Copyright in the Era of Flickr and Google
I need to make some preliminary explanations before I get to the heart of this story.
(1) This story is about digital photography -- but the general issues it raises apply equally well to almost any kind of intellectual property that can be represented digitally--meaning music, video, software programs, and more.
(2) I am an active and enthusiastic member of the flickr community. I use my flickr photostream to display my photographs to other flickr members, and to power the image management behind my Photoblog 2.0.
Within the flickr application, you can assign different access permissions to your photographs (essentially, available to the public, only to friends, or only to family). But in order for anyone to view your photos, and in order to use them in my own blog, access has to be set to public. This means that anyone can display my photos on the web, whether or not I've given them permission to do so.
(3) I've changed the name and identifying details of the person using photos from flickr without permission (which is what this story is about). For two reasons: it wouldn't be fair to identify the person (they didn't know I'd blog about it) and I'd also like to pursue my flickr addiction without personal acrimony.
(4) A flickr badge is a group of pictures from flickr that can be displayed on your own website. Flickr generates the code for you, using either HTML or Flash. The pictures must be marked for public access, and can be based around the work of everybody on flickr, a single flickr photographer's set, a Flickr group pool, or using tags (to name the most common way badges are generated). Photos can be set to be random or sequential. This page shows a Flash badge using my photos.
Got all that? OK. Here goes.
I am a member of a variety of group pools on flickr. In a group pool, photographers with interests in common all submit their photos, creating a kind of library.
Recently, I noticed on a fairly prominent blog a flickr badge consisting of random photos from one of the group pools I belong to. The blog author is the flickr administrator of this group pool. I will call him X (and the group in question Y).
I wrote X:
I'm writing to express a little concern about the flickr badge from the Y Group that is displayed on your blog. I assume that you are showing a random selection of photos from the group. While most people would be glad and flattered to have you display their photos (I certainly would), some of the photos in the Y Group are "all rights reserved" (mine, for example - which I accompany with a copyright notice).
So I think as a matter of form and respect, you need to ask permission. Perhaps this could be accomplished by starting a discussion thread on the group (and asking if anyone objects) so it wouldn't be a logistical nightmare. Or, as an opt-in mechansim, you could designate a unique tag for people to use if they want to be included in your display - and create your badge using the tag.
I really don't mean to be a pill here, but I think photo rights are quite important...
X responded as follows:
It took me a while to figure out how I was going to respond to your comments. As a professional photographer and designer I make a living selling my work ... [and] I share your concern over proper use and photographers rights. Having been a long time member of Flickr ... (not to mention many personal sites showing my work) I've seen my work stolen and passed off by others as their own work many times. So many times, in fact, that I do not put the majority of my photos ... on the web. If you value your work, and it sounds like you do, then I don't believe Flickr is the place for you to showcase it properly.
Flickr holds no discretion in who is able to view and use photos posted to groups. This is evident through the site flickrlicio.us which routinely republishes copyrighted material on their site without permission. The Flickr Badge which I (and countless others) use allows you to sample photos from a group or from everyone regardless of copyright status.
Out of respect for your wishes I have changed it to show only my photos I have posted on Flickr. I have, on file, permission from all but a few of the members of the Y Group allowing me to use their photos. For this reason I did not perceive there being a problem. For that I apologize. It was not my intent to offend you.
If the situation with the Flickr Badge continues to be a problem for you I urge you, in my official capacity as admin of the Y Group, to pursue this matter with Flickr (Yahoo!). You also might consider marking your photos as "private only available to family and friends" and setting your download permissions similarly so they are not abused.
Have a nice evening.
I wrote back:
Thank you for your email. I, too, have given your email quite a bit of thought. Where I come out is that I think you missed the point of my original email.
I was not asking you to remove the Y group badge from your site. In fact, I think the variety of photos from the group enhances your site, and that group members would be pleased to have their pictures shown in a badge on your site.
I was asking you to get appropriate permissions, which should not be a hard thing to do (you say that you already have these for most members). For one, I would be happy to extend permission for my photos.
My further suggestion was that you add a discussion thread to the group so that members (and potential members) would know the use you were making of the photos.
I also noted that you could use a special tag to generate a badge, which would allow people to opt-in to your badge display. (A private group by invitation would be yet another possibility.)
The fact that others make use of copyrighted materials without getting permission that you mention doesn't seem very relevant to me. As a general principle, if someone else does something wrong, this doesn't make it right for us to do it. The fact that you are a professional photographer (which I did not realize) should make you even more careful about rights issues.
Regarding your more general comments about flickr and the use I make of it, I am a very enthusiastic member of the flickr community, although I understand some of the drawbacks of widespread image dissemination that you mention. I'd be happy to discuss my uses of flickr, why I do so, and my strategies for dealing with these matters in another email if you'd like.
It's important to me that our discussion not turn acrimonious. As I indicated, I am a reader and fan of your Y blog (and have sent traffic to it via links on my sites). I also like the Y group on flickr. So I think you took my comments the wrong way -- I was suggesting a minor procedural fix to what you were doing, not scrapping the whole thing.
All this raises alot of interesting issues--and they don't have very much to do with flickr. The truth is that it is easy to find images on the web, for example using Google Images.
One way or the other anything you can find and view on the web, you can also copy and use for your own purposes. The only real limitation is that photos displayed on the web are not suitable for high quality reproduction.
Of course, having the ability to do something neither confers the legal right to do so nor makes it OK to do it. I own the rights to my photos, and nobody should be displaying them without my permission (which, by the way, I'm usually pretty happy to give).
Ultimately, there is an inherent conflict between intellectual property lockdown--which means no one gets to see your work--and the desire for dissemination that all intellectual property owners have for practical and emotional reasons. Your intellectal property is only safe if no one sees it, but photos that no one sees do not get appreciated in the marketplace (or otherwise).
By the way, the flickrlicio.us site that X mentions features the "Babes of Flickr"--and is a great deal of fun if you are into this kind of thing.
Posted by Harold Davis at November 2, 2005 07:52 PM
