Open main menu
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Switzerland and the translation is 42% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Switzerland and have to be approved by a translation administrator.
Other languages:
Alemannisch • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Esperanto • ‎català • ‎español • ‎français • ‎galego • ‎norsk bokmål • ‎occitan • ‎polski • ‎suomi • ‎македонски • ‎русский • ‎中文

This page provides an overview of copyright rules of Switzerland relevant to uploading works into Wikimedia Commons. Note that any work originating in Switzerland must be in the public domain, or available under a free license, in both Switzerland and the United States before it can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. If there is any doubt about the copyright status of a work from Switzerland, refer to the relevant laws for clarification.

Geltende gesetzliche Bestimmungen

Switzerland has been a member of the Berne Convention since 5 December 1887, the World Trade Organization since 1 July 1995 and the WIPO Copyright Treaty since 1 July 2008.[1]

As of 2018 the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), an agency of the United Nations, listed Federal Act of October 9, 1992, on Copyright and Related Rights (status as of January 1, 2017) as the main copyright law enacted by the legislature of Switzerland.[1] WIPO holds an unofficial English translation of the text of this law in their WIPO Lex database.[2] The Bundesrat (Federal Council) holds official German, French and Italian versions.[3][4][5]

Allgemeine Regeln

Under the Act of October 9, 1992, on Copyright and Related Rights (as of January 1, 2017),

  • In general a work is protected by copyright as soon as it is created, irrespective of whether it has been fixed on a physical medium.[1992-2017 Art.29(1)]
  • Protection expires a. in the case of computer programs, 50 years after the death of the author; b. in the case of all other works, 70 years after the death of the author.[1992-2017 Art.29(2)]
  • Where it is has to be assumed that the author has been dead for more than 50 or 70 years respectively, protection no longer applies.[1992-2017 Art.29(3)]
  • Where two or more persons have participated in the creation of a work, protection expires a. in the case of computer programs, 50 years after the death of the last surviving joint author; b. in the case of all other works, 70 years after the death of the last surviving joint author.[1992-2017 Art.30(1)]
  • Where the individual contributions may be separated, protection for each contribution expires 50 or 70 years respectively after the death of the respective author.[1992-2017 Art.30(2)]
  • In the case of films and other audio-visual works, the calculation of the term of protection is based solely on the date of the death of the director.[1992-2017 Art.30(3)]
  • Where the author of a work is unknown, protection for that work expires 70 years after it has been published or, if it has been published in instalments, 70 years after the final instalment, unless the identity of the author becomes known during this period.[1992-2017 Art.31]
  • The term of protection is calculated from 31 December of the year in which the event determining the calculation occurred.[1992-2017 Art.32]

The increase of the protection term from 50 to 70 years occurred in 1993 and was not retroactive, but since the change was more than 20 years ago, no works are in the public domain under the life+50 term that would not also be in the public domain under the current life+70 rule. However, this can be relevant with regard to URAA-restored copyrights in the US, as the protection of many works was already expired applying the 50 years term and protection was not restored for these works in 1993, as confirmed by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court in its "Sternheim" decision in 1998.[6] For example, Swiss aviation pioneer and photographer Walter Mittelholzer died in 1937. His works went into the public domain in Switzerland 50 years after his death on January 1, 1988. As the 1993 extension to 70 years did not restore already expired copyrights, Mittelholzer's photographs were still in the public domain in Switzerland on the URAA date of 1 January 1996, and therefore outside the scope of URAA copyright restorations.

Nicht geschützt

Copyright does not protect acts, ordinances, international treaties and other official enactments; means of payment; decisions, minutes and reports issued by authorities and public administrations; patent specifications and published patent applications. Copyright also does not protect official or legally required collections and translations of the works referred to in paragraph 1.[1992-2017 Art.5]

To be eligible for copyright in the first place, works must be literary or artistic intellectual creations with an individual character, irrespective of their value or purpose.[1992-2017 Art.2] Many photographs may therefore not be protected (see {{PD-Switzerland-photo}} for details).

