Editing Eiffel Tower (section)

==Illumination copyright==
{{Further|Freedom of panorama#France}}
[[File:Eiffel Tower at Night.jpg|thumb|The Eiffel Tower illuminated in 2012]]

The tower and its image have been in the [[public domain]] since 1993, 70 years after Eiffel's death.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.thejakartapost.com/travel/2017/12/08/why-its-actually-illegal-to-take-pictures-of-eiffel-tower-at-night.html|work=[[The Jakarta Post]]|title=Why it's actually illegal to take pictures of Eiffel Tower at night|date=9 December 2017}}</ref> In June 1990, a French court ruled that a special lighting display on the tower in 1989 to mark the tower's 100th anniversary was an "original visual creation" protected by copyright. The [[Court of Cassation (France)|Court of Cassation]], France's judicial court of last resort, upheld the ruling in March 1992.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.lexeek.com/jus-luminum/decision-cass-03-03-1992,523975.htm |title=Cour de cassation 3 mars 1992, Jus Luminum n°J523975 |publisher=Jus Luminum |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091116234240/http://www.lexeek.com/jus-luminum/decision-cass-03-03-1992,523975.htm |archive-date=16 November 2009|language=fr}}</ref> The {{lang|fr|Société d'Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel}} (SETE) now considers any illumination of the tower to be a separate work of art that falls under copyright.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/03/sharing-photos-freedom-of-panorama|title= If you want to keep sharing photos for free, read this|author=Jimmy Wales|work=The Guardian|date=3 July 2015|access-date=15 April 2016}}</ref> As a result, the SNTE alleges that it is illegal to publish contemporary photographs of the lit tower at night without permission in France and some other countries for commercial use.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.toureiffel.paris/the-eiffel-tower-image-and-brand/filming-at-the-eiffel-tower.html#img4|title=The Eiffel Tower image rights|date=31 March 2021|publisher=Société d'Exploitation de la Tour Eiffel}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/Freedom-of-panorama-EU-proposal-could-mean-holiday-snaps-breach-copyright/ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220110/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/Freedom-of-panorama-EU-proposal-could-mean-holiday-snaps-breach-copyright/ |archive-date=10 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|title=Freedom of panorama: EU proposal could mean holiday snaps breach copyright|work=The Telegraph|date=24 June 2015|access-date=15 April 2016|author=Hugh Morris}}{{cbignore}}</ref> For this reason, it is often rare to find images or videos of the lit tower at night on stock image sites,<ref name=petapixeleiffel>{{cite web |url=https://petapixel.com/2017/10/14/photos-eiffel-tower-night-illegal/ |title=Why Photos of the Eiffel Tower at Night are Illegal |last=Nicholls |first=Will |date=14 October 2017 |access-date=24 February 2021 |website=PetaPixel}}</ref> and media outlets rarely broadcast images or videos of it.<ref name=thecultureeiffel>{{cite web|url=https://theculturetrip.com/europe/france/paris/articles/why-its-illegal-to-take-pictures-of-the-eiffel-tower-at-night/ |title=Why Photos of the Eiffel Tower at Night are Illegal |last=Cuttle |first=Jade |date=1 July 2019 |access-date=24 February 2021 |website=The Culture Trip}}</ref>

The imposition of copyright has been controversial. The Director of Documentation for what was then called the {{lang|fr| Société Nouvelle d'exploitation de la Tour Eiffel}} (SNTE), Stéphane Dieu, commented in 2005: "It is really just a way to manage commercial use of the image, so that it isn't used in ways [of which] we don't approve".<ref name="fastco">{{cite magazine|url=http://www.fastcompany.com/668174/eiffel-tower-repossessed|date=2 February 2005|magazine=Fast Company|title=Eiffel Tower: Repossessed|access-date=15 April 2016}}</ref> SNTE made over €1&nbsp;million from copyright fees in 2002.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3029993.stm|title=Are things looking up for the Eiffel Tower?|date=16 May 2003|access-date=16 April 2016|work=BBC News|author=James Arnold}}</ref> However, it could also be used to restrict the publication of tourist photographs of the tower at night, as well as hindering non-profit and semi-commercial publication of images of the illuminated tower.<ref name="artjournal">{{cite web|url=https://alj.artrepreneur.com/night-photos-eiffel-tower-violate-copyright/|title=Do night photos of the Eiffel Tower violate copyright?|publisher=Artrepreneur Art Law Journal|author=Steve Schlackman|date=16 November 2014|access-date=13 July 2020}}</ref>

The copyright claim itself has never been tested in courts to date, according to a 2014 article in the ''Art Law Journal'', and there has never been an attempt to track down millions of people who have posted and shared their images of the illuminated tower on the Internet worldwide. However, the article adds that commercial uses of such images, like in a magazine, on a film poster, or on product packaging, may require prior permission.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/photographs-of-eiffel-tower-at-night/ |title=Is it Illegal to Take Photographs of the Eiffel Tower at Night? |date=13 March 2017 |last=Larsen |first=Stephanie |access-date=24 February 2021 |website=[[Snopes]]}}</ref>

French doctrine and jurisprudence allows pictures incorporating a copyrighted work as long as their presence is incidental or accessory to the subject being represented,<ref>{{cite book|title=Notions Fondamentales Du Droit D'auteur|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=M6w3991thgsC&pg=PA277|year=2002|publisher=World Intellectual Property Organization|language=fr|isbn=978-92-805-1013-3|page=277|quote=La représentation d'une œuvre située dans un lieu public n'est licite que lorsqu'elle est accessoire par rapport au sujet principal représenté ou traité}}</ref> a reasoning akin to the ''[[de minimis]]'' rule. Therefore, SETE may be unable to claim copyright on photographs of Paris which happen to include the lit tower.