Pilipinas Panorama Community/Freedom of Panorama
,_Woold,_Boven_Slinge_--_2014_--_3170.jpg)
| Main page | Membership | Freedom of Panorama | Cultural Heritage | GLAM-Wiki | Movement Charter | Meetups |
The Pilipinas Panorama Community (PPC) is a thematic Wikimedia organization based in the National Capital Region of the Philippines.
The community was founded by Filipino Wikimedians advocating equity, cultural heritage, history, language & ethnicity, art, freedom of panorama, and Wikimedia's Movement Strategy, contributing to expand the global availability of free knowledge.
Freedom Of Panorama (FoP) in the Philippines
- Majority contributions from User:JWilz12345.
- Hashtags
Facebook: #FreedomofPanoramaPH; Twitter: #FreedomofPanoramaPH
Definitions of "Freedom of Panorama" (FoP)
- According to Dulong de Rosnay and Langlais (2017) – "the legal right in some countries to publish pictures of artworks, sculptures, paintings, buildings or monuments that are in public spaces, even when they are still under copyright."[1]
- As per IPOPHL's Atty. Chuck Valerio as quoted by Reyes (2021) – "an exception under copyright laws, similar to fair use, that dispenses with the need to secure prior permission from a copyright owner for the use of a work."[2]
In other words, freedom of panorama is a little-known yet important legal right for photographers, netizens, and content creators to freely take pictures of public works of art and architecture found in or seen in public spaces, usually installed on either a permanent basis (e.g. Swiss freedom of panorama) or long-term basis (e.g. Taiwanese freedom of panorama).
For example, an indie film producer shoots a famous public building in a Metro Manila city made by a famous architect and National Artist, producing assorted photographs with that building both as the main subject and as the background or incidental element. He then uses these photos on his film, which got the attention of Netflix that then purchases the right to stream his film in their famous streaming platform. Without freedom of panorama he still needed commercial license authorization from the architect (or his heirs if he is already deceased for less than 50 years), but with this exception such prior permission is no longer necessary. The same principle of freedom of panorama applies to shooting of works of monuments still under their sculptors' copyrights.
Benefits of Freedom of Panorama
- Photographers can host their photos of works of architecture and monuments on Wikimedia Commons, Flickr, Unsplash, Pexels, Pixabay, and Getty Images under licenses they desire. For Wikimedia Commons, this is elaborated later in this advocacy page.
- Images of the same works can be used in tourism souvenir items like T-shirt prints, calendar designs, post cards, coffee mug designs, and many more. This boosts the tourism industry of a country.
- State-owned philatelic agencies, such as the Philippine Postal Corporation (PhilPost) in the Philippines, can freely use the same works in their commemorative stamps.
- Content creators can use their photos of the same works in their YouTube or Facebook vlogs, even for commercial or semi-commercial purposes. Donation drives by vloggers are semi-profitary in nature as these involve collecting some amount.
- Developers or web admins of travel portals and blogs can freely use photos of the same works in their websites.
- Painters are free to create paintings that depict cityscape or townscape as their subjects, and liberally include the same works in their paintings that they can sell for their livelihood.
- Netizens can freely share vacation photos of the same works in social media (Twitter, Instagram et cetera) and in Flickr, under Creative Commons licenses.
- Book publishers can freely use the same works in the covers of the books they published, such as novels or short stories that they will sell to millions.
- Advertising companies can legally use the same works in their ads (TV commercials, tarpaulins, etc..) as significant element (e.g. background) of their advertising works.
- Teleserye and film making production companies (like Regal, Viva, Dreamscape, ABS-CBN, GMA, et cetera) can legally depict the same works in their audio-visual outputs.
- For architects: Freedom of panorama is important for building up discourse on architecture, in print, in audio-visual media, and in online media. As per Archify: "But most importantly for architects, we live in a world where images of our built environment - shared freely between people via the internet - are increasingly important in constructing a discourse around that built environment. We live in a world that requires freedom of panorama in order for architects to make the world a better place. And architects should be pretty upset about how many restrictions have been placed, and continue to be placed, on that freedom."[3]
Wikimedia Commons
Wikimedia Commons (or "Commons"), a sister site of Wikipedia and hosted by Wikimedia Foundation, only accepts freely-licensed media files as per its "Commons:Licensing" policy page, such as files under Creative Commons Attribution and/or Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike. It not accept fair use content as well as media licensed for non-commercial use only (like BY-NC-SA).[4] Therefore, the media repository treats freedom of panorama with utmost importance, with a dedicated policy page on it.[5] Through freedom of panorama photos of works of architecture and monuments can be hosted on Commons under free licenses. Therefore, helping facilitating knowledge on architecture, public art, and heritage throughout Wikimedia umbrella.