Lizenzvorlagen

Siehe auch: Commons:Lizenzvorlagen

  • {{PD-Switzerland-official}} – für offizielle Schweizer Dokumente (Gesetze, Verordnungen, Erlasse, usw.), Zahlungsmittel und Patente, u. ä.
  • {{PD-Switzerland-photo}} – für Fotografien, die zum ersten Mal in der Schweiz publiziert wurden und mangels Individualität kein geschütztes Werk sind. See template for details, but use this only in obvious cases, as reasonable people can disagree about the individuality of a picture.

In Switzerland copyright protection expires 70 years after the death of the author with the exception of computer programs, the protection of which ends 50 years after the death of the author.

Währung

Siehe auch: Commons:Währung

 OK: Currency is not covered by copyright in Switzerland. Article 5(1)(b) of the Swiss copyright law from 1993 on works not subject to copyright explicitly excludes monetary items from copyright.

Reproduction of banknotes that may be confused with genuine bills is prohibited by article 243 of the Swiss Penal Code.[7] The Swiss National Bank has issued guidelines on how to reproduce banknotes in a way they believe are permissible.[8] Printing "Specimen" across the image and not reproducing the bills at their true size or in their true colors are recommendations.

{{PD-Switzerland-official}} can be used to tag images of Swiss currency.

Panoramafreiheit

Siehe auch: Commons:Panoramafreiheit

 OK {{FoP-Switzerland}}

Under Article 27 of the Copyright Act, a work permanently situated in a place accessible to the public may be depicted and the depiction offered, transferred, broadcast or otherwise distributed. The depiction must not be three-dimensional and it must not serve the same purpose as the original.

Accessible to the public

  • The place must be accessible to the public on a de facto basis. The legal ownership status of the place is irrelevant to the applicability of the provision.[9]
  • The depicted work itself does not have to be accessible to the public. Freedom of panorama also applies to a work on private (not publicly accessible) grounds provided it can be seen with the naked eye from a place accessible to the public.[10]
  • The place does not need to be accessible to the public all the time. If a park is closed during night hours, it may still be “accessible to the public” within the meaning of Article 27 provided the other criteria are met.[11]
  • Following the majority view in the legal literature, if the place is only accessible to certain categories of persons, such as pupils and high school staff, it is no longer “accessible to the public”.[12] Commentators do not agree whether charging entrance fees also makes the place "not public" and therefore not subject to Article 27.[13]
  • Following the majority view in the legal literature, freedom of panorama does not apply to interior spaces.[14] Hence Article 27 cannot be invoked for depictions produced in the staircase or the rooms of a building.[15] It is recognized in the literature that in some cases it can be difficult to determine what constitutes an “interior space”. Part of the literature suggests a differentiation of interior spaces from interior courtyards, with only the latter fulfilling the requirements of Article 27.[16] However, definition problems remain, for instance, in the case of station halls or shopping arcades which, consequently, are assessed differently by commentators.[17] It is generally held that the interior of a church cannot be depicted under Article 27.[18]

Permanently situated

  • A work is not “permanently situated” within the meaning of the law if it is only visible by accident (e.g. whilst being transported).[19]
  • It is controversial what is required to fulfill the feature “permanently situated”. According to one widespread view, this requires that the (objective) intent of the copyright holder is to indefinitely present the work in/at a publicly-accessible place.[20] A minority view holds that freedom of panorama can also apply to a work such as a sculpture otherwise located inside a museum that is accessible to the public as part of a temporary exhibition.[21] Whether Christo’s “wrapped works” can be depicted under Art. 27 is controversial.[22] Posters in public are not considered “permanently situated” by the literature.[23]
  • Works whose lifetime is restricted by natural conditions, such as ice sculptures or chalk paintings on streets, are nevertheless considered permanent.[24]

General

  • Applicability to all works: Article 27 applies to all categories of protected works.[25]
  • Modifications: Modifications of the work are not allowed (Art. 10 URG). Article 11 prohibits the distortion of the work. However, modifications required due to the reproduction method used are generally considered permitted.[26]

Briefmarken

Siehe auch: Commons:Briefmarken

  According to Article 5 of the Federal Act on Copyright and Related Rights, Copyright does not protect .. means of payment. However, stamps are not considered means of payment and do not fall under any other exemption clause. They therefore enjoy copyright protection.[27]

