30,000 back petition against ‘barking’ European copyright plan, as MEP behind proposal speaks out

As we reported earlier this week, there are growing fears that proposed changes to European copyright law will require photographers to obtain permission from architects – and possibly pay them royalties – before publishing pictures of tourist attractions such as the London Eye and The Shard, even just on Facebook.

The change.org petition against the plans was started by German photographer Nico Trinkhaus who called on MEPs to bring Freedom of Panorama to all European countries and ‘not limit the Freedom of Panorama in any way’.

In a separate post on Facebook Trinkhaus explained that he started the petition to raise awareness of an issue first highlighted by Germany’s Pirate Party MEP Julia Reda.

‘This would have a huge effect on many kinds of photographers, on myself and maybe even on everyone who just shares a photo on Facebook,’ claimed Trinkhaus.

He added, ‘So far I have not heard about any architect who complained about the petition. I think they understand the difference. An architect gets paid as the building is built. A photographer most of the time shoots first and gets paid later.’

MEP at centre of copyright storm speaks outMeanwhile, the French MEP who first tabled the controversial proposal, Jean-Marie Cavada, has responded to the furore surrounding the issue.

Raphaël Dorgans, Cavada’s parliamentary assistant claimed that no-one in Europe has thus far been sued for commercial use of images not covered by Freedom of Panorama – which protects photographers in certain EU countries.

Dorgans told AP: ‘Contrary to what Ms Reda says, Mr Cavada’s amendment would not have far-reaching consequences for internet users who upload their photos on line.’

He added: ‘At the present time, in the EU Member States which don’t have any exception for Freedom of Panorama – and which indeed currently require their citizens to get an authorisation before making a commercial use of a picture of a work located in the public space (i.e. Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Finland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Romania, Slovenia) – not a single European citizen has been sued after having posted such pictures online, just as in the EU Member States which implemented an exception for Freedom of Panorama (i.e. Germany, Austria, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Poland, the Czech Republic, the UK and Slovakia).’

‘And consequently, the legal liability of dealing with the potential copyrights of the pictures they upload weigh on the users’ shoulders. We consider that this situation is outrageous.’

Cavada’s representative suggested his office would support a law where Facebook itself, rather than its users, would be responsible for asking the right’s holders for authorisation to use images commercially, and possibly pay them royalties.

‘He only struggles for a fair remuneration for artists and to stop the copyright abuses used by internet service providers such as Facebook, Instagram, Flickr, etc.’

In April, the European Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy called for a review of the liability of service providers with regard to copyright.

Dorgans said: ‘So, should they use these pictures for commercial use, they would have to ask for the authorisation of the right holders, and they may have to give them a financial compensation.

Mr Cavada is lying again. Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain have full Freedom of Panorama, meaning that images are freely re-usable for any purpose.