A couple of weeks ago, I received a request to remove a photo off of my “website” by a rather large public library. By the head of their marketing and communications department, no less.
Why? Because they decided to change the license on their Flickr account from Creative Commons to All Rights Reserved (which is where I found the photo).
Here’s the [edited] email they sent me:
“We are writing to you from [insert public library name here] to let you know about the current license on our photos available through flickr, and we note that you have a [insert public library name here] photo posted on your websites at http://www.slideshare.net/davidleeking/technology-trends-in-libraries-the-emerging-generation and http://www.slidesearch.org/slide/technology-trends-in-libraries-the-emerging-generation.
This will inform you that [insert public library name here] now has a license of ‘All Rights Reserved’ on all its flickr content, including the image you have posted on your site. All previous licenses, including of Creative Commons, are unequivocally revoked, and you are requested to remove the photo from your site within seven days.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter, and we’ll follow up in several days if you have questions about this request. Please email legal@[insert public library name here] to confirm that you have removed the photo from your site.”
Guess what? You can’t do that with a Creative Commons license. According to the Creative Commons website, CC licenses cannot be revoked. Creative Commons says this: “Once you apply a CC license to your material, anyone who receives it may rely on that license for as long as the material is protected by copyright and similar rights, even if you later stop distributing it” (found here).
Here’s what I emailed back to the library:
“As a reminder, once you use a creative Commons license, that license cannot be revoked – https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Considerations_for_licensors_and_licensees#Considerations_for_licensors
I won’t use the photo anymore, since it appears you have taken it offline (the link no longer works). But per Creative Commons licensing rules, my use of that particular photo was, is, and will be fine and legal, since it at one time had a Creative Commons license.”
So long story short, I won’t use that particular photo anymore. But I’m also not going to sift through a couple of slidedecks that I posted at slideshare.net (i.e., not my website) and remove one particular photo from them. Because the library can’t change the CC license, once given.
And so – a gentle reminder to you about Creative Commons licenses. Creative Commons licenses are great. They allow for easier sharing and remixing, and seem like something libraries should do. We are, after all, all about sharing, distributing, and remixing content of all shapes and sizes.
But think long and hard about applying a Creative Commons license to your content. Because as staff, departments, and priorities change, someone might want to change those CC licenses too. And you (the people who create and control the content) need to know what’s allowed and what’s not, what’s legal and what’s not, etc.
And a small side note on that legal thing – I’m a librarian, not a lawyer. Do Creative Commons rules hold up in court? Beats me. Hopefully I don’t have to find out!
CC logo from Creative Commons
Haha. Did they say anything to your last message?
Does creative commons transcend countries? I had that question.
No, not yet. We will see!
Good question – not sure…
If you look at the actual licenses, you’ll see that the newest versions are marked “International”. For instance, Attribution 4.0 International, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
So at least the newer versions are worded for international use.
You’re totally right, of course and it’s too bad that this library doesn’t understand enough of how the law works to understand this wrinkle in how CC licensing works. You were cooler than you needed to be about this.
Nice set of reminders about the ups and downs of working in this particular arena; knowing as much as you can about the resources you use; and not simply assuming that every note we receive actually merits the actions requested (and, often, demanded). I was once very surprised to receive a note directing me to remove a link to a video posted on YouTube by someone purporting to represent the academic library that had posted that video. Long story made short: I found a contact within the administration of that particular library; wrote a follow-up note to that administrator to request clarification; and wonder, to this day, what happened to the library-school student who overstepped boundaries by sending me the initial (unauthorized) letter.
Just wondering why you choose to omit the name of the offending library. “Thou shalt not impose accountability on other librarians”?
The lesson here is that when you use a creative commons licensed resource, you want to save the evidence of the license conveyance. That means save a copy of the website it came from.
On the other hand, it’s possible that the offending library never had clear license to the offending image, in which case the license you aquired was improperly granted. In that case the library should let you know that it believed its original CC license was invalid, which would be a very different situation, and you should certainly cooperate. But they shouldn’t try to go against their own license. that’s both reprehensible and legally indefensible.
Also, congrats on standing your ground.
The licenses work across national boundaries, but “ported” versions of the pre-4.0 licenses were written to account for the governing law of the licensor. There are things like fair-use/fairdealing, “moral rights”, database rights, etc. that are treated differently depending on jurisdiction. It’s not the case that a French CC license is limited to France, for example.
I saw you used an image from our CC Flickr collection (over 40k photos strong) in that presentation – and you cited it so thank you! Although if you wanted to make the citation font a little darker gray it wouldn’t hurt so it’s easier to read. 😉
We’ve had our CC photos on flickr used by HuffingtonPost & Wired (among other news agencies). We’ve had them online for almost 8 years now — not sure why a library wouldn’t want the free publicity from wider viewership.
Thanks for sharing- I learned something today.
You are welcome!
Referencing your article on Twelve Tips to Better Writing for the Mobile Web, in PPT for Friends if the Library chapters. So thanks for that gem as well.