free images & the fine print
Five tips for sourcing, understanding, and clearing public domain and Creative Commons works.
Many copyright complaints and takedown notifications are not caused my someone intending to use a work without permission. More often, the cause is a missing record of where the work came from, or a lack of understanding around the layers of rights that may be involved in the use. Although documentation will not transform an infringing action into a lawful use, it does provide evidence of your due diligence, move you towards compliance, and carry real significance with most copyright holders, particularly when the infringement was accidental or the result of a misleading third-party source.
These best practices are not foolproof, but they are my top five tips for using works from online resources with more confidence and reliability.
Tip 01. Maintain a rights register
Create a centralized folder structure and log to track content sources. Build it at the time you source the work, not after the fact, when the work may have been removed from the source location or the online rights profile may have been changed.
How you organize the register depends on the type of use. For my blog articles, for example, I keep a folder structure sorted by publication date containing a screenshot of the source image and the corresponding license, along with an entry in a centralized log, also organized by date. For my digital collages, the same material is sorted by year and the title of the work. The structure changes, but the components of the log itself remain consistent. Types of information documented include:
Source of the work. This may be the name of the website, the company, or the organization sharing the work.
Copyright holder. This is usually the creator of the work, although in some cases, a separate copyright holder may be clearly listed.
Source URL. Track the specific page where the work was found, not the site homepage or search results page.
License type. This may be a Creative Commons license, a public domain notification, or another form of online license.
Creation date. If the source site lists it, record the date the work was created. This is critical when the work is identified as public domain based on the creation and/or publication date.
Source date. Record the date you downloaded or sourced the work, which will provide a clear record of the licensing terms as they stood at the time of use.
Screenshot or printout. Keep a capture of the source page showing the work along with any attribution, licensing, or relevant terms information.
Keep the log current along with corresponding visual documentation. This information helps protect you if the source site changes or the content is removed from its online repository. Store the register and all documentation in one location that is easy to access, easy to maintain, and that is backed for safekeeping.
This practice is the foundation the other four tips are built on. The questions a rights holder asks will center on where the material came from and what you documented as your reasoning at the time.
Tip 02. Use reputable sources
A license or public domain designation is only as reliable as the source. If you cannot verify who retains the rights and how the source came to host the work, the source is questionable. A few example scenarios help contextualize the vetting process and how to think about source identification.
Example 01.
Scenario. You find an illustration on the Library of Congress website. The site lists the creation date as 1918. The illustration does not appear to contain logos, brand names, or other elements that would require third-party permissions.
Risk Assessment. Green flag
Next Steps. I would proceed with the use, updating my rights tracking log and capturing the source information before using the work.
Example 02.
Scenario. You find an icon on Wikipedia with no creation date listed, although it looks contemporary. The file is listed under a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY). The page names the original creator and links to their online portfolio, where the same CC BY license appears and the site looks legitimately maintained by the artist. You compare the icon against similar work online and find the design to be generic.
Risk Assessment. Orange flag
Next Steps. The source appears sound, but there is always risk in using works from user-supported sites like Wikipedia or the Internet Archive. Tracing the license back to the creator, evaluating their portfolio, and confirming the same license in both places reduces that risk considerably. Comparing the work against similar icons online offers further assurance that it is unlikely to infringe other rights. I would document the work and proceed with caution.
Example 03.
Scenario. You find a 2016 photo on Flickr, but the creator’s portfolio is a mix of design styles and content types combined with memes and movie stills. The license type is listed as public domain. You attempt to contact the portfolio owner for more information about the work and never receive a response after repeated attempts.
Risk Assessment. Red flag
Next Steps. I would abandon the image. A reverse image search might reveal where the photo originated, but the contents of the portfolio and the absence of any response are strong indications that the uploader is not the rights holder. Treat the use as high risk and find a replacement.
The online world is an amazing thing, but it is also full of aggregation sites that are high risk to source from, such as Google Images or Pinterest. Target viable repositories instead, such as museum and library collections, government archives, institutional digital collections, and established stock agencies. Even then, read the site terms and any licensing language carefully, since additional restrictions often sit alongside an asset-by-asset license.
Tip 03. Understand the layers
Public domain, Creative Commons, and other license types describe only one facet of rights. Content can often have several layers, and clearing the top layer does not necessarily mean the rights are fully cleared. For example, a photograph taken at an event may require permission from the photographer, model releases for identifiable individuals, a property release from the venue, and permission from an artist whose work appears in the scene. A presentation may carry separate rights in each image and graphic, in the fonts, and in the design itself. A digital file of a painting shown by a museum still requires permission from the artist unless the underlying work has fallen into the public domain. With more complex works such as musical recording, film clips, and immersive experiences, the layers multiply and can become more difficult to untangle.
