For work in the public domain, that’s one thing, but for work which is still copyright protected, you can actually be sued for (shockingly enough) making copies of it.
Generally, though, most countries only care if you distribute copies of something (even if you’re not making money off of it), but that’s not to say that the concept of “distributing” hasn’t been stretched pretty thin in the past.
Rightsholders have gone after businesses and private individuals just for playing sports events on radio or TV audibly/visibly enough to have an “audience”, thereby infringing on broadcast rights. Even if they’re not charging a thing for it. Feel free to read this and see how far the insanity goes.
If I buy a book and make copies of the pages to takes notes on, that’s usually fine. But if I make a copy and give it to a friend…
A better question to start would be if there’s any creative commons or copyleft media in the modern zeitgeist.
Memes are made organically as small units of culture and gain popularity via an implicit understanding of meaning that doesn’t need to be explained.
For a meme template to have those attributes, it would need to derive from a work that was licensed as CC/copyleft from the get-go and gained popularity among the masses.
That being said, seems a moot point when fair use/derivative work standards allow unlicensed memes to legally exist regardless of the original licensing of the work they were derived from.