Schöpfungshöhe

Siehe auch: Commons:Schöpfungshöhe

Siehe auch

Zitate

  1. a b Switzerland Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights). WIPO: World Intellectual Property Organization (2018). Retrieved on 2018-11-13.
  2. Federal Act of October 9, 1992, on Copyright and Related Rights (status as of January 1, 2017). Switzerland (2017). Retrieved on 2018-11-13.
  3. Bundesgesetz über das Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte (Urheberrechtsgesetz, URG) vom 9. Oktober 1992 (Stand am 1. Januar 2017) (in German). Retrieved on 2019-01-30.
  4. Loi fédérale sur le droit d'auteur et les droits voisins (Loi sur le droit d'auteur, LDA)*12 du 9 octobre 1992 (Etat le 1er janvier 2017) (in French). Retrieved on 2019-01-30.
  5. Legge federale sul diritto d'autore e sui diritti di protezione affini (Legge sul diritto d'autore, LDA) del 9 ottobre 1992 (Stato 1° gennaio 2017) (in Italian). Retrieved on 2019-01-30.
  6. BGE 124 III 266
  7. Reproduction of banknotes. Swiss National Bank. Retrieved on 2019-03-29.
  8. Instruction sheet on the reproduction of banknotes. Swiss National Bank (30 August 2017). Retrieved on 2019-03-29.
  9. Rehbinder/Viganó, URG, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (2); Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (4); Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 300; Dessemonet, La propriété intellectuelle et les contrats de licence, 2nd ed. (2011), marginal no. 153; Hilty: Urheberrecht, 2011, p. 209.
  10. Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (4); Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 300; Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (5); Sandro Macciacchini: Die unautorisierte Wiedergabe von urheberrechtlich geschützten Werken in Massenmedien. In: sic! 1997, pp. 361–371, p. 369; Renold/Contel in Werra, Gilliéron, Propriété intellectuelle, 2013, LDA Art. 27 (11).
  11. Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (4); Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (4); Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 300; Hilty: Urheberrecht, 2011, p. 210.
  12. Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 300; Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (4); Fanny Ambühl and Stephan Beutler: Fotografieren verboten! – Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Urheber- und Eigentumsrecht im Fotografiebereich. In: recht. 2011, pp. 14–19, p. 17; Rolf H. Weber, Roland Unternährer and Rena Zulauf: Schweizerisches Filmrecht. Schulthess, Zürich 2003, p. 147.
  13. In favor: Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 300. No limitation to a particular category of persons but merely a general restriction that applies to anyone: Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (4); Fanny Ambühl and Stephan Beutler: Fotografieren verboten! – Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Urheber- und Eigentumsrecht im Fotografiebereich. In: recht. 2011, pp. 14–19, p. 17.
  14. Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (2, 4); Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 300; Fanny Ambühl and Stephan Beutler: Fotografieren verboten! – Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Urheber- und Eigentumsrecht im Fotografiebereich. In: recht. 2011, pp. 14–19, p. 17; Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (6); Daniel Csoport: Rechtsschutz für Kunstschaffende im schweizerischen und internationalen Urheberrecht. Dissertation, University of St. Gallen, 2008, Internet http://www1.unisg.ch/www/edis.nsf/wwwDisplayIdentifier/3498, accessed on 1 February 2014, p. 25. Dissenting: Wittweiler: Zu den Schrankenbestimmungen im neuen Urheberrechtsgesetz. In: AJP. Nr. 5, 1993, pp. 588 et seq., p. 591; Auf der Maur: Multimedia: Neue Herausforderungen für das Urheberrecht. In: AJP. Nr. 4, 1995, pp. 435 et seq., p. 439.
  15. Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (4).
  16. Fanny Ambühl and Stephan Beutler: Fotografieren verboten! – Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Urheber- und Eigentumsrecht im Fotografiebereich. In: recht. 2011, pp. 14–19, p. 18; Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (6); Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (4).
  17. Against applicability to station halls: Rehbinder/Viganó, URG, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (2). In favor: Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (6) (also to “park pavilions, shopping arcades and malls”); Fanny Ambühl and Stephan Beutler: Fotografieren verboten! – Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Urheber- und Eigentumsrecht im Fotografiebereich. In: recht. 2011, pp. 14–19, p. 18 (also to shopping arcades for both “do not constitute an interior space in the current language”).