Images on Wikimedia Commons can be freely used in all websites under Wikimedia umbrella. While English Wikipedia has accepted original resolutions of photos of unfree architecture from no-FoP countries (following only U.S. copyright law),[6] local files there cannot be used in other language editions of Wikipedia (like Tagalog Wikipedia) as well as other sister sites like Wikivoyage and Wikinews. In addition, since the U.S. freedom of panorama is for architecture only, photos of copyrighted public art like monuments cannot be freely hosted on English Wikipedia unless applicable fair use tags are used, and such photos cannot be used on list articles. It is noteworthy that the article "List of public art in Metro Manila" is lacking any illustration for contemporary monuments still under sculptors' copyright.
Courtesy of freedom of panorama, the annual Wiki Loves Monuments (WLM) photo competition can be conducted with broader scope, to include modern and contemporary monuments and architecture, not just limited to old or public domain monuments and architecture. Thus complete documentation of the country's heritage structures becomes possible.
The Philippines
According to Atty. Valerio, the current version of the Philippines copyright law (Republic Act No. 8293), as it stands, does not have this important exception,[2] reinforcing the Wikimedia Commons interpretation that the Philippines does not have freedom of panorama in the list of copyright exceptions (Article 184).[7]
One possible option for the general public using photos of copyrighted structures in public space is Section 185, "Fair Use of a Copyrighted Work". However, according to Macahiya (2012), "the Court ruled that a non-commercial use is not fair use when it has substantial market effect."[8] So even if a photo is to be used non-commercially, if it was disseminated or shared on a platform where people can freely view it (e.g. Instagram and TikTok), possibly this is no longer falling under fair use. This is more so in sharing of photos of copyrighted public landmarks of the Philippines on Commons, since the photos are already licensed in such a way free culture uses are mandated and that the structures gained very wide viewing access through the Commons site, more so, the English Wikipedia site once the photos are inserted in Philippines-related articles.
No-FoP impact for Pinoy Wikimedians
The lack of complete freedom of panorama in the Philippines deprives Pilipino Wikimedians' ability to record assorted contemporary public buildings and monuments through freely-licensed photos hosted on Wikimedia Commons. As said before Commons only accepts freely-licensed content. It cannot accept photos of public works and art from countries that lack adequate freedom of panorama. Photos of such works caught by license reviewers and administrators on Commons are immediately tagged for deletion through "Deletion requests" discussions.
In Wikimedia jargon "deletion" does not result to permanent removal of content; rather it only redacts the content and makes it invisible to non-administrators. Therefore, deleted content can be "undeleted" or "restored" if there is a valid reason to do so, like the introduction of freedom of panorama in a no-FoP country.
The first Philippine FoP deletion request (2007) involved a photo of the 11th World Scout Jamboree Memorial roundabout,[9] authored by sculptor Florante Beltran Caedo. Since then Commons photos of many other public structures have been redacted, including:
- "The Angry Christ" mural, Victorias[10]
- Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas[11]
- Crown Regency Hotel, Cebu City[12]
- Divine Mercy Shrine, El Salvador, Misamis Oriental[13]
- Eagle of the North[14]
- EDSA Shrine[15]
- "The Execution of Dr. Jose P. Rizal", Rizal Park[16]
- G.T. International Tower[17]
- Iloilo International Airport[18]
- Kartilya ng Katipunan and Bonifacio Monument[19]
- Lion's Head[20]
- LRT Line 1 (Metro Manila) stations, including the United Nations station[21]
- MacArthur's Landing (Leyte Landing Memorial)[22]
- Malacañan Palace[23]
- New Clark City Athletics Stadium[24]
- Oblation of University of the Philippines[25]
- People Power Monument[26]
- Philippine Arena[27]
- Philippine International Convention Center[28]
- Quezon Memorial Shrine[29]
- SM Mall of Asia[30]
- Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkhia Mosque[31]
- TriNoma[32]
- A certain public art in Naga, Camarines Sur, involved in a hotly-debated deletion request.[33]
- Certain murals in Makati.[34]
More Philippine FoP deletions at Commons can be found at this Commons category.
