Re: Flickr
The problem for educators with Flickr and the other photo/video sharing
services, is that many authorities use their filtering software to
prevent access to such sites. There's a lot of images featuring naked
bodies, or bits of them, on such sites; most authorities want to make
such stuff impossible to access at least on school equipment.
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: elearning projects group: museums and galleries, libraries and
archives [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of James Cummings
Sent: 27 July 2006 10:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Image Banks for Schools
Roger Broadie wrote:
> Colin,
>
> Your phrase 'copy for classroom use only and without infringing
> copyright at all' is not as simple as it sounds. You do go on to say
> 'that pupils can use in their own work' but this also cannot be taken
as a simple statement.
>
> What pupils need to be able to do is dis-aggregate content completely,
> even down to using parts of images. Then they need not just permission
> to copy but permission to completely re-purpose in whatever way they
> like (as long as moral rights of original creators are respected, e.g.
> images not being associated with material damaging to the reputation
of the creator.).
>
> Then on top of this, only being able to publish their work in the
> classroom is very restrictive in these days of the Internet and
learning platforms.
> They need permission to re-publish images in their work, to important
> constituents such as family or peers they are working with
> collaboratively, who are possibly in schools in other countries.
>
>
> If you compare this statement of requirement with the terms and
> conditions in the small print in museum/gallery/library/archive
> websites, you will find a considerable mis-match.
I suggested to Colin offline that he might want to consider mentioning
www.flickr.com particularly because of the issues you mention here.
These are photos from the public, but many have been Creative Commons
licensed. This means that schoolchildren (as others) have free access to
millions of images that are properly licensed for their use. See
http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/ and of course
http://www.creativecommons.org/ for more information.
For example there are currently some 1,886,041 photos on flickr that are
licensed as CC Attribution. This means that they only have to provide
attribution as to who took the photo, but are free to chop it up, re-use
it, and even sell it commercially! The real benefit of this is that
schoolchildren learn to *cite* the resources they use. This is
something that most British schoolchildren haven't mastered by the time
they get to (and in many cases
through) University. So teaching them to credit the people whose
resources they use is a very very good thing.
In addition to the CC+by photos, flickr has 2,418,957 which are licensed
as CC Attribution Non-commercial (so they are allowed to make derivative
works based on the images as long as they say who took the photo and
don't sell it).
And 4,970,696 photos on flickr are CC Attribution Non-commercial
Share-A-Like (so they are allowed to make derivative works based on the
images as long as they say who took the photo, don't sell it, and in
turn license it as
CC+by+nc+sa, thus making the freedoms inherent in the photo licensing
CC+by+nc+hereditary.)
There are 1,315,594 which are CC Attribution Share-A-Like (so they are
allowed to make derivative works based on the images as long as they say
who took the photo, and in turn license it as CC+by+sa, but are allowed
to sell it if they want).
There are also many private websites that have properly licensed their
images.
For example, I have a family website filled with thousands of holiday
snaps which are all licensed under a creative commons license.
The problem is that museums/galleries/libraries/archives have a vested
interest in maintaining image reproduction as a revenue stream so are
unlikely ever to use such useful licensing as creative commons. But,
for the resources you create privately (or at work if your institution's
IPR policy allows), I would urge everyone to properly consider licensing
their work. Putting it up on the web isn't enough, it is still
defaultly under copyright and we aren't allowed to use it if you don't
also license us to do so.
-James
--
Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford James dot
Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk Ask me about free long-term
preservation for your electronic texts!
|