing their work or who subsequently publishes or distributes it.
Freedom of panorama already exists in many countries. In others, such as France, Italy, Belgium, Iceland, Greece, the Baltic republics, Saudi Arabia, for example, freedom of panorama is partial or non-existent, but in reality, it makes no difference. It is one of those rights that we have assumed as technology progresses: from the moment it is possible for large numbers of people to take photographs easily and to make them public through a few clicks on a smartphone screen, quite simply we are talking about a restriction that is very rarely going to be applied. If somebody tries to prevent me from using the image of the Eiffel Tower in this article, or to charge me a copyright fee, they are going to hear my laughter in the center of Paris all the way from Spain.
So why all this concern for the protection of freedom of panorama we’ve been hearing about in recent weeks? Why would so many people who’ve never heard of the term now be backing it? In my opinion, this is an excessively literal interpretation of something that makes little sense. Is Wikipedia really going to be forced to remove all those images of public places? Is the new raft of copyright laws in Europe really an attack on freedom of panorama that is going to change how we do things from now on?
In my humble opinion (please insert here: IANAL — I Am Not A Lawyer), the answer is no. My impression is that what we’re talking about here is an artificial problem, the result of a series of proposed legal changes by Julia Reda, and that this is a distraction and of no real importance. Julia is the Pirate Party’s only deputy in the European Parliament. She is undoubtedly very clever, as has been shown by her positioning herself as the author of a raft of laws that aim to revise copyright legislation in the EU. The fact that Julia, and not others, has written the draft outline for these laws is positive for all concerned: she is not only an expert on intellectual property rights, but her approach is much more in keeping with the technological environment we live in than the one we might have expected from most other members of the European Parliament.
Freedom of panorama is a mere brushstroke in the larger canvas of Reda’s proposals. The fact that Julia herself has highlighted this was surely in the hope that it was not picked up on during the amendment phase of her proposals. Instead, it has seemingly met with the dogged resistance of French deputy Jean Marie Cavada, who wants French standards on freedom of panorama applied to “protect us from the voracious appetites of companies like Facebook and Wikimedia”. Quite why he has taken this approach is unclear, but the reasons seem to have little to do with reality, and more importantly are of no great concern anyway.
To be honest, I have my doubts as to whether Cavada really wants to impose restrictions on freedom of panorama all over Europe, and tend to think that he simply wants to leave it up to member states to oppose it on a case by case basis. It seems to me to be a restriction that would end up being so diluted in the final stages of its passage through the European Parliament that it would have little or no impact. After all, who would be the first to force Wikipedia to remove its images? Who would be tracking us down to prevent us publishing pictures of the Eiffel Tower or any other European landmark on the social networks? It’s not going to happen, is it?
Should we protest against efforts to limit freedom of panorama legislation around the world? Of course. We should shout our opposition from the rooftops and sign petitions on Change.org, as well as sending letters to our elected representatives, pointing out the stupidity of this. But do I really think our rights are in danger here? Well, no, not really.
I think this is a storm in a teacup, and that it is perhaps even a smokescreen created by Julia Reda to avoid discussion of more important aspects of the legislation, or it might just be clumsiness and naivety. My impression is that there really is nothing to argue about here, and that even if Europe decided to try to impose restrictions on freedom of panorama, they would be of little consequence.
We will all continue to publish any photograph we like, in the same way that we will fight anybody who tries to remove a single photograph from our sacrosanct Wikipedia. What’s next? Do we have to ask everybody in a crowd permission to publish their image when we take a photograph in a public place? Governments are easily worn down by laws that they cannot enforce.
Should we defend freedom of panorama. Yes, of course, to the hilt, because to not do so would be illogical. Should we be worried? In all sincerity, I think not. If only all our battles were like this.
(En español, aquí)