Deletions have also been made at English Wikipedia itself too. As said before, public art is not allowed if not tagged as fair use. Non-fair use photos have been deleted since at least 2009. Among these are photos showing Peter Tiamzon de Guzman's Memorare – Manila 1945 Monument[35] and Eduardo Castrillo's People Power Monument.[36] Additionally, one People Power Monument photo was speedily deleted under a vague reasoning: "Derivative work lacking adequate licensing information regarding its components," possibly derivative work of a copyrighted sculpture without license from Castrillo's heirs (had the Philippines had freedom of panorama, this issue would not surface in the first place, and image file could have been transferred to Wikimedia Commons so that other wiki sites under Wikimedia umbrella could use this image too). See also: this page.
- Censored images due to lack of FoP in the Philippines
-
-
-
-
-
_(no_freedom_of_panorama_phl_blacked-out).png)
.png)
(2017-12-30)_(no_freedom_of_panorama_phl_blacked-out).png)
.png)
.png)
Some old discussions concerning Philippine freedom of panorama
- On English Wikipedia
- w:en:Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 26#Amendments to RA 8293 : Copyright law of the Philippines (September 2010)
- w:en:Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 30#Pictures on the list of public art in Manila slated for deletion (July 2012)
- w:en:Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 39#Philippine FoP-related deletion nominations at Commons. (October 2015)
- w:en:Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 40#FoP Philippines (July 2017)
- w:en:Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 46#Possible online meeting with IPOPHL on freedom of panorama (and possibly government-published images) (January 2021)
- w:en:Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 49#Copyright law amendment bills (August 2022)
Recent developments
For the community discussion, visit Talk:Pilipinas Panorama Community/Freedom of Panorama#Possible suggestions to FoP in the Philippines
Respect to public work and art authors' rights
While the Philippine freedom of panorama as proposed will be broad enough for the benefit of Wikimedians, content creators, and netizens, the provision as it stands will still not cause undue harm to economic rights of architects, sculptors, and muralists, because:
- "Otherwise than temporarily situated" – the aim of the Philippine FoP will only cover works that are not meant to be permanently seen or installed in public. Hence, works not covered include, but not limited to: sculptures meant for auctions or temporary exhibitions in malls or galleries, models of buildings found inside malls (like Camella house models), artists' paintings, children's works on paper or illustration boards, billboard advertisements, advertisements painted on trains or vehicles, campaign material used in elections or rallies/demonstrations, posters, banners, tarpaulins, and photographs sticked on the likes of municipal or church information boards.
- For buildings: only actual buildings will be covered by freedom of panorama. Building plans and blueprints are normally not for long-term exhibition in public spaces and therefore not covered, still respecting the important asset of architects and not affecting their livelihood or occupation.
- For buildings and sculptures: freedom of panorama concerns representing these works in media stated by the proposed clause, such as photography, TV broadcasting, and cinematography. Three-dimensional representations like miniatures of Eduardo Castrillo's Kartilya ng Katipunan and Bonifacio Monument are not covered. Or exact reproduction like building a house in the style of Mañosa's Coconut Palace. These acts are reserved for authors' or their heirs (like heirs of Mañosa and Castrillo). Yet it may be subject to debate the 3D-style representations in computer technology, like Minecraft. This type of 3D representation needs further consultations.
- For murals and frescoes: if there is an upcoming "Implementing rules and regulations", it should be clear that only photography, cinematography, and television broadcasting are allowed forms of representing these works through freedom of panorama.
Respect to owners of the same works
Freedom of panorama only removes the burden need of Wikimedians, photographers, netizens, and content creators to ask for license from work architects, sculptors, or muralists for uses, publications, and distributions of their photos of the said authors' works permanently placed or installed in public spaces. The legal right does not in any way remove the owners' rights to privacy and/or security. Wikimedians, photographers, netizens, and content creators are still encouraged to respect privacy and security rules of every establishment, even those owned by the Philippine government, when conducting photography of the said works. Museum house rules still apply too: avoid using flash if the museums prohibit using flash in photography.
This is illustrated in the British FoP situation. Their legal right is broad enough to cover also interiors of publicly-accessible museums, irrespective of entrance fee and opening hours. British FoP does not cover murals and frescoes (2D flat works), however. But as per the UK section of this English Wikipedia article, they have one of the strictest anti-terror laws in the world, and photography of sensitive sites is prohibited or regulated. Among those caught by their law were a BBC photojouralist and a representative of their Parliament. This is a security law that is not in any way related to copyright.