A habit worth building is to look beyond the license and at the work itself. Ask yourself what is actually in the scene, who else may have contributed to the work in some way, and whether the individual, company, or institution licensing the work has the authority or went through the process to clear any of those embedded rights. A single license may not always cover every element of a work and those rights issues may surface later.
These examples are not meant to cause concern, but to build awareness that rights may be layered, that the layers are important, and that learning to spot them is a skill worth developing. I will share some questions you can work with to better understand embedded rights when evaluating a third-party work in a future post.
04. Match the rights
Even when the source is reputable and the layers are understood, there is another aspect where rights can get tricky. Specifically, online and open source licenses can often carry conditions, and those conditions vary more than then license name or description may suggest. Be aware what you intended to do with a work before making an commitment to use, and keep a close eye on the following four conditions, which are the ones most likely to appear in these types of licenses, such as Creative Commons.
Modification rights. Where you want to crop, recolor, overlay text, or adapt the work, a NoDerivatives license (such as CC BY-ND or CC BY-NC-ND) does not allow modifications to be made to the original work. If your final design or creative work requires the source material to change, confirm that adaptation is permitted before you start.
Commercial use. A NonCommercial license (such as CC BY-NC or CC BY-NC-SA) does not allow the work to be used in a commercial context. A blog carrying advertising, a website that markets a service, or a nonprofit selling merchandise could all be considered commercial use. Where the use supports a business or a monetization activity, it is best to treat a NonCommercial license as a blocker.
Attribution. Attribution covers whether credit is required, what is must include, and where it should appear. An Attribution license (all CC BY licenses) requires that credit be given to the creator when using the work. This includes identifying the creator, including a copyright notice, a reference to the license, and a link to the original material. Failing to include the attribution line is a violation of the license. It is also recommended that you take a capture of the page with the credit line as evidence in case the page is migrated or changed at a later date.
ShareAlike. These license types (such as CC BY-SA or CC BY-NC-SA) require that the work created with the source material be licensed under the same license as the original. They are intended to build out and strengthen the open community, but they can also impact your control over the new work. It is important to understand what you are agreeing to before using a work under these terms.
In all of these cases, record the license type and any requirements that accompany the use. Confirm that you can meet those requirements, and if not, either replace the work or contact the creator to obtain more expansive rights. More information about Creative Commons and its licenses is available at https://creativecommons.org.
05. Hit the road
The most important advice I can give is to be willing to walk away. When you cannot find the creator of a work, when the source site is questionable, when the layers of rights are unclear, or when you cannot obtain the rights you need, there is usually another work out there that will serve the purpose. It is rare that a work is irreplaceable, and taking on legal risk or violating a creator’s rights is not an acceptable course of action. When a replacement is needed, a few approaches tend to work better than scratch.
Return to the source. If the work came from a reputable source, such as a museum collection or a government archive, that same collection may hold adjacent material. Collections are often built around specific subjects, topics, or time periods, so neighboring works may be a close match and carry the information you need to proceed with the use.
Source broadly. Many repositories contain content well beyond what their name suggests. For example, the CDC does not hold images related only to health and medicine, but also everyday life, technology, and more. The Library of Congress has an amazing historical collection alongside contemporary works created by the government or dedicated to the public domain. A future article will cover specific resources in more depth, but in the meantime, assume most repositories are deeper and more expansive than you expect.
Search widely. What you need from a work varies by purpose, whether that is what an image conveys, a design style, a composition or color palette, or something else entirely. Thinking broadly about search terms will surface more than a narrow or limited query. For example, the social share image for this article came from the Library of Congress, and after search for terms like record, type, typewriters, and filing, I found what I wanted with stenographer.
Be bold. Never hesitate to reach out to a creator or rights holder to inquire about a work. A short, specific message explaining who you are and how you want to use the work is answered more often than people expect, and permission is often granted, especially for uses that are noncommercial. The worst that can happen is they may say no.
It is important to remember that some of the pleasure of content research, sourcing, and provenance is in the hunt, so don’t hesitate to open back up your search and see what else is out there.
Disclaimer. This article is intended for general education and not as legal advice. For specific questions, consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction. All decisions you make are your responsibility.
