wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: some research
Carl von Einem 2008-May-27 16:05:00
Posted by: "Yuval Levy"
Bruno Postle wrote:
>> > Agreed, this is no 'non-commercial' exhibition.
>
> the definition of 'non-commercial' is a tricky one.
Note that in Germany even a private website is seen as "commercial",
only if the owner selects a "banner program" of his domain hoster so
that he gets a cheaper hosting tariff. No direct contract between the
site owner and the company that the banner links to.
They have paying sponsors, the technical system is advertised as a
business solution by partners.
> On the other hand, for this specific case given that the WWP is (C) all
> rights reserved, the German laws put in some limitations and definitions
> that may allow public display.
>
> http://dejure.org/gesetze/UrhG/52.html
It's a public exhibition, no performance by an artist (1). Public
display of a work is only legal with the OK from an authorised person (3).
> http://dejure.org/gesetze/UrhG/52a.html
This is about small parts of a work, and only applicable if the work is
specially made for educational purposes. Needs OK from author.
> http://dejure.org/gesetze/UrhG/52b.html
Doesn't apply here: this is meant to control the libraries' rights to
make a work available in a certain way that they already legally have.
> lot of food for lawyers there, really.
Not really (even if I'm no lawyer). I can serve you with several pages
of final court decisions. High courts in Munich, Hamburg, Berlin,...
>> > The crazy thing is that it just isn't that hard to find geolocated
>> > panoramas available for commercial use:
>> >
>> > http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=equirectangular+geotagged&m=tags&...
>
> I guess they did not think their things through, and somebody found it
> easier to grab the stuff from the WWP with some automated program.
A typical decision problem...