Successful FoP introductions
See: Freedom of Panorama#Successful FoP introductions.
Freedom of Panorama (FoP) statuses, internationally
- The following subsection (including the table) is transcluded from User:JWilz12345/FOP/Global statuses.
- Freedom of Panorama statuses internationally, in 197 countries.
- All 197 countries as per [1]. Non-commercial FoP (e.g. Azerbaijan, South Korea, and Uzbekistan), incidental FoP (e.g. Cambodia, Luxembourg, and Zambia), and FoP for traditional media only (e.g. Greece, Lebanon, and UAE) are considered as not OK as these are not suitable for Wikimedia Commons. "Partial" denotes FoP is for architecture only but not other types of public artistic works.
- "YES" designation also includes countries with full FoP for 3D public space works (e.g. buildings and sculptural monuments) but limited or no FoP for most 2D public space works (e.g. murals and church/mosque/temple frescoes), like India and UK.
A more comprehensive table is available at Wikimedia Commons: c:Commons:Freedom of panorama/table.
- Statistics
Out of 197 countries...
- 111 have no FoP (56.35%), and
- 86 have some-form of Commons-compatible FoP (43.65%).
Out of those 86 countries...
- 79 have adequate FoP*, and
- 7 have partial FoP, for architecture only: Denmark, Finland, Japan, Norway, Russia, Taiwan, United States
Note: * - accounts for 40.10% of all 197 countries. Percentage calculated using this online percentage calculator.
- Table
| Country | FoP status | Note/s 1 | Note/s 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Afghanistan | no | ||
| Albania | yes | ||
| Algeria | yes | ||
| Andorra | no | ||
| Angola | yes | ||
| Antigua and Barbuda | yes | ||
| Argentina[note 1] | no | ||
| Armenia | yes | ||
| Australia | yes | ESEAP | |
| Austria | yes | EU | |
| Azerbaijan | no | ||
| Bahamas | yes | ||
| Bahrain | no | ||
| Bangladesh | yes | ||
| Barbados | yes | ||
| Belarus | no | ||
| Belgium | yes | EU | |
| Belize | yes | ||
| Benin | no | OAPI | |
| Bhutan | no | ||
| Bolivia | yes | ||
| Bosnia and Hercegovina | no | ||
| Botswana | no | ||
| Brazil | yes | ||
| Brunei | yes | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Bulgaria | no | EU | |
| Burkina Faso | no | OAPI | |
| Burundi | no | ||
| Cabo Verde | no | ||
| Cambodia | no | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Cameroon | no | OAPI | |
| Canada | yes | ||
| Central African Republic | no | OAPI | |
| Chad | no | OAPI | |
| Chile | yes | ||
| China | yes | ESEAP | |
| Colombia | yes | ||
| Comoros | no | OAPI | |
| Congo-Brazzaville (R.) | no | OAPI | |
| Congo-Kinshasa (D.R.) | no | ||
| Costa Rica | no | ||
| Côte d'Ivoire | no | OAPI | |
| Croatia | yes | EU | |
| Cuba | yes | ||
| Cyprus | yes | EU | |
| Czech Republic | yes | EU | |
| Denmark | partial | EU | |
| Djibouti | no | ||
| Dominica | no | ||
| Dominican Republic | yes | ||
| East Timor / Timor-Leste | yes | ESEAP | |
| Ecuador | yes | ||
| Egypt | yes | ||
| El Salvador | yes | ||
| Equatorial Guinea | no | OAPI | |
| Eritrea | no | ||
| Estonia | no | EU | |
| Eswatini | no | ||
| Ethiopia | no | ||
| Fiji | yes | ESEAP | |
| Finland | partial | EU | |
| France | no | EU | |
| Gabon | yes | OAPI | |
| Gambia | no | ||
| Georgia | no | ||
| Germany | yes | EU | |
| Ghana | no | ||
| Greece | no | EU | |
| Grenada | yes | ||
| Guatemala | no | ||
| Guinea | no | OAPI | |
| Guinea-Bissau | yes | OAPI | |
| Guyana | yes | ||
| Haiti | no | ||
| Honduras | no | ||
| Hungary | yes | EU | |
| Iceland | no | ||
| India | yes | ||
| Indonesia | no | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Iran | no | ||
| Iraq | no | ||
| Ireland | yes | EU | |
