공용:PD-signature 틀을 사용할 때
|
이 문서의 요지는: 서명을 구체적으로 다루는 법률이나 판례는 없습니다. 상식을 사용해야 합니다.
|
이 페이지는 {{PD-signature}} 틀을 사용할 때를 설명하고 있습니다.
{{PD-signature}} 틀은 미국과 현지 법률에서 저작권 보호를 받지 못하는 개인의 사적 서명의 스캔 또는 사진에 사용합니다. 공용의 대부분의 콘텐츠와 마찬가지로 서명 이미지는 미국과 현지 법률에서 모두 퍼블릭 도메인이거나 자유 라이선스로 이용 가능해야 유지될 수 있습니다. 미국 법률은 일반적인 개인 서명에 대한 저작권이 없으므로 일반적으로 유일한 문제는 서명이 현지 법률에 따라 보호되는가 입니다.
이 틀은 저작자가 사망한 후 70년이 지난(또는 현지 저작권 보호기간에 따라) 서명 같은 저작권이 만료된 서명에는 적용되지 않습니다. {{PD-Old}} 같은 틀을 대신 사용하세요.
모든 국가는 아니지만 많은 국가에서 일반적인 서명은 저작권 보호의 요건을 충족하지 않습니다.
서명이 저작권 보호를 받을 수 있는지의 여부를 정의하는 절대적인 법률이 없기 때문에 모든 경우에 판단을 내려야 합니다. 일반적으로 서명에 대한 저작권을 인정하지 않는 국가에서는 서명이 보호 가능한 예술 작품으로 인정받을 만큼 충분히 복잡한 경우(사소하지 않는 그림과 유사)에 그렇게 할 수 있습니다. 반면에 일반적으로 저작권을 인정하는 국가에서는 서명이 매우 단순한 경우(예를 들어 한 줄 또는 두 줄의 낙서인 경우)에 저작권을 인정하지 않을 수 있습니다.
특정 서명에 어떤 국가의 법률이 적용되는 지 항상 명확하지 않을 수 있지만(이는 어려운 법적 문제일 수 있음) 개인의 국적 국가를 선택하는 것이 좋습니다.
미국
COM:SIG United States
미국
OK for a typical signature. In Copyright circular Number 1 the US Copyright Office sets out a list of things on which copyright protection cannot be granted, including "Titles, names, short phrases, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; and mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring."
The US Copyright Compendium, chapter 503.02(2) states that copyright will be denied to a character of Chinese calligraphy painted upon horizontally striated grass cloth. It states that "like typography, calligraphy is not copyrightable as such, notwithstanding the effect achieved by calligraphic brush strokes across a striated surface". Thus, it appears that calligraphy cannot be protected and, by analogy, signatures.
In Commons talk:Licensing/Archive 11#Autographs.2Fsignatures, there is a reference to User:BrokenSphere having sent an email to the US Copyright Office, and receiving the reply "A signature is not protected by copyright".
If the signature is sufficiently complex to be considered a protectable artistic work in the US (akin to a non-trivial drawing), it cannot be hosted on Commons regardless of the position under local law unless it has been licensed under a compatible license or would have fallen into the public domain under some other rule (e.g. expiration of copyright).
대륙법계 국가
대륙법계 국가는 일반적으로 저작권 보호에서 일반적인 서명을 제외하는 비교적 높은 수준의 지적 창의성을 요구합니다.
특정 국가에서 이 문제에 대한 특정 판례 또는 법적 조언을 알고 있는 경우 아래에 항목을 추가해주세요.
COM:SIG Germany
독일
German copyright law requires a high threshold of originality, called Schöpfungshöhe.