  18. Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 300; Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (6); Sandro Macciacchini: Die unautorisierte Wiedergabe von urheberrechtlich geschützten Werken in Massenmedien. In: sic! 1997, pp. 361–371, p. 369; Fanny Ambühl and Stephan Beutler: Fotografieren verboten! – Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Urheber- und Eigentumsrecht im Fotografiebereich. In: recht. 2011, pp. 14–19, p. 18; Rehbinder/Viganó, URG, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (2); Hilty: Urheberrecht, 2011, p. 210.
  19. Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (5); Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (9); Renold/Contel in Werra, Gilliéron, Propriété intellectuelle, 2013, LDA Art. 27 (6); Rehbinder/Viganó, URG, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (3) («erkennbar absichtlich dauerhaft an oder auf öffentlich zugänglichem Grund»).
  20. Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (9) («Werke, die sich für unbestimmte Zeit an dem für sie bestimmten Ort befinden [...] Massgeblich ist die zeitliche und örtliche Bestimmung [...] aufgrund der objektiv erkennbaren Widmung durch den Rechtsinhaber»); Rehbinder/Viganó, URG, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (3) («[...] erkennbar absichtlich dauerhaft an oder auf öffentlich zugänglichem Grund befindet»); similar though apparently based on subjective intent: Dessemonet, La propriété intellectuelle et les contrats de licence, 2nd ed. (2011), marginal no. 153 («A notre sens, le critère décisif est l’intention de laisser l’oeuvre en question durablement sur la voie publique»); Hilty: Urheberrecht, 2011, p. 210 («unbestimmte Dauer»).
  21. Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (5); possibly Fanny Ambühl and Stephan Beutler: Fotografieren verboten! – Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Urheber- und Eigentumsrecht im Fotografiebereich. In: recht. 2011, pp. 14–19, p. 18.
  22. In favor: Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (5); Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (9) (because they are temporary in nature as the creators intentionally limited the duration of their public presentation to a level below their ordinary life expectancy); Fanny Ambühl and Stephan Beutler: Fotografieren verboten! – Zum Spannungsverhältnis von Urheber- und Eigentumsrecht im Fotografiebereich. In: recht. 2011, pp. 14–19, p. 18. Ineligible: Rehbinder/Viganó, URG, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (4); Hilty: Urheberrecht, 2011, p. 210 (because the artist’s intent is the temporary display); Mosimann in Mosimann/Renold/Raschér, Kultur. Kunst. Recht, 2009, p. 596.
  23. Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (9) (because it is well-known that they are replaced/removed on a regular basis); Dessemonet, La propriété intellectuelle et les contrats de licence, 2nd ed. (2011), marginal no. 153 (posters presented for one or two weeks); Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 299.
  24. Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue Urheberrecht, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (5) (snow and ice sculptures); Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (9) (chalk paintings on streets or the sculpture ‚A WAY‘ by Simone Zaugg that was made of sugar); Hilty: Urheberrecht, 2011, p. 209 (chalk paintings).
  25. Uncontested, see e.g. Rehbinder/Viganó, URG, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (2).
  26. Macciacchini/Oertli, Handkommentar Urheberrechtsgesetz, 2nd ed. (2012), Art. 27 (13a); Barrelet/Egloff, Das neue permissible, 3rd ed. (2008), Art. 27 (6); more restrictive: Cherpillod, Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte, 1995, p. 300 (depiction must not modify the original work).
  27. Denis Barrelet; Willi Egloff () (in German) Das neue Urheberrecht (3rd ed.), Bern: Stämpfli, p. 33 ISBN: 978-3-7272-9563-8. "Hingegen geniessen Briefmarken Urheberrechtsschutz, da sie keine Zahlungsmittel sind und auch sonst unter keine Ausnahmebestimmung fallen"
Caution: The above description may be inaccurate, incomplete and/or out of date, so must be treated with caution. Before you upload a file to Wikimedia Commons you should ensure it may be used freely. Siehe auch: Commons:Allgemeiner Haftungsausschluss