Copyright in
Medical Communications

Question 1

Q: I am working with a subject matter expert who insists they can use a screenshot of an image from the internet in their presentation, without citing the source or seeking permission, because the presentation is intended as an educational session they are not getting paid to present. How do other MedComm professionals address such situations?

Industry Insights is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal or other professional advice. If you have legal questions, please consult your own legal counsel. Also note that the opinions expressed here are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of CCC or its affiliates and may be specific to a particular jurisdiction. The content on this page is provided “as is” and no representations are made that the content is error-free.

Answer

CCC reached out to Elizabeth Jennings, Editorial Team Lead, Scientific Group, for her perspective.

This question covers three aspects: perception around internet material, commercial vs. non-commercial (eg, educational use), and due diligence around author recognition. The internet is vast and can be a misleading space! A common myth is that anything published on the internet, or on social media, is freely available to use. However, web pages often have copyright terms and conditions that users must follow, which you need to read closely to ensure your intended use does not breach these terms of use. As to the nature of the presentation, although the subject matter expert may view the presentation as an education resource only, it may be considered by a copyright owner as a ‘commercial’ reuse if the session is sponsored by a pharmaceutical or other commercial entity. The copyright owner will determine how to price and license the reuse. See the February 11, 2026, Industry Insight by Leslie Lansman, Head of Permissions and Licensing at UK-based Springer Nature, for more information on this topic.

Lastly, it’s important to remember that copyright aims to protect content creators and to provide these creators with due recognition. Keep in mind that using screenshots without citing the authors and the source could be seen as disrespectful, unethical, and most often unlawful. We have a responsibility in MedComms to follow guidelines and regulations and follow best practice.

4 March 2026

Question 2

When requesting permission to reuse content in a project some members of my MedComms team use CCC Marketplace and others use the link on the publisher’s web site that brings them to RightsLink for Permissions. How do inputs needed to submit a permissions quote differ through these two CCC permissions channels?

Answer

CCC reached out to Erin Callahan, Senior Director, Information and Content Solutions, for her perspective on this question.

When requesting permission to reuse content in a MedComms project, the questions presented to the buyer are standardized across rightsholders in both Marketplace and RightsLink for Permissions. Rightsholders and MedComm professionals worked with CCC to develop these questions to ensure consistency and efficiency across channels and projects.

However, for other types of permission requests, the questions presented to the buyer can vary. In RightsLink for Permissions, rightsholders can customize the questions/drop down menus presented to buyers. Rightsholders are free to determine what information they collect to determine whether to grant a permissions request and the cost of that permission. In CCC Marketplace, the questions/dropdown menus are standardized so that buyers are asked the same questions for each permissions request regardless of the rightsholder.

25 February 2026

Question 3

If I obtain permission to use a previously published chart in a conference presentation, can that chart be reused in a different presentation later in the year without securing a second permission?

Answer

Erin Callahan, Senior Director, Information & Content Solutions at CCC, provides her perspective on this reader question below.

One of the core principles of copyright is that different uses of a work correspond to different rights. The different reuses have different impacts, which means the rightsholder may make different decisions based on the specific permission requested. The type of use, duration, sharing method and audience size are all factors that will affect the type of permission required. The permission that was, hypothetically, granted to reuse the chart in one presentation does not grant additional permissions to reuse that article in a second presentation, mailing or any other additional type of reuse.

18 February 2026

Question 4

I get questions from my MedComms team so regularly about whether events about disease states funded by pharma are non-promotional rather than educational that I suspect confusion about these terms. The term “non-promotional” is used in our industry as a compliance term but is treated as synonymous with “educational” when considering copyright. How would the experts explain that “non-promotional” is different from “educational” in copyright?

Answer

CCC turned to Leslie Lansman, Head of Permissions and Licensing at UK-based Springer Nature, for her thoughts on this question.

It is my view that “non‑promotional” and “educational” activities are not equivalent activities, even though they are often conflated. Terms such as non‑promotional, educational, non‑commercial, and non‑profit are frequently used interchangeably, but they describe separate and distinct concepts. To make matters more complex, their meaning often depends on context, and different professional communities (i.e., compliance, marketing, copyright, academia) may apply their own interpretations.

From a copyright perspective, these distinctions matter. At one end of the copyright spectrum are uses that are clearly educational and non‑profit, with these words regularly going hand in hand. For example, content used while teaching a class within a formal educational institution where there is no commercial purpose or advantage. At the other end of the spectrum are commercial uses, where the key question we ask is whether the activity provides any direct or indirect commercial advantage. This assessment goes well beyond immediate monetary gain and may include reputational benefit, advertising, publicity, or other non‑quantifiable or long‑term commercial boosts.

This is why “non‑promotional activity” frequently causes confusion. In a medical compliance or regulatory sense, non‑promotional simply means that specific rules governing product promotion are not triggered. This does not mean non‑commercial. An activity may fully comply with promotional restrictions and still deliver indirect commercial value, for example through reputation building, brand positioning, goodwill, advertising, publicity, or long‑term market influence. In other words, an event can be non‑promotional in a regulatory sense while still serving a commercial objective in copyright terms.

For instance, a disease‑state meeting may be approved internally as non‑promotional, feature independent speakers, and avoid product references entirely. From a compliance standpoint, this may be entirely appropriate. From a copyright standpoint, the analysis differs, we ask whether the event sits within a wider commercial strategy and delivers indirect commercial value. If it does, in my view, the use of third‑party content may still require commercial licensing. Similarly, the fact that an event is free to attend does not make it educational in copyright terms. Free events can be commercial if they support brand perception, unique value propositions, or other business goals.

Understanding when uses are commercial is essential. Treating “non‑promotional” as synonymous with “educational” risks over‑simplifying copyright analysis and can lead to incorrect assumptions about what uses require permission and what type of permission you should be seeking when permission is required.

11 February 2026