OK for a typical signature. The relevant law is the Urheberrechtsgesetz, abbreviated UrhG. Paragraph 2(2) UrhG makes it clear that there is a threshold of originality that must be met: "Werke im Sinne dieses Gesetzes sind nur persönliche geistige Schöpfungen", which can be roughly translated as "According to this law, only personal intellectual creations are considered as works." The Schöpfungshöhe defines the minimal requirements that must be met for a work to become a copyrightable intellectual creation. In this context, signatures are comparable to simple graphics that just fulfill some practical purpose which are likewise not eligible for copyright as documented by following cases:
- OLG Köln, 6 U 199/85 (GRUR 1986, 889) ruled that this image is ineligible for copyright including its animation
- BVerfG 1 BvR 1571/02 ruled that this image is ineligible for copyright because it is a work of applied art serving a practical purpose which requires a higher threshold of originality
In general, simple type faces and signatures for practical purposes are not eligible for copyright. To quote from Haimo Schack: Urheber- und Urhebervertragsrecht, p. 118:
- "Dagegen wird ein Urheberschutz von Schriftzeichen von der Rechtssprechung in aller Regel verneint. Auch das einprägsame Signet der "ARD-1" erfüllte nicht die Anforderungen an eine persönliche geistige Schöpfung. Seit dem 1.6.2004 werden Schriftzeichen nicht mehr über das Schriftzeichengesetz, sondern unmittelbar als Geschmacksmuster geschützt (vgl § 61 GeschmMG)."
Rough translation:
- "In contrast, copyright protection for typefaces is declined by the prevailing case law. Even the catchy logo "ARD-1" did not fulfil the requirements of a personal intellectual creation. Since 1 June 2004 type faces are no longer protected by the Schriftzeichengesetz (law for type faces) but as design patents (see § 61 GeschmMG)."
However, there may still be copyright be if the signature is sufficiently complex to become a protectable artistic work (e.g. because it has more creativity than this image - see above).
COM:SIG China
중국
Not OK: According to the laws of the People's Republic of China, whether a work is protected by copyright, that is contingent on the originality (, literally "independent creativity"). Works having originality are protected and the copyright held by their authors ("Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (2020) Article 15: "A work created by compilation shall refer to the work which is compiled of some works, fragments of works or the data or other materials not constituting a work, and the choice or layout of the contents of which embodies the original creation. The copyright of the compilation work shall be enjoyed by the compiler, provided that the exercise of such copyright does not infringe upon the copyright of the pre-existing works included in the compilation.") The signatures are commonly created independently rather than imitatively.
The signatures by the Chinese people containing Chinese characters may be considered as Chinese calligraphy works, and thus defined as artwork (, or translated as "works of fine arts") and protected by law ("Regulations for the Implementation of the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (2002) Article 4: "(8) 'works of fine arts' means two- or three-dimensional works of the plastic arts created in lines, colours or other media which impart aesthetic effect, such as paintings, works of calligraphy and sculptures;"). In a typical case, Dow Jones & Company had used a calligraphy "" written by calligrapher Guan Dongsheng. In 2003, Guan Dongsheng won his court action against the company, ruling by the Beijing First Intermediate People's Court. The artwork can be seen here.
Exceptions OK:
- If a signature is originally from documents of legislative, administrative, or judicial nature, it is in the public domain (see {{PD-PRC-exempt}}).
- Signatures whose author died more than 50 years ago are in the public domain.
- If the work is not a handwritten signature, but was instead created using standard, common typefaces of Ming, Sans-serif, or Regular script, it may be in the public domain. However, the vector glyphs in computer fonts may still be copyrighted.
COM:SIG Japan
일본
COM:SIG Jordan
요르단
OK for a typical signature, based on Article 3 of Jordanian copyright law, which specifies what is eligible to be copyrighted.
COM:SIG Peru
페루
OK for a typical signature. Because calligraphies consist of trivial mechanical processes that do not involve artistic and literary efforts, they do not pass the threshold of originality due to the lack of reasonable creative and individual transmission during their process ("mera naturaleza de las cosas").[1] On Resolution No. 0286-1998/TPI-INDECOPI explains the differences between a creative work and a trivial work, therefore not all creations are authentic and not are subject for their protection.[2] Also, Resolution No. 0148-2008/TPI-INDECOPI sets to the drawings of common use cannot pass the attributes of individuality, making the signatures look the same as the concept of uncopyrighted drawings.
