Can You Get A Shower Straight After Waxing?

But Part 2 is 2.50 m but not freedom of panorama is not it?

In discussions about Google Street View to read more often, the images would violate the copyright, because a photograph is from such a height no longer covered by freedom of panorama.

§ 59 UrhG allows short take pictures of buildings, public places, paths, roads, etc. are. Without this barrier could not take pictures in many places without a license. When the Street View car out 2.50 m height photographed, you have to compare the intent of the legislature according to well with the possibilities of a human photographer. Again, this is expected to reach such a height with outstretched arms.

In this connection, the famous view protection hedge out into the field. However, this has primarily to protect the end, the residents, where appropriate, in their garden from prying eyes. Unless people can be seen on the Street View images, but this is problematic for other reasons, if they are not made unrecognizable. The buildings obstruct the view of privacy protection does not hedge any case, since at least the roof or upper floors can be seen. Copyright it makes no difference whether a city hall or a protected by a transparent protective hedge building is photographed with outstretched arms. The former is undoubtedly covered by the barrier and also happens all the time. Since copyright but only the work (and the connection to the author) to protect themselves, the shoot must be over the hedge by normal means, or means that do not exceed the recoverable by normal means prospects are also allowed.

Anders would assess the situation safe if the camera shots from 3 m in height and would have done more.

Who reliable recording and all curious eyes wants to prevent plants must correspondingly high visibility protection.

self should be photographed by the copyright of 2.50 m or more from irrelevant considerations Watch out injured from 2.50 m from a Street View car as that would not help the vast majority of private homes. To private houses, it goes but in the overwhelming majority of cases. Usually you can find an appropriate privacy protection and only there.

The most normal houses, however, have no work character, since they lack the special creation of height. There are no creative designs, but slight variations of what is just a normal house. It would also failed to provide ordinary houses under copyright protection because of similar houses might otherwise be built only with the cooperation of the same architect, what has any interest other than a few architects.

Further reading:

my series on Google Street View "entitled to damages or Entpixelung"

first Part:

http://bearbeiter.blogspot.com/2010/11/anspruch-auf-entpixelung-oder.html

second Part:

http://bearbeiter.blogspot.com/2010/11/anspruch-auf-entpixelung-oder_24.html