Freedom of Panorama in France and Germany: A Comparative Guide

France and Germany — neighbouring civil law jurisdictions with similar broad copyright frameworks — take strikingly different positions on freedom of panorama (FOP). France recognises only a narrow FOP, with significant restrictions on commercial use of photographs of public artistic works. Germany, by contrast, has one of the most generous FOP frameworks in continental Europe, codified as Panoramafreiheit in Section 59 of the German Copyright Act.

The contrast illustrates that civil law jurisdictions do not all approach FOP identically. For photographers, content creators, and businesses operating across European markets, understanding the specific national frameworks is essential. For broader context, see our companion guides on FOP in Italy and FOP in the UK. For the broader copyright framework, see our master pillar guide to copyright law in Italy and Europe.

France: the restrictive position

France historically maintained a strict copyright framework with no explicit FOP exception. Photographs of buildings, sculptures, and other artistic works still under copyright required authorisation from the copyright holder for any use beyond strictly private. Commercial reproduction was particularly restricted.

This restrictive position generated repeated controversies. The most famous example concerned the night-time illumination of the Eiffel Tower: while the Tower itself entered the public domain decades ago (Gustave Eiffel died in 1923), the nightly illumination system created in 1985 is treated as a separate copyrighted work. Photographs of the illuminated Tower at night for commercial purposes were therefore subject to authorisation by SETE (Société d’Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel) — a position that remains in force despite the broader 2016 FOP reform.

The 2016 French reform: Article L. 122-5 11°

French law introduced a limited FOP exception through the Loi pour une République numérique (Digital Republic Law) of 7 October 2016, adding Article L. 122-5 11° to the French Code de la Propriété Intellectuelle:

The author of a work cannot prohibit “les reproductions et représentations d’œuvres architecturales et de sculptures, placées en permanence sur la voie publique, réalisées par des personnes physiques, à l’exclusion de tout usage à caractère commercial“.

Translation: “reproductions and representations of architectural works and sculptures, permanently placed on public roads, made by natural persons, to the exclusion of any commercial use”.

The French exception is significantly narrower than the German or UK frameworks:

• Limited to natural persons: companies, publishers, and other legal entities cannot benefit from the exception — only individual people;
• Limited to architectural works and sculptures: other categories (murals, large installations not classified as sculptures) may not be covered;
• Limited to works permanently on public roads: works in museums, in private spaces open to public, in temporary installations are excluded;
• Excludes commercial use: any commercial purpose — including stock photography licensing, advertising, commercial publishing — falls outside the exception.

In practical terms, the French 2016 reform legalised personal photography of public architectural works for non-commercial purposes (social media sharing without commercial intent, personal websites without monetisation), but commercial use remains subject to authorisation from copyright holders.

Practical examples in France

Specific situations illustrate the French framework:

• Eiffel Tower (daytime): Tower itself in public domain. Daytime photographs permitted for any use;
• Eiffel Tower (nighttime illumination): the illumination is a separately protected work. Commercial use of photographs requires SETE authorisation;
• Pyramide du Louvre (I.M. Pei, 1989): protected by copyright. Commercial photography requires authorisation from the architect’s estate;
• Musée du Quai Branly (Jean Nouvel, 2006): protected by copyright. Commercial photography requires authorisation;
• Mont-Saint-Michel: medieval architecture in public domain. Photography unrestricted from copyright perspective (but other restrictions may apply);
• Modern public art installations in Paris streets: typically covered by the 2016 exception for personal use only; commercial use requires artist authorisation.

Stock photography agencies operating in France have adapted by either restricting their French catalogues to works in the public domain, or obtaining licences from copyright holders of frequently photographed modern landmarks.

Germany: Panoramafreiheit under UrhG § 59

Germany has one of the most generous FOP frameworks in continental Europe, codified as “Panoramafreiheit” (panorama freedom) in Section 59 of the German Copyright Act (Urheberrechtsgesetz, UrhG):

§ 59 Werke an öffentlichen Plätzen

(1) Zulässig ist, Werke, die sich bleibend an öffentlichen Wegen, Straßen oder Plätzen befinden, mit Mitteln der Malerei oder Graphik, durch Lichtbild oder durch Film zu vervielfältigen, zu verbreiten und öffentlich wiederzugeben. Bei Bauwerken erstrecken sich diese Befugnisse nur auf die äußere Ansicht.

Translation: “It is permitted to reproduce, distribute and publicly communicate by means of painting, drawing, photography or film works that are permanently located on public ways, streets or squares. For buildings, these powers extend only to the external view.”