COM:SIG Russia
러시아
괜찮습니다. Signature used for expression of will, for identification, or in similar cases is a legal or technical tool, it is not work of science, literature, or art, so it is not copyrightable.
Depend on case. Signature used for other purposes can be protected depending on its creativity.
COM:SIG South Korea
대한민국
COM:SIG Taiwan
중화민국
Not OK: This government regulation (archived from original) lists handwriting and calligraphy as examples of artistic works that are subject to copyright protection.
영미법계 국가
Most Common law countries use a "skill and labour" test to determine the minimum level of originality capable of attracting copyright protection, and in some countries such as the UK the required level is extremely low. Without some research into individual laws, it cannot be assumed that a signature from a Common law country is necessarily allowed on Commons. If there is real doubt about the position a local court would take, then the image must be deleted under the precautionary principle.
If the signature is extremely simple (e.g. a scribbled line or two), it will not be copyright even in Common law countries.
If you are aware of specific caselaw or legal advice on this issue in any country, please add an entry below.
COM:SIG United Kingdom
영국
괜찮지 않음 for a typical signature. The level of originality required for copyright protection in the United Kingdom is very low, and it is easily arguable that personal signatures are entitled to copyright protection. Under United Kingdom law, a signature may be protectable as a graphic work (a type of artistic work). Artistic works are protected regardless of artistic merit. There are various sources that point in that direction, including the following:
- The practitioners' text Copinger and Skone James on Copyright mentions, at para. 2-23, an unreported decision that a signature combined with an (apparently copyrighted) shield device can be accorded artistic copyright.
- Professor Charles Oppenheim of de Montfort University: "graphic works, photographs, sculptures and collages are protected regardless of artistic merit. Your signature is an artistic work, as you always suspected" See presentation of Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC).
- Sallie Spilsbury, Media Law, 2000, p. 439: An individual's signature may be protected under law as an artistic work. If so, the unauthorised reproduction of the signature will infringe copyright. The name itself will not be protected by copyright; it is the appearance of the signature which is protected.
- Alan Story LLM, in "Owning Diana: From People's Princess to Private Property" accepts it is that possible ("though debatable") that there may be copyright in Diana's signature as an original artistic work. This is of interest, in that Story accepts this even though he is writing from an anti-protectionist angle.
- The E. Chambré Hardman Archive Copyright Clinic page states that "Somebody’s signature is also thought of as an artistic work, rather than a literary work."
Unless further legal commentary or caselaw to the contrary becomes available, the UK position is that typical personal signatures are arguably entitled to protection under local law, and generally UK signatures should be deleted under the precautionary principle. However, if the signature is extremely simple (eg a scribbled line or two), it will not be copyright even in the UK.
PD-signature 틀을 사용하는 방법
You can apply the tag {{PD-signature}} to a photograph or scan of a personal signature provided that:
- The signature is highly likely to fall below the threshold of originality for protection in the US; and
- It is highly likely to fall below the threshold of originality for the stated country. (If the signature is of "typical" complexity/creativity, it should be assumed free in Civil law countries and unfree in Common law countries for which no specific country rule is listed above); and
- You explicitly state as a parameter to the tag which country's law is relevant, (e.g. the individual's country of nationality).
Note that you must specify a country, so that a judgement can be made as the minimum level of originality required under local law. If no country is stated, or if the signature is arguably complex/creative enough to attract copyright then the image cannot be assumed free and will be deleted under the precautionary principle.
서명과 상표권 보호
In many countries, a signature is capable of being protected as a trademark. However, even where a signature is protected by trademark laws it can still be hosted here: see Commons:Non-copyright restrictions. If you know that a particular signature is trademark-protected, you can add the {{Trademark}} disclaimer as well as the {{PD-signature}} tag.
서명 이미지의 재사용
|
{{{1}}} |
- ↑ Enrique, Cavero Safra (july 2015). "El concepto de originalidad en el derecho de autor peruano". Forsetti (5): 113-127. ISSN 2312-3583. Retrieved on 2021-08-20.
- ↑ Ministry of Justice (2015). "Precedentes y normativa del Indecopi en Propiedad Intelectual". Indecopi. ISSN 2409-7667.