| Israel | yes | ||
| Italy | no | EU | |
| Jamaica | yes | ||
| Japan | partial | ESEAP | |
| Jordan | no | ||
| Kazakhstan | no | ||
| Kenya | yes | ||
| Kiribati | no | ESEAP | |
| Korea, North (DPRK) | yes | ||
| Korea, South (ROK) | no | ESEAP | |
| Kosovo | no | ||
| Kuwait | no | ||
| Kyrgyzstan | no | ||
| Lao PDR | no | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Latvia | no | EU | |
| Lebanon | no | ||
| Lesotho | no | ||
| Liberia | no | ||
| Libya | no | ||
| Liechtenstein | yes | ||
| Lithuania | no | EU | |
| Luxembourg | no | EU | |
| Madagascar | no | ||
| Malawi | no | ||
| Malaysia | yes | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Maldives | no | ||
| Mali | no | OAPI | |
| Malta | yes | EU | |
| Marshall Islands[note 2] | yes | ESEAP | |
| Mauritania | yes | OAPI | |
| Mauritius | no | ||
| Mexico | yes | ||
| Micronesia (FS) | no | ESEAP | |
| Moldova | yes | ||
| Monaco | no | ||
| Mongolia | no | ESEAP | |
| Montenegro | no | ||
| Morocco | no | ||
| Mozambique | no | ||
| Myanmar / Burma | no | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Namibia | no | ||
| Nauru | no | ESEAP | |
| Nepal | no | ||
| Netherlands | yes | EU | |
| New Zealand | yes | ESEAP | |
| Nicaragua | no | ||
| Niger | no | OAPI | |
| Nigeria | no | ||
| North Macedonia | yes | ||
| Norway | partial | ||
| Oman | no | ||
| Pakistan | yes | ||
| Palau | no | ESEAP | |
| Palestine | no | ||
| Panama | yes | ||
| Papua New Guinea | no | ESEAP | |
| Paraguay | yes | ||
| Peru | yes | ||
| Philippines | no | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Poland | yes | EU | |
| Portugal | yes | EU | |
| Qatar | no | ||
| Romania | no | EU | |
| Russian Federation | partial | ||
| Rwanda | no | ||
| Saint Kitts and Nevis | yes | ||
| Saint Lucia | yes | ||
| Saint Vincent and the Grenadines | yes | ||
| Samoa (Western) | no | ESEAP | |
| San Marino | no | ||
| São Tomé e Príncipe | yes | ||
| Saudi Arabia | no | ||
| Senegal | no | OAPI | |
| Serbia | yes | ||
| Seychelles | no | ||
| Sierra Leone | no | ||
| Singapore | yes | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Slovakia | yes | EU | |
| Slovenia | no | EU | |
| Solomon Islands | yes | ESEAP | |
| Somalia | no | ||
| South Africa | no | ||
| South Sudan | no | ||
| Spain | yes | EU | |
| Sri Lanka | no | ||
| Sudan | no | ||
| Suriname | yes | ||
| Sweden | yes | EU | |
| Switzerland | yes | ||
| Syria | no | ||
| Taiwan | partial | ESEAP | |
| Tajikistan | no | ||
| Tanzania | no | ||
| Thailand | yes | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Togo | no | OAPI | |
| Tonga | no | ESEAP | |
| Trinidad and Tobago | yes | ||
| Tunisia | yes | ||
| Türkiye | yes | ||
| Turkmenistan | no | ||
| Tuvalu | yes | ESEAP | |
| Uganda | yes | ||
| Ukraine | no | ||
| United Arab Emirates (UAE) | no | ||
| United Kingdom (UK) | yes | ||
| United States of America (USA) | partial | ||
| Uruguay | yes | ||
| Uzbekistan | no | ||
| Vanuatu | no | ESEAP | |
| Vatican City[note 3] | no | ||
| Venezuela | yes | ||
| Vietnam | no | ASEAN | ESEAP |
| Yemen | no | ||
| Zambia | no | ||
| Zimbabwe | yes |
- Note/s 1 remarks
- ASEAN – country is a member of the Association of South East Asian Nations
- EU – country is a member of the European Union organization.
- OAPI – country is a member of Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle. The Bangui Agreement[2] that governs it provides a non-commercial FoP at Annex VII, Part I, Article 16; it is unsure if there is an effect in that provision's conflict with unrestricted FoP legal rights of 3 of the 17 member states: Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, and Mauritania.
