from the you-have-to-be-kidding-me dept
Update: The British Library has now apologized, noting that a staff member presented inaccurate info. The no camera rule is still there, but they admit it has nothing to do with copyright.
On the whole, librarians tend to be really good on copyright issues, understanding the deeper nuances better than most. Apparently, however, the British Library — or whoever runs their Twitter feed — leans in the other direction. There was a bizarre exchange on Twitter today, kicking off with reporter Mathew Ingram, who is in NYC for a conference, tweeting a photo of the Periodicals Room at the NY Public Library, and noting that it was his “office this morning.” Another reporter, John Gapper, amusingly tweeted back a photo of his own “office” for the day, which happened to be the Humanities Reading Room at the British Library.
All in all, a little slice of life moment that’s often kind of fun to see on Twitter — two reporters noting how they’re working from public libraries, separated by an ocean, at the same time. Cool. Except… along comes the British Library with a ridiculous freakout. Its Twitter feed jumped into the conversation to demand that Gapper delete the photo
as being against the conditions of use. As a bunch of others started asking why, whoever handles the Twitter account for the British Library Reference Service started tweeting out a bunch of nonsensical claims about copyright
and other random arguments that make no sense.
Mathew first asked if the library was serious, and was told yes, and then when Jeff Jarvis asked why, the Library first said “all the more reason for not taking photos then!” which makes no sense at all, and then followed up with two ridiculous claims:
For collection items: copyright issues; for readers: they haven’t given their permission to be photographed.
Mathew pointed out that the copyright claim was absurd and that the people were in a public place. The UK isn’t Hungary after all. The British Library then tried to defend the copyright statement with a series of tweets:
for researchers making copies of books, though fails to note that those are what the library advises
people stay within to avoid copyright issues. And, once again, none of that has anything to do with the question of whether or not photography itself should be allowed at all, especially to just take a photo of the room, in which no actual books are seen.
All too often in debates about copyright issues, people get high and mighty about something they naturally assume to be true, using a sort of “because… copyright” argument. You’d hope that libraries and the people who work there would be more careful and knowledgeable, but apparently that doesn’t apply to the British Library. Either way, point taken. Next time I’m in the UK, I’ll find a friendlier “office for the day” than the confused British Library.
Filed Under: copyright, john gapper, libraries, library, mathew ingram, photos, public
Companies: british library