copyright japan
Copyright status of election posters in Japan
<p>Imagine I take a picture of an election poster in Japan (example picture below).</p>

<p>Can I post it to Wikipedia? (CC-BY-SA 3.0 license or public domain)</p>

<p>What law(s) do apply?<br>
While general Japanese copyright law about 2D artworks <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan" rel="nofollow noreferrer">would not</a> allow reproduction to Wikipedia, is there a specific law covering election posters in particular?</p>

<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZvISA.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZvISA.png" alt="Election poster"></a></p>

<p>Assuming that <a href="http://www.cric.or.jp/english/clj/cl2.html" rel="nofollow">this translation</a> is correct, Article 10(viii) identifies photographic works as "works". Article 13 described works not covered (basically, legal documents of the government), and nothing resembling "campaign posters" is included. Article 21 states that the author has exclusive right to reproduce his work. There are no indications that posters used for political purposes, including electoral politics, are excluded from copyright protection. There <em>is</em> in Article 40 permission to "exploit, by any means, political speeches delivered in public and speeches delivered in the course of judicial proceedings" or "speeches not falling within the preceding paragraph, which are delivered in public by organs of the State or local public entities", but these fall under the penumbra of government documents.</p>

<p>Article 41 says that </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>For the purpose of reporting current events by means of photography,
  cinematography, broadcasting or otherwise, it shall be permissible to
  reproduce and exploit a work involved in the event or a work seen or
  heard in the course of the event, to the extent justified by the
  informatory purpose</p>
</blockquote>

<p>which might maybe cover your case. There are other government-action type permissions such as the Chief Librarian of the National Diet Library to archive information, which presumably are irrelevant. </p>

<p>The specific permission that you mention, Article  46, says:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>It shall be permissible to exploit artistic works permanently located
  in such open places as mentioned in paragraph (2) of the preceding
  Article and architectural works by any means not falling within any of
  the following items:</p>
  
  <p>(i) multiplication of a sculpture and offering it to the public by
  transfer of ownership of its copies;</p>
  
  <p>(ii) imitative reproduction of an architectural work and offering it
  to the public by transfer of ownership of its copies;</p>
  
  <p>(iii) reproduction of a work for the purpose of locating it
  permanently in such open places as mentioned in paragraph (2) of the
  preceding Article;</p>
  
  <p>(iv) reproduction of an artistic work exclusively for the purpose of
  selling its copies and sale of such copies.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>where the places are "in open places accessible to the public, such as streets and parks, or at places easily seen by the public, such as the outer walls of buildings". The ordinary interpretation of "artistic works" would not apply to a campaign poster, and at any rate they are not <em>permanently</em> located in such open places.</p>

<p>So, there is no political poster exception.</p>
