Usually identified as rights experts, academic librarians are in a unique position to provide copyright education in the digital humanities field through consultation, instruction, and other means to faculty and students.[3] Librarians sometimes position themselves as “reuse evangelists” who embrace the vision of Creative Commons by applying CC licenses as well as introducing CC licenses to the campus community through guides and webpages.[4] Yet, few discussions have been brought up about the limitations of CC licenses in the library community.[5] Drawing from scholarly literature from the law field and primary sources including lawsuits, websites, magazine articles, and newspaper articles involving this topic, this article intends to bring a critical perspective into the copyright education academic librarians provide by analyzing the four limitations of CC licenses in managing digital humanities projects intellectual property rights. In the law community, scholars have examined the limitations of open licensing and Creative Commons. Katz elaborated the mismatch of the vision of Creative Commons and its licensors as well as how the incompatibility of CC licenses may result in potential detriment to the dissemination of knowledge.[6] Scholars later have referred to Katz in extensive discussions of the limitations of CC licenses in different realms of copyrighted works. For example, Johnson investigated several limitations of CC licenses for entertainment media, including those with ShareAlike, NonCommercial, and NonDerivative licenses.[7] Lukoseviciene acknowledged the efficiency of CC licenses while pointing out its limitation in ensuring equity in a sharing culture.[8] When discussing the problems of CC licenses in data sharing, Khayyat and Bannisterechoed Katz’s critique on the limitation of CC licenses in combining copyrighted works with different types of licenses.[9] Scholars have also addressed problems related to intellectual property rights other than copyright when applying for CC licenses. For example, Hietnanen discussed the problems of license interpretation and concluded that although CC licenses are useful for “low value -high volume licensing,” it fails to address some important intellectual property rights including privacy and moral rights.[10] Burger demonstrated how CC commercial licenses have encouraged publicity right infringement in several cases.[11] Nevertheless, none of the above scholars discussed the implication of the limitations of CC licenses in digital scholarship. To solve the problem of excessive open-source licenses, Gomulkiewicz suggested a license-selection “wizard” modeling what Creative Commons offers, which demonstrates the limitation of CC licenses in managing the intellectual property rights of codes, a common component of many digital humanities projects.[12] This article does not aim to conduct a comprehensive assessment of pitfalls of CC licenses in digital scholarship or make legal recommendations to manage the intellectual property rights of digital humanities projects. Rather, it discusses the four limitations of CC licenses that are usually overlooked but essential for academic librarians to educate patrons in the digital humanities field. With the development of the digital humanities field and more students involved in it, academic librarians should educate both faculty scholars and emerging scholars about implications of applying CC licenses.[13] NOTES 1. Amanda Hornby and Leslie Bussert, "Digital Scholarship and Scholarly Communication," University of Washington Libraries, accessed November 30, 2016, https://www.uwb.edu/getattachment/tlc/faculty/teachingresources/newmedia. 2. Oya Y Rieger, “Framing Digital Humanities: The Role of New Media in Humanities Scholarship,” 15, no. 10 (October 11, 2010), First Monday http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3198. 3. Elizabeth Joan Kelly, "Rights Instruction for Undergraduate Students: Needs, Trends, and Resources," 25, no. 1 (2018): 1-16, College & Undergraduate Libraries https://doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2016.1275910 4. Daniel Hickey, "The Reuse Evangelist: Taking Ownership of Copyright Questions at Your Library," 51, no. 1 (2011): 9-11;“Research Guides: Image Resources: Creative Commons Images,”Creative Commons Images -Image Resources -Research Guides at UCLA Library,accessed April 28, 2019, ; “Finding Public Domain & Creative Commons Media: Images,”Research Guides,accessed April 28, 2019, Harvard are two good examples. Reference & User Services Quarterly https://guides.library.ucla.edu/c.php?g=180361&p=1185834 https://guides.library.harvard.edu/c.php?g=310751&p=2072816 and 5. Lewin-Lane et al., "The Search for a Service Model of Copyright Best Practices in Academic Libraries," , no. 2 (2018): 1-24. Harvard.For example, when conducting a literature review of the copyright education in academic libraries to search for best practices, does not discuss any limitation of CC licensesin this article. Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship 2 6. Zachary Katz, "Pitfalls of Open Licensing: An Analysis of Creative Commons Licensing," 46, no. 3 (2006): 391-413. Idea: The Intellectual Property Law Review 7. Eric E.Johnson,"Rethinking Sharing Licenses for Entertainment Media," 26, no. 2 (2008): 391-440. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal 8. AurelijaLukoseviciene, "Beyond the Creative Commons Framework of Production and Dissemination of Knowledge," . http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1973967 9. Mashael Khayyat and Frank Bannister,“Open Data Licensing: More than Meets the Eye,” Information Polity: 20 (4): 231–52, . The International Journal of Government & Democracy in the Information Age https://doi:10.3233/IP-150357 10. Herkko Hietanen, “The Pursuit of Efficient Copyright Licensing: How Some Rights Reserved Attempts to Solve the Problems of All Rights Reserved,” Lappeenranta University of Technology, 2008. 11. Christa Engel Pletcher Burger, “Are Publicity Rights Gone in a Flash?: Flickr, Creative Commons, and the Commercial Use of Personal Photographs,” 8(2009):129, . Florida State Business Review https://ssrn.com/abstract=1476347 12. Robert W Gomulkiewicz, “Open Source License Proliferation: Helpful Diversity or Hopeless Confusion?” 30 (2009): 261;Expanded Academic ASAP, accessed April 28, 2019, . Washington University Journal of Law & Policy http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A208273638/EAIM?u=csunorthridge&sid=EAIM&xid=4bbf2442 13. Jacob H. Rooksby, “A Fresh Look at Copyright on Campus,” (Summer 2016):769;General OneFile, accessed April 27, 2019, . Missouri Law Review http://link.galegroup.com.libproxy.csun.edu/apps/doc/A485538679/ITOF?u=csunorthridge&sid=ITOF&xid=1f2822f3 14. “eScholarship: Copyright & Legal Agreements,” accessed December 1, 2016, http://escholarship.org/help_copyright.html#creative. 15. “Directory of Open Access Journals,” DOAJ, accessed December 1, 2016, . https://doaj.org 16. “Frequently Asked Questions—Creative Commons,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://creativecommons.org/faq/#do-i-need-to-register-with-creative-commons-before-i-obtain-a-license 17. “Copyright in General,”U.S.Copyright Office, accessed July 30, 2019, https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html. 18. “Why Should I Register My Work If Copyright Protection Is Automatic?,”Copyright Alliance,accessed July 28, 2019, https://copyrightalliance.org/ca_faq_post/copyright-protection-ata/. 19. “Copyright Basics,” U.S. Copyright Office and Library of Congress, accessed November 30, 2016. https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf#page=7. 20. Phil Clapham,“Are Creative Commons Licenses Overly Permissive? The Case of a Predatory Publisher,”BioScience(2018):842-43, accessed April 20, 2019, ; Cornelius Puschmann and Marco Bastos,“How Digital Are the Digital Humanities? An Analysis of Two Scholarly Blogging Platforms,” 10, no. 2 (2015), accessed April 20, 2019. . https://doi:10.1093/biosci/biy098 Plos One https://doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115035 21. “Why Your Blog Images Are aTicking Time Bomb,” , accessed December 2, 2016, . Koozai.com https://www.koozai.com/blog/content-marketing-seo/blog-sued-for-images/ 22. John W. White and HeatherGilbert eds., (West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 2016), ProQuest Ebook Central. Laying the Foundation: Digital Humanities in Academic Libraries 23. “Considerations for Licensors and Licensees—Creative Commons,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Considerations_for_licensors_and_licensees 24. “The Terms ‘Revocable’ and ‘Irrevocable’in License Agreements: Tips and Pitfalls,” accessed December 7, 2016, http://www.sidley.com/news/the-terms-revocable-and-irrevocable-in-license-agreements-tips-and-pitfalls-02-21-2013. 25. Mark Seeley and Lois Wasoff, “Legal Aspects and Copyright-15,”in edited byRobert Campbell, Ed Pentz,and Ian Borthwick (Cambridge, UK: Elsevier Ltd, 2012), 355-83. Academic and Professional Publishing, 26. Douglas MacMillan, “Fight Over Yahoo’s Use of Flickr Photos,” , November 25, 2014, sec. Tech, . Wall Street Journal http://www.wsj.com/articles/fight-over-flickrs-use-of-photos-1416875564 27. “Flickr Apologizes but What About CC Abuses by Others?,” accessed December 7, 2016, . http://www.artists-bill-of-rights.org/news/campaign-news/flickr-apologizes-but-what-about-cc-abuses-by-others?/ 28. “The Terms ‘Revocable’ and ‘Irrevocable’ in License Agreements: Tips and Pitfalls,” accessed December 7, 2016, . http://www.sidley.com/news/the-terms-revocable-and-irrevocable-in-license-agreements-tips-and-pitfalls-02-21-2013 29. “Legal Code—Creative Commons,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Legal_code 30. “Why CC-BY?—OASPA,” accessed December 7, 2016, . http://oaspa.org/why-cc-by/ 31. “Why CC-BY?—OASPA.” 32. “Intellectual Property Policy,”The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, accessed July 28, 2019, . https://mellon.org/grants/grantmaking-policies-and-guidelines/grantmaking-policies/intellectual-property-policy/ 33. “Why I’m Giving up on Creative Commons on YouTube,” , September 6, 2014, . Eddie.com http://eddie.com/2014/09/05/why-im-giving-up-on-creative-commons-on-youtube/ 34. “Creative Commons—Attribution 4.0 International—CC BY 4.0,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 35. “Why I’m Giving up on Creative Commons on YouTube.” 