Ethics

To answer the member’s questions, we must start with the fundamentals.

When accepting a donation of culturally significant photos, an archive should have a donor agreement or other documentation that addresses the following things:

Does the donor solely own the physical photos?

Is physical ownership being given to your institution?

Who authored the pictures?  If not a company, what is their name and birthdate?

Does the donor solely own the copyrights?

Is copyright ownership being given to your institution? If not, what permission comes with the physical donation?

May the receiving institution license use by others (a “transferable license”)?

Were the copyrights registered?

Are there any reservations or conditions on this gift?

If donated as part of a will, obtain a copy of the will.

What is the value of the gift? (for tax purposes, if the donor wants to claim a deduction)

Confirming the scope of the donation, the conditions, and value of the gift creates a firm basis for future decisions, including how to address the potential risks of posting pictures of minors.

It is also helpful to get as much additional information as you can at the time of the donation:

To the best of the donor’s ability, what is the date, place, and identity of those in the pictures?  What else of significance is being depicted?

What type of equipment was used to product the images?

Why were the images gathered?

Who collected the images?

Why is this collection significant; why should it be preserved and made available to the public?

Why does this collection fit into the mission of your institution?

Knowing as much as possible about the provenance and purpose of a collection makes it easier to access the protections built into the law for journalism and scholarship.  And with that background, it is easier to assess the risks when the collection involves human subjects.[1]

Those risks include:

Will this content be used by the institution in a way that violates New York’s bar on use of names and likenesses for commercial use? [2]

Are there any ethical considerations that bar including these images in the collection?

Is this depicting any personal health information?

Are there special sensitivities we must consider and plan for?[3]

Will the names of those depicted be included in the metadata of the digital archive?  If so, why is that necessary?

When it comes to minors (those under 18), additional risks are:

Will this reveal a minor’s youthful offender status?

Will this reveal participation in the social services system?

Does this depict an illegal act?

If the answer to any of the last eight questions is “yes,” a consultation with a lawyer, and perhaps an an image-by-image review, may be warranted.  But while that may time time and resources, it may be worth it, since there still may be a way to digitize the photos and make them available via the internet…especially if they have sentimental, cultural, historical and academic value to our region and beyond.

[1] At an academic institution, if the images depict human subjects (of any age) consult the Institutional Review Board (“IRB”).  Depending on how you design your project, it could be important.

[2] Here is the actual text of the law: “§  50.  Right  of privacy. A person, firm or corporation that uses for advertising purposes, or for the purposes of trade, the  name,  portrait or  picture  of  any  living  person  without  having first obtained the written consent of such person, or if a minor of his or  her  parent  or guardian, is guilty of a misdemeanor.”

[3] Depictions of exploitation, enslavement, abuse, or images that could be considered an “illegal sex act” (as defined by §130 the penal law) for instance.  From the sound of it, that is not the case here, but at “Ask the Lawyer!” we try to be thorough.

Wow.  There is really just no hum-drum day for librarians, is there?

Okay, let’s take this in stages.

First, the member’s question starts with the premise that the alteration of certain documents is illegal.  That premise is correct.   And although there are any number of crimes such alteration could be (depending on the type of document), here in New York, the catch-all term would be “Forgery.”  

Forgery [1] is a crime that comes in many degrees, but whatever degree, it involves the act of falsely making or altering a document (meaning the forger invented it wholly, or—as in the scenario—somehow manipulates or alters the original).  However, it is important to note that a critical element of Forgery, no matter what degree, is the intent to defraud, deceive, or cause injury.

Second, the member raises the concern that, if library staff assist a patron who turns out to be a forger, they could risk being implicated in the crime—or feel an obligation to report what they have seen.  While I found no case law addressing this precise scenario, these are valid concerns.   

We’ll start with some good news: for staff to be (legally) implicated, they would have to be aware of the forger’s criminal intent.  In other words, the staff would have to know that the person was planning to defraud, deceive, or cause injury; the mere suspicion would not make them part of a crime [2].  

That said, if the content visible on the screen makes it difficult to ignore a crime in progress (for instance, the manipulation of child pornography) or the possibility of imminent harm to another (someone changing the checkboxes on a Power of Attorney, for example), both library operational integrity, and staff well-being, may require removing personal service, removing privileges, and/or alerting law enforcement.