The German Panoramafreiheit is broadly permissive:

• Permitted both commercial and non-commercial use: unlike the French exception, German FOP applies to all categories of users and uses;
• Covers reproduction, distribution, and public communication: a comprehensive set of acts is permitted, including commercial publishing and stock photography distribution;
• Applies to works permanently on public ways, streets, or squares: similar to UK Section 62’s “permanently situated” requirement;
• For buildings: only the external view: interior architectural details are not covered (different from UK Section 62, which can cover interior spaces open to the public).

Scope and limits of German FOP

The German framework is broad but not unlimited:

• Permanent location requirement: temporary installations are excluded. The German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) has interpreted “permanent” relatively strictly, holding that installations intended for limited periods (even a few months) fall outside the exception;
• Public ways, streets, squares: works in private spaces, museums (even publicly accessible), and other non-public locations are excluded;
• Building exteriors only: interior architectural views (entrance halls, internal courtyards, decorated interiors) are not covered;
• Moral rights still apply: while economic copyright is exempted under Section 59, moral rights (paternity, integrity) of the author may still apply to subsequent uses;
• Wrapped Reichstag exception: the Bundesgerichtshof held that Christo and Jeanne-Claude’s 1995 “Wrapped Reichstag” — a temporary installation — was NOT permanently located and therefore not covered by Section 59, requiring authorisation for commercial photography.

Comparative table: France, Germany, UK, Italy

Cross-border production strategy

For productions and publications distributed across France, Germany, the UK, and Italy, the practical strategy is to comply with the most restrictive applicable jurisdiction:

• Pan-European commercial distribution: assume French-level restrictions apply, obtain authorisations for modern protected works;
• German-only distribution: Panoramafreiheit applies broadly; minimal clearance required;
• UK-only distribution: Section 62 applies broadly; minimal clearance required;
• French-only distribution: full authorisation regime; clearance essential for commercial use;
• Italian distribution: clearance for modern works under copyright; cultural heritage authorisations for cultural heritage items.

Stock photography agencies, advertising productions, and other commercial uses with broad international distribution typically opt for the most restrictive standard to ensure pan-European compliance.

Frequently asked questions

Does France recognise freedom of panorama?

Only narrowly. Article L. 122-5 11° of the French Code de la Propriété Intellectuelle (introduced in 2016) permits non-commercial reproduction by natural persons of architectural works and sculptures permanently placed on public roads. Commercial use remains subject to authorisation.

Can I photograph the Eiffel Tower at night for commercial use?

Generally no, without authorisation. The Tower itself is in the public domain (Gustave Eiffel died in 1923) but the 1985 night-time illumination is a separately protected work. Commercial use of photographs of the illuminated Tower requires authorisation from SETE.

Does Germany permit commercial use of FOP photographs?

Yes. UrhG § 59 (Panoramafreiheit) permits both commercial and non-commercial use of photographs of works permanently located on public ways, streets, or squares. This is one of the most generous FOP frameworks in Europe.

What is the difference between French and German FOP?

France permits only non-commercial use by natural persons (Article L. 122-5 11°). Germany permits both commercial and non-commercial use by all users (UrhG § 59). The two neighbouring civil law jurisdictions take opposite positions on commercial FOP.

Can I include photos of French buildings in a stock photography library?

For modern French buildings still under copyright, stock photography use (which is commercial) requires authorisation from the architect or estate. French FOP does not cover stock photography. Works in the public domain (architects died more than 70 years ago) can be freely included.

How do these frameworks affect cross-border productions?

For productions distributed across multiple European jurisdictions, the practical approach is to comply with the most restrictive applicable framework (typically French). This ensures pan-European compliance without needing jurisdiction-specific editing or version control.

Are temporary art installations covered by Panoramafreiheit?

No. The German Bundesgerichtshof held in the famous Wrapped Reichstag case that Christo and Jeanne-Claude’s 1995 temporary installation was not “permanently located” and therefore not covered by § 59. Commercial photography of temporary works requires authorisation.

How DANDI supports cross-border clients

DANDI.media supports photographers, publishers, advertising agencies, and producers on cross-border FOP and clearance matters:

• Pan-European clearance strategy: optimisation of clearance approaches for productions distributed across multiple jurisdictions;
• Jurisdiction-specific authorisations: coordination of authorisations under French, Italian, and other restrictive frameworks;
• Stock photography portfolio review: jurisdictional assessment of stock photography catalogues for European distribution compliance;
• Risk assessment: pre-publication review of photographs and films for potential FOP-related infringement risks across European markets.

For an initial consultation, book directly with Avv. Claudia Roggero or Avv. Donato Di Pelino.

Related guides

Dandi Law Firm provides legal assistance in several Practice Areas. Check out our Services or contact Us!