Personal Democracy Plus Our premium content network. LEARN MORE You are not logged in. LOG IN NOW >

Can the White House Really Say That Its Flickr Photos Can't Be Tweaked?

BY Nancy Scola | Thursday, May 12 2011

White House photo by Pete Souza, as altered by...well, who knows. It was on the Internet.

Here's a quick follow-up on the legal angle of that situation where a Brooklyn Hasidic paper apologized for erasing Hillary Clinton and another woman from that iconic White House Situation Room photo -- but only because doing so violated a ban on alterations that the Obama White House inserted into the Flickr caption on the photo. The U.S. Government Work designation that the White House photo was released under is generally interpreted to mean that this sort of thing is in the public domain. So, the question becomes, is there any real weight to the White House's "may not be manipulated in any way" order just because they put it in a Flickr caption? I consulted Electronic Frontier Foundation general counsel and legal director Cindy Cohn. Here's her take:

The public domain means public domain: the photo belongs to the public and the public can do what it wants with it. That photo has been altered and used in a bunch of ways online, some of them pretty funny. I would be curious to know if the White House has been complaining to those folks too. While I agree that the altering done by the newspaper, erasing the women, is personally offensive to me and could be misleading, it makes me even more nervous to have government officials believing that they are in the position of deciding which alterations to public domain materials are OK for the public to see and which are not.  

Of course, in this case, the White House didn't articulate any objection to what Der Tzeitung did to its photo. Der Tzeitzung belatedly objected to what Der Tzeitung did to the White House's photo. But the White House's no-alterations order did give the paper something to work with when it came time to issue an apology. More than anything, the incident points to the fact that there are still unsettled zones when it comes to how we make use of digital content in the civic space -- though in the U.S. things are still considerably more liberal on that front than, say, in the U.K.

As Cohn points out, there's been an online explosion of altered versions of that Sit Room photo, and no one has complained about them. She highlights as a particularly favorite the one above where sitting in on the U.S. national security session is the angry-looking tiny bridesmaid from the royal wedding.

News Briefs

RSS Feed thursday >

Beyond @Congressedits, Capitol Hill Looks for Entry to Wikipedia

As he recently told techPresident, the creator of Congressedits did not aim to make Members of Congress look bad, but said he hoped that they would recognize the importance of Wikipedia as a public space and engage more with its community. "If staffers and politicians identified as Wikipedians, that would be super. You could imagine politicians' home pages with a list of their recent edits, that they would be proud of the things that they are doing." On Capitol Hill, there is in fact interest in making that vision a reality, starting off with an initial conversation that could create a framework for more Wikipedians in Congress. GO

wednesday >

In the Philippines, Citizens Go Undercover With Bantay to Monitor Public Offices

The Philippines, a country of almost 100 million, is considered among the most corrupt country in Southeast Asia, despite a boost in Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index in the past few years (from 134th in 2010 to 94th in 2013 out of 175.) Corruption involves all levels of government, but benefits also from a mindset of tolerance, says Happy Feraren, the co-founder of Bantay.ph, an anti-corruption educational initiative that teaches citizens how to monitor the quality of government services, sometimes by going undercover. GO

More