Unfortunately, after looking at case law, guides from the ALA, and numerous policies in the field, I could find no graceful way for staff to simply discontinue service, without telling a patron why.  Since staff assistance is in many ways as much of a right (once it is routinely provided) as access to your collection and technology, withholding it without a clear basis is a due process concern (for public libraries) and a professional ethics [3]/best practices concern (for private libraries).

That said, I can offer the following steps to making sure staff are ready to address this difficult situation: 

First, every employee and volunteer assisting patrons should have the phrase “service to patrons, in accordance with established policies and procedures” in their employee handbook, job description or volunteer letter (the wording doesn’t have to be precisely this, but the requirement of staff to follow library policies should be express).

Second, an institution providing access to “maker equipment” (computers, scanners, 3D printers, recording devices, tools, etc), should have a posted, public policy forbidding use of library equipment for illegal activity.  Something like:

 “Use of library equipment for illegal activity is forbidden. Examples of illegal activity include  but are not limited to: manipulating illegal content, engaging in forgery (falsely altering documents), gaining unauthorized access to other computers or networks, and 3D printing of illegal devices.  Staff assisting you, who suspect illegal activity, are authorized to discontinue assistance, and the library may discontinue your library access and contact law enforcement.  Patrons using technology to alter official or signed documents should be aware that such activity may be perceived as potentially in violation of this policy.”

As with any library policy impacting access and privileges (including staff assistance), such a policy should have an established procedure, and at least one level of appeal. [4]

Third, staff and volunteers should be trained [5] on how to withdraw service while honoring the rights of patrons.  A very simple policy (coordinated with current bylaws and other institutional policies before implementation [6]), such as the generic one below, could assist with balancing staff well-being with patron rights:

POLICY

It is the policy of the library that, to promote the integrity of operations, and the well-being of staff, use of library equipment and staff services in furtherance of illegal activity is forbidden.  

Staff concerned that a patron’s use of library technology may violate the law shall withdraw their services and/or patron access to the technology, per the below procedure.

In making this policy, the library re-affirms that unless authorized by law, patron records, including those generated by the use of technology, are confidential, and that users of the library technology have a right to privacy. 

In making this policy, the library re-affirms that all patrons are entitled to excellent service and access, and that such service and access shall not be removed without due process.

PROCEDURE

A staff member identifies a potential violation, withdraws from the patron, and consults a supervisor to confirm that withdrawing service and/or access is appropriate.

If the supervisor, upon further assessment, agrees that the use violates the policy, and that withdrawing service and/or access is appropriate, the supervisor will initiate the removal, and provide in writing to the patron:

On [DATE], your access to [/SERVICE/TECHNOLOGY] was removed, on the basis that the use was barred under our posted policy (copy enclosed).  This removal may be appealed by sending a letter of appeal to [PERSON], at [ADDRESS] by [DATE].   The library respects your privacy and does not require you to appeal or to provide any further information regarding this matter, unless you choose to do so.

If an appeal is filed, the [PERSON TO WHOM APPEAL IS DIRECTED] shall consult leadership and legal counsel as needed, and shall notify the patron, in writing, as to the result of the appeal within [#] business days.

If there is concern that IMMINENT HARM may be caused by patron use of technology, staff shall immediately alert XXXX, who shall determine if law enforcement must be called, or if there are any additional immediate action take, per governing procedures.

I am sorry to not have a more graceful solution, but I cannot advise that staff simply withdraw services and not return to the patron.  I have designed the above generic policy to provide a “uh-oh” moment for the patron, when they can remove themselves from a situation, and the supervisor can choose to not pursue the matter further.  This is a delicate dance on the tightropes of confidentiality and operational integrity.

Further, I have added the final clause in bold so the person in charge at the time is reminded to use the “buddy system” when it comes to making tough calls about safety, inferring criminal intent, and assessing imminent harm.  These are decisions that, whenever possible, should not be made in isolation. 

This balancing, giving a situation time to breath, and due process, are the best way to shield library staff while honoring library principles.  I hope you don’t have to use it too often!  But with more and more people relying on libraries for service beyond the traditional quest for information, I suspect more institutions will be addressing this issue.

[1] NY Penal Law 170.00

[2] Of course, a prosecutor can pursue criminal charges if they believe they can prove such awareness…and they can try and prove it by using knowledge of the content.  And for certain documents, merely altering them is a crime.  So erring on the side of caution is wise.

