Is a single article/blog post considered a collective work?
<p>Is a single article or blog post that contains, say three creative commons images, along with some text, considered a <code>Collection</code> or <code>Collective Work</code>?  How about if the blog post contains a single creative common image along with some text?</p>

<p><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/" rel="nofollow">CC BY-SA 2.0</a> says:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>"Collective Work"</strong> means a work, such as a periodical issue, anthology
  or encyclopedia, in which the Work in its entirety in unmodified form,
  along with a number of other contributions, constituting separate and
  independent works in themselves, are assembled into a collective
  whole. A work that constitutes a Collective Work will not be
  considered a Derivative Work (as defined below) for the purposes of
  this License.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode" rel="nofollow">CC BY-SA 3.0</a> (which appears to drop the term "Collective Work" in favor of "Collection") says:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>"Collection"</strong> means a collection of literary or artistic works, such as
  encyclopedias and anthologies, or performances, phonograms or
  broadcasts, or other works or subject matter other than works listed
  in Section 1(f) below, which, by reason of the selection and
  arrangement of their contents, constitute intellectual creations, in
  which the Work is included in its entirety in unmodified form along
  with one or more other contributions, each constituting separate and
  independent works in themselves, which together are assembled into a
  collective whole. A work that constitutes a Collection will not be
  considered an Adaptation (as defined below) for the purposes of this
  License.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode" rel="nofollow">CC BY-SA 4.0</a> appears to drop mention of collections.</p>

<p>My reading is that yes, a blog post which includes individual works qualifies as a collective Work or a Collection. Even if it is just one unaltered licensed image along with your own original text.</p>

<p>The biggest clue comes in Section 4(a) of Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 (3.0 is similar):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The above applies to the Work as incorporated in a Collective Work,
  but this does not require the Collective Work apart from the Work
  itself to be made subject to the terms of this License.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>"The above" refers to imposing terms on an original work. In other words if you publish your blog post under a strict license, the original work must be available under its original license.</p>

<p>Continuing, there is this bit here:  </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>If You create a Collective Work, upon notice from any Licensor You
  must, to the extent practicable, remove from the Collective Work any
  reference to such Licensor or the Original Author, as requested.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>This is saying that if you include a photo in your blog, and you give credit to the licensor but the licensor does not want to be a part of your blogging message (for example), the licensor can ask that you remove the reference.</p>

<p>There is additional information in the license that is helpful to the blog example, like where and how to give credit, but suffice it to say, the answer is yes.</p>

copyright creative-commons