- Note/s 2 remarks
- ESEAP – country is in a Wikimedia region known as ESEAP (ESEAP Hub)
- Footnotes
- ↑ On Wikimedia Commons, Argentina is considered to have a de facto FoP for architecture, based on a perspective of an Argentine lawyer about permissible photographic reproductions of buildings (brought in a July 2010 discussion). However, it was put into question in two discussions (from December 2022, from September 2023), especially regarding the actual context of the Argentine lawyer's perspective, if that extends to commercial distributions of images or not. Also, contrary to a claim in the 2010 discussion that Argentina follows customary law in copyright, a Harvard article states that the country follows civil law system following the European system. See also c:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Argentina#Freedom of panorama. On top of that, Infojustice.org tells of a proposal in 2017 to add more limitations/exceptions for the Argentine copyright law (Law No. 11.723), one of which would have been a freedom of panorama provision. Instead, most of the suggested exceptions were abolished, and the only surviving exception to be passed concerns free uses of works for persons with disabilities (PWDs), as proven by the resulting amendment law, Law No. 27.588 of November 11, 2020, on Amendments to Law No. 11.723 (WIPO copy).
- ↑ They have no copyright law.
- ↑ Church decrees govern papal works, but works of art and architecture are governed by Italian copyright law. Italy has no FoP so Vatican City has no FoP too. Refer to c:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Vatican City#Freedom of panorama.
ASEAN + APEC
Council of Europe
FoP Philippines Discussion Group
- See main page: FoP Philippines Discussion Group
The group was formed in 2023 to become an avenue for PPC members on sharing their ideas regarding their FoP advocacies and its progress especially in the Philippine setting.
Objectives
- As a subcommunity of PPC, the group aims to lead the Freedom of Panorama (FoP) movement in the Philippines especially among the community of Filipino Wikimedians.
- To become an avenue among FoP advocates in the Philippines to share ideas with one another
- To promote the FoP advocacy primarily to bring awareness on different communities and its importance to related topics e.g. cultural heritage preservation
References
- ↑ Dulong de Rosnay, Mélanie; Langlais, Pierre-Carl (2017). "Public artworks and the freedom of panorama controversy: a case of Wikimedia influence". Internet Policy Review.
- ↑ a b Reyes, Mary Ann LL. (2021-11-28). "Changing landscape of copyright". The Philippine Star.
- ↑ Stott, Rory (2016-04-07). "Freedom of Panorama: The Internet Copyright Law that Should Have Architects Up in Arms". Archify.
- ↑ c:Commons:Licensing, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ Commons:Freedom of panorama, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ w:en:Wikipedia:Freedom of panorama, English Wikipedia
- ↑ c:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Philippines#Freedom of panorama, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ "Macahiya, Jayson: The Legal Dynamics Relevant to Public Art in the Philippines". AUSL Tech & Law. September 27, 2012. Retrieved August 10, 2023.
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:11th Jamboree Memorial.jpg, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Angry Christ Mural of the Saint Joseph The Worker Parish Church.jpg, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Main Office, Manila, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Crown Regency Hotel.jpg, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Divine Mercy Shrine (Misamis Oriental), Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Eagle of the North, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:EDSA Shrine and c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:EDSA Shrine 2.jpg, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Diorama of Rizal's Martyrdom, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:GT International Tower.jpg
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Iloilo International Airport
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Kartilya ng Katipunan “The Life and Heroism of Gat Andres Bonifacio” Monument and Mural (Mehan Garden, Ermita, Manila) and Commons:Deletion requests/Bonifacio Shrine in Manila, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Lion's Head (Kennon Road), Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:United Nations station, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Photographs of the Leyte Landing Memorial and c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Leyte Landing Memorial, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Malacañang Palace, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:New Clark City Athletics Stadium, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Oblation (University of the Philippines Diliman) and c:Commons:Deletion requests/Guillermo Tolentino statues, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:People Power Monument.jpg and c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:People Power Monument, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Philippine Arena, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Philippine International Convention Center, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Quezon Memorial Monument.jpg and c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with incategory:"Quezon Memorial Shrine", see also c:Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2020-09#File:Quezon memorial.jpg (failed undeletion request), Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:SM Mall of Asia, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkhia Mosque, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:TriNoma.jpg, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:WTNaga HMMM A11.JPG, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Murals in Manila, Wikimedia Commons
- ↑ w:en:Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 June 15#File:Memorare Manila Monument.jpg, English Wikipedia
- ↑ w:en:Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 September 30#File:People Power Monument (EDSA-White Plains, Quezon City; 2014-12-03).jpg, English Wikipedia
.jpg){kind=link}