[3] At the heart of this question is staff who don’t want to be implicated in wrongdoing, but honor their professional ethics, including the obligations to:

• Provide the highest level of service to all library users, and accurate, unbiased responses to all requests for assistance;
• Distinguish between personal convictions and professional duties;
• Strive for excellence via use of professional skills;
• Protect each patron’s right to privacy and confidentiality

[4] This is advised by the ALA at http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/guidelinesforaccesspolicies, and of course is required for municipal institutions.

[5] As part of this training, staff should be alerted to the library’s policies about any signs of activity posing a risk of imminent harm (which may be a result of illegal activity).

[6] This coordination is critical.  Please don’t use any model language without considering your full suite of bylaws, manuals, policies, and procedures already in place.

Before I wrote this answer, I stopped to ponder the fact that there are over 20 library systems in New York, each with its own policy and approach to managing the information in its "ILS" (integrated library system).

The beauty of library law in New York--and it is beautiful--is that it uses a firm structure of laws and regulation to enable a sturdy but flexible array of unique library institutions.

All of which is to say: there is no single right answer to this question.

Every library system managing an ILS has the responsibility and right to set the terms for participation in that system. Among other things, that means every library system sets the terms for the use of the information access the system provides.

So, with that, can a library use the email addresses of its patrons from an ILS patron database to send a donation request for its annual fundraising drive?

The answer will vary from system to system. However, unless specific provisions have been made otherwise, the answer is most likely "no."

Here is why.

First, as always, we'll start with ethics.

The ALA and NYLA Code of Ethics provides: "We protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted."

While using the patron information in the ILS to populate a donor solicitation list does not in and of itself reveal "information sought" by the patron, it does raise the issue of how the patron's confidential library records are being used.

Second, we'll look at the law, [1] which requires: "Library records, which contain names or other personally identifying details regarding the users of public, free association, school, college and university libraries and library systems of this state...shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed except that such records may be disclosed to the extent necessary for the proper operation of such library...."

While sending a late notice to a patron via email is certainly necessary for the proper operation of the library, using library records to solicit donations, without further consent by the patron, is again a dubious disclosure of patron information. I am not saying it is outright barred by law...but it gives me an icky feeling.

An "icky feeling," of course, is not admissible in court. So, let's dig a little deeper.

An ILS is a service each library participates in. The laws that govern ILS use are Education Law 255 and 8 NYCRR 90.3, and the bylaws of the particular system that library is a member of. Although a member library contributes information to an ILS, unless system bylaws or policies say otherwise, that information belongs to the system, who is just as ethically and legally bound to protect the information as a member library.

The default position for a library system to adopt is that patron information should only be used in furtherance of a patron's use of services from the system. This is the best way to stay on the right side of the law.

The "special position" a library system could adopt, if it wanted to facilitate special mailings based on library membership and use (not just for fundraising, but perhaps based on demographics or interest) could be to enable patron consent to such information use, perhaps by using an opt-in or express waiver. This too would ensure adherence to the law regarding confidentiality.

For a library whose system takes the "default" position of not allowing ILS information to be exported for fundraising purposes, the library also has a few options, including:

1. Creating a passive sign-up sheet for library news and fundraising efforts and maintain a spreadsheet outside of the ILS with personal information. Here is some sample language:

Do you want to sign up for newsletter information, event notifications, and fund-raising? We won't supply your information to any third party, and our mailings will come straight from the library! Please enter your name and contact information below.

2. Proactively asking patrons to voluntarily consent to the disclosure of their information for fundraising purposes during sign up and create your own list outside of the ILS.  Here is some sample language:

Per our patron confidentiality policy, the library considers records of your patronage confidential. Do you consent to the library using your name and address for newsletter information, event notification, and fund-raising? If so, please sign the agreement below. We won't supply your information to any third party, and our mailings will come straight from the library!

NOTE: This permission can be revoked upon request.

I agree for my information to be added to the library's newsletter, event, and donation solicitation list.

NAME:______________________________________

Signature:_____________________ DATE:_______________

3. Asking the cooperative library system to add a "library event notice and fundraising information disclosure checkbox" so the information can be exported from the ILS. Of course, such "checkbox" would depend on the ILS technology (and might be impossible to add). But it would be work exploring.

Thank you for a thought-provoking question.

[1] New York State Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 4509.