36, “Creative Commons—Attribution 4.0 International—CC BY 4.0.” 37. “Why I’m Giving up on Creative Commons on YouTube.” 38. “Creative Commons—Attribution 4.0 International—CC BY 4.0.” 39. Ibid. 40. “CC Search,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://search.creativecommons.org/ 41. “Creative Commons—Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International—CC BY-NC-SA 4.0,” accessed December 7, 2016, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode. 42. “U.S. Copyright Office Fair Use Index,”U.S. Copyright Office, accessed April 21, 2019, . https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/ 43. Ibid. 44. Ibid. 45. Jerry D Campbell,“Intellectual Property in a Networked World: Balancing Fair Use and Commercial Interests,” 19, no. 2 (1995): 179-84, ; Igor Slabykh,“Ambiguous Commercial Nature of Use in Fair Use Analysis,” 46, no. 3 (2018): 293-339. Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory https://doi:10.1016/0364-6408(95)00020-A AIPLA Quarterly Journal 46. “Defending Noncommercial Uses: Great Minds v Fedex Office,” Creative Commons, August 30, 2016, . https://creativecommons.org/2016/08/30/defending-noncommercial-uses-great-minds-v-fedex-office/ 47. “Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services,” Bitlaw, accessed December 7, 2016, . http://www.bitlaw.com/source/cases/copyright/pup.html#IIIA 48. Justia, “Great Minds v. FedEx Office & Print Services, Inc,”Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Center, March 21, 2018, . https://fairuse.stanford.edu/case/great-minds-v-fedex-office-print-services-inc/ 49. Minjeong Kim,“The Creative Commons and Copyright Protection in the Digital Era: Uses of Creative Commons Licenses,” 13, no. 1 (2007): 187-209, ; “Directory of Open Access Journals,” DOAJ, accessed December 1, 2016, . Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication https://doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00392.x https://doaj.org 50. “FEATURE: Creative Commons: Copyright Tools for the 21st Century,” accessed December 7, 2016, . http://www.infotoday.com/online/jan10/Gordon-Murnane.shtml 51. “The Creative Commons and Copyright Protection in the Digital Era: Uses of Creative Commons Licenses.” 52. Ibid. 53. “Creative Commons—Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International—CC BY-SA 4.0,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode#s6a 54. “17 U.S. Code § 101—Definitions,” Legal Information Institute, accessed April 20, 2019, . https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101 55. “Creative Commons—Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International—CC BY-NC-ND 4.0,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode 56. “Creative Commons—Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International—CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.” 57. The famous Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music case established that a commercial parodycould qualify as fair use. 58. Katz, “Pitfalls of Open Licensing,”411. 59. “Professional Ethics,”Tools, Publications & Resources, American Library Association, February 6, 2019, . http://www.ala.org/tools/ethics 60. “Creative Commons—Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International—CC BY-SA 4.0,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ 61. Molly Houweling,“The New Servitudes,” 96, no. 3 (2008): 885-950. Georgetown Law Journal 62. “Compatible Licenses,” Creative Commons,accessed December 7, 2016, . https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses/ 63. Katz, “Pitfalls of Open Licensing,”391; Susan Corbett, “Creative Commons Licences,the Copyright Regime and the Online Community: Is There a Fatal Disconnect?,” 74, no. 4 (2011):506, . The Modern Law Review http://www.jstor.org/stable/20869091 64. Lawrence Lessig,“Against Transparency,” , October 8, 2009, . New Republic https://newrepublic.com/article/70097/against-transparency 65. “Creative Commons CEO Apologizes To Virgin Mobile—Stock Photography News, Analysis and Opinion,” accessed December 7, 2016, . https://www.selling-stock.com/Article/creative-commons-ceo-apologizes-to-virgin-mob 66. “Frequently Asked Questions,”Creative Commons, accessed July 30, 2019, . https://creativecommons.org/faq/#how-are-publicity-privacy-and-personality-rights-affected-when-i-apply-a-cc-license 67. “Defending Noncommercial Uses: Great Minds v Fedex Office,” Creative Commons, August 30, 2016, . https://creativecommons.org/2016/08/30/defending-noncommercial-uses-great-minds-v-fedex-office/ 68. Andrea Maloneet al., “Center Stage: Performing a Needs Assessment of Campus Research Centers and Institutes,” 57, no.4 (2017): 406–19, . Journal of Library Administration https://doi:10.1080/01930826.2017.1300451 69. Laura Gordon-Murnane,“FEATURE: Creative Commons: Copyright Tools for the 21st Century,” , accessed December 7, 2016, . Information Today http://www.infotoday.com/online/jan10/Gordon-Murnane.shtml 70. Ibid. Originally published as “ ” with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Attribution Confusion
