We have been discussing the ever-expanding copyright and trademarks claims on what seems every object and observation in modern life, including such things as pictures taken of public scenes in London and in New York. Now one of the most iconic public images is being claimed as protected: the Eiffel Tower at night. Under EU law, the tower light display constitutes an “art work” and is therefore copyrighted. Thus, you can take a picture during the day but at night the copyright lawyers come out and roam the streets to see if you are taking pictures of the lights of the city of the “City of Lights.” (To show my innate sense of legality, I took this cunning picture just before the lights came on at dusk in Paris a few years ago. Ha!)
According to various news sites, the Société d’Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel, the organization that manages the tower, notes this on its website:
“Daytime views from the Eiffel Tower are rights-free. However, its various illuminations are subject to author’s rights as well as brand rights. Usage of these images is subject to prior request from the Société d’Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel.”
It is reminiscent of the English decision finding that taking photographs of London icons are also violations. In Hungary, the government has made it a crime to take anyone’s picture in public without their consent.
I have long been a critic of growing copyright and trademark claims over things occurring in public or common phrases or terms. (For a prior column, click here). We have often discussed the abusive expansion of copyright and trademark laws. This includes common phrases, symbols, and images being claimed as private property. (here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). This included recently a New York artist claiming that he holds the trademark to symbol π. —pi followed by a period—a design.
The EU has long been accused of bizarre little regulations that have exploded under the multinational bureaucracy. Under the EU’s 2001 information society directive, tourists could be fined for taking pictures of the Eiffel Tower at night and sharing them on Facebook, Twitter, or online.
The copyright and trademark laws are now threatening to achieve the inverse of their original purpose: to stifle rather than encourage creative work. While employing an army of lawyers who spend their days threatening people with lawsuit and securing coerced settlements, the negative effects of such ownership claims are obvious. When this claim was first published, I was convinced that it was something from The Onion. However, in today’s copyright and trademark systems, the absurd is now considered the normal.
Max-1,
When Ansel Adams was at the end of his life, he had all his negatives run through a Wells Fargo check cancelling machine. That was the type of machine which punched dozens of holes in order to cancel the check. If he could not be in control of the print itself in the darkroom, he did not want ham-handed assistants trying to make copies that would be of lesser quality than his.
That drove up the price of Ansel prints. I have three originals that had never been framed, and almost never found a frame shop willing to frame them. Most picture frame shop owners refused to even touch the prints, even with white gloves on. I did eventually get them framed. Darren Smith has seen them.
Having said that, the French © laws about pictures of an internationally recognized icon are unenforceable. Creating unenforceable laws is an open invitation for the law to be challenged, ignored, or simply made the target of scofflaws.
To the tune of Spam :
“Greed , Greed , Greed ,,, Greed , Greed , Greed…”
So I take JT’s dusk photo and photoshop it to look like the ETower at night…. add some fake lights and copyright it. who owns the ETower ? … not the French people……
“Forget it Jake, it’s France.”
issac
Isn’t the easiest way of protecting an image is by destroying it?
The French should consider THAT as an option…
Then no one can EVER take it’s picture. EVER!
Max-1 – the Eiffel Tower was not designed to be permanent. They just kept leaving it up and leaving it up until eventually no one was alive who had ever not seen it up. So it became a landmark. Personally, I would make the claim they are just lighting a landmark and it is not copyrightable. BTW, they are putting glass floors in just to add to the scare factor.
Wait till the day I copyright the word “the”…
… You will all owe me!! Mhawhahahahahahaha
Max-1 – I remember a comedian on the Johnny Carson Show claiming he had copyrighted the letter M. Now you in trouble. 😉 You can expect letters any day.
“Portlandia sketch where they try to get the rights to the Beatles songs and the price is $1 billion dollars. Very funny.”
Gives new meaning to the cliche “I picked it up for a song”.
BTW, copyright law in the USA has nothing to do with reasonableness or the public good, its all about how many Politicians you can bribe.
Sorry for being dense, but who EXACTLY holds the copyright?
rcocean – have you seen the Portlandia sketch where they try to get the rights to the Beatles songs and the price is $1 billion dollars. Very funny.
They can all kiss my big black ass!!!
Remind me not to go to Paris….OR Perugia!
What a thoughtless, absurd trend. You shouldn’t be able to copyright physical structures from photographs. Besides, I thought the Eiffel Tower belonged to the French people.
To boycott this absurdity, I move that millions of people photography he Eiffel Tower at night. Overwhelm the court system.
Laws like this stand because the people allow it.
“The copyright and trademark laws are now threatening to achieve the inverse of their original purpose: to stifle rather than encourage creative work.”
I disagree; the original purpose of copyright and trademark laws was to restrict the market. It’s the guild approach.
Someone should copyright the “artistic design and use” of the three words, Made in China.
Corporations are very adept at developing rules to put humans at risk. This is an outgrowth of that effort. I too am surprised that the EU has made it “official” so to speak.
This is nothing new. The creator of the lighting design for the tower has been at it for years. Back in 2004 when I was in art school for photography, one of my professors discussed this exact thing, listing landmarks all over the world that you can’t photograph (or can’t photograph in certain situations, like this).
It’s interesting to see the EU solidifying it, though.
They’re French. Just threaten to invade and they’ll throw up the white flag while chain smoking Gauloises.
Typically what these laws are created to do is to stop people from profiting from the work, art, object, whatever. Regardless of the American penchant for pointing out the foibles of others, especially the French, if you really want to understand how this works and where it originated, research Hollywood and the Good Ole USA, where lawyers work overtime creating their industry.
Other than this is insane, I am not sure what I can add.
Reblogged this on BLOGGING BAD w/Gunny G ~ "CLINGERS of AMERICA!".