You need to take it up with the flickr admins.
________________________________
From: Caroline Ford <caroline.ford.work(a)googlemail.com>
To: commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 3:30:08 PM
Subject: [Commons-l] "no copyright restrictions" - LSE Library & flickr
Hi
With some fanfare the LSE library have added some images from their
collection to flickr commons. As per the rules of flickr commons these
are listed as "no copyright restrictions". If you click on the LSE's
interpretation of "no copyright restrictions" they link to a very
non-free, personal, non-commercial licence.
Flickr's understanding of no copyright restrictions:
http://www.flickr.com/commons/usage/
BY ASSERTING "NO KNOWN COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS," PARTICIPATING
INSTITUTIONS ARE SHARING THE BENEFIT OF THEIR RESEARCH WITHOUT
PROVIDING AN EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED WARRANTY TO OTHERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO
USE OR REPRODUCE THE PHOTOGRAPH. IF YOU MAKE USE OF A PHOTO FROM THE
COMMONS, YOU ARE REMINDED TO CONDUCT AN INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS OF
APPLICABLE LAW BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH A PARTICULAR NEW USE.
The LSE Library's understanding of no copyright restrictions:
http://www2.lse.ac.uk/library/archive/flickr_rights_statement.aspx
"The
images published on our Flickr Commons photostream are all marked as
having ‘no known copyright restrictions’ attached to them. This means
that we are unaware of any current copyright restrictions for
displaying this selection of photographs from our collection within the
Flickr website, either because LSE owns the copyright, or the term of
copyright has expired, or because no evidence has been found that
copyright restrictions apply.
The
images on our photostream are meant to be used for personal,
educational or research purposes. To obtain high quality digital
copies, or to find out more about copyright terms for the reproduction
of specific works in our collection, please contact the Library's
Archives and Rare Books Division. Please note that it is our policy to
charge licensing fees for commercial use. "
I've complained here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lselibrary/3274389894/
The LSE replied:
Just to clarify on the copyright point.
Copyright in ‘No known copyright
restrictions’ refers to the rights of the
photographer. In the case of all the images
we have put on Flickr as far as we have been
able to establish copyright has either
expired or belongs to LSE. Licensing is
different, this applies to permission to
reproduce images. We have placed these
images under a ‘non-commercial licence’ which
means that they can be used freely for
personal and academic use. Charges only
apply if someone wanted to use the images for
commercial publications when we would have to
supply higher resolution images. This is
standard practice for commercial
publications. Flickr Commons has a code of
practice dictating what can be displayed on
the site and LSE adheres to this in all
respects.
Can they really claim copyright and licensing are different like this?
I know library thing had people upload images from this collection believing "no
copyright restrictions" meant PD. I expect some will end up on Commons too.
Caroline