Subject

Here is the relevant portion of the response from Benjamin A. Bautista, project director of UPMO Roads Management Cluster 1(B) of the w:en:Department of Public Works and Highways, via email, concerning the work if it is an architectural work or not (with regards to the undeletion of image file File:Binondo-Intramuros Bridge (view from Binondo side) 2022-04-10.jpg):

As per the Consultant and Designer of the Project, the team exerted finest effort to come up with a structurally stable design with artistic features that fits into the environment. In spite of its aesthetic features and characteristics, the design team does not consider it as archtectural [sic] work and would rather identify it as work of engineering.

The depicted structure situated in or visible from public space (e.g. a building, a bridge, a signage) in the  Philippines is ineligible for copyright as it is a simple or ordinary work with no architectural or artistic properties that would have made it a copyrighted structure. It may also be a work of an engineer (like an infrastructure), not of an architect. In several countries like South Korea and the United States, bridges are not among their copyrightable works. Notes: Different jurisdictions have different levels of originality with regards to works of art or architecture: see Threshold of originality for more details. In a few countries like France and Thailand, bridges may be among their copyrightable works. A building or a bridge is eligible for copyright if it is a true architectural work; images of such buildings or bridges are not allowed on Wikimedia Commons unless there is an applicable freedom of panorama (that allows commercial uses) in the jurisdiction where the building or the bridge is located; see Commons:Freedom of panorama for more details. For images of architecture that are in public domain, please use {{PD-old-architecture}}. Refer to its documentation for jurisdiction-specific tags. English ∙ Tagalog ∙ 한국어 ∙ slovenščina ∙ +/−