7. I give my permission for you to...

I haven't had much time this week to engage with the 23 mobile things topic of photos + apps + maps. This weekend I plan to do a walk around town and take some pics. For now though, seeing as copyright is in my head following on from yesterday's post, I thought I'd have a look at the copyright issues around adding photos to Historypin and WhatWasThere. Here's the discussion question posed on the ANZ 23 mobile things blog:

What happens with the photographs you are uploading to these sites? Do you still own the content? Are there any issues with copyright?

The answers to these questions are available in the terms of service (TOS). These aren't found in the apps themselves, but are easily found on their websites. They are rather long, complex documents although I think some effort (especially in the case of Historypin) has been made to avoid legalese and use common language.

public domain image

It's clear from the TOS that you continue to own any images that you take and upload in regards to both of these apps. But through the act of uploading it (publishing it) you enter into a licensing agreement with the companies that own the apps which basically says that you give them permission to use, modify, reproduce (and so on) your image in a variety of ways. Historypin actually lets you choose the type of license you want to have for your content, which is great! WhatWasThere on the other hand, doesn't. Also Historypin is a non-profit organisation whereas WhatWasThere is not. Just remember, licenses and contracts override copyright law, which is why it's so important to know what you're signing up for when you contribute content to sites like these.

In regards to copyright, the most dangerous thing you can do is upload an image that you didn't take, and for which you don't hold copyright. By uploading it to the site, you are claiming it as your work, so you'd better make sure that's really what it is!

Also, better not modify an image in any way - don't use a photo editor to paint the town hall red and then post it to the site! Not having read the TOS is not a good defence if you've breached copyright...

One annoying thing they tend to say in the TOS is they can change it at anytime, so check back regularly. They really hold all the cards, don't they?

6. Copyright copywrong

Today I attended a copyright information session for work during which I learnt some very interesting things. A surprising one is that the library I work at does not meet the legal definition of a library because its resources are not available to the general public and we do not offer an interlibrary loan service!

Creative commons license attribution

The session slides are up on Slideshare here. Another thing I learnt is that there are large sections of copyright law that are considered 'grey areas', and that many of these grey areas are to do with digital content. For example, is it ever a breach of copyright to publish hyperlinks? No one has ever been prosecuted for it, but it remains a grey area.

The points the presenter made about publishing on social media were also interesting. Contracts and licences override copyright. Whenever you sign up to a social media site such as Facebook, Twitter, Blogger or Instagram for example, you are agreeing with their terms of service which are not always favourable to the individual. I decided to have a careful look at Blogger's Terms of Service, which come under the broader Google Terms of Service. Of particular interest is what social media sites say they will do with content uploaded by users. Have a look for yourself, but they basically say that you're giving Google a licence to use your content for a wide range of activities that they define in the TOS, but which seems to be limited to operating, promoting and improving Google services.

That's what I've agreed to by starting this blog...

It was clear from today's presentation that copyright law isn't keeping up to date with what we are able to do with digital technology, both as individuals and organisations. The Australian Digital Alliance are pushing to right this copyright imbalance that is being discussed as part of the present copyright inquiry in Australia. They have produced a nice interactive micro-site full of copyright wrongs - check it out here.

A fun fact from the microsite to finish with - did you know that it is an infringement of copyright law to include a YouTube video in a presentation to colleagues at work or at a conference? You can show them the clip on the YouTube site however, if I understand correctly. This copyright law is a very tricky business!