Hello all, Since Cathryn asked for a show of hands, here's one. The Davison Art Center, Wesleyan University also is a case of so-far quiet adoption. Our open access images policy has been in effect and in use since 12/12/2012; but until we can make an initial critical mass of images available for download by users (target: September), we're staying low-key about it. The policy and accompanying information are at:
http://www.wesleyan.edu/dac/openaccess cheers, Rob Rob Lancefield Manager of Museum Information Services / Registrar of Collections Davison Art Center, Wesleyan University 301 High Street, Middletown CT 06459-0487 USA rlancefield [at] wesleyan [dot] edu | tel. 860.685.2965 On 5/29/2013 8:58 AM, Cathryn Goodwin wrote: > An addendum to this thread is the fact that many institutions, Princeton > among them, are more quietly adopting an open access to public domain images > policy - I'd be interested in a show of hands. > > Cathryn > > -----Original Message----- > From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of > David Green > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:48 AM > To: Museum Computer Network Listserv > Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Permissions > > Absolutely agree, of course. And see today's NYT article about the > Rijksmuseum's contribution to the way forward: > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/arts/design/museums-mull-public-use-of-online-art-images.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130529&_r=0 > > "We're a public institution, and so the art and objects we have are, in a > way, everyone's property," said [Taco Dibbits, the director of collections at > the Rijksmuseum,] in an interview. "'With the Internet, it's so difficult to > control your copyright or use of images that we decided we'd rather people > use a very good high-resolution image of the 'Milkmaid' from the Rijksmuseum > rather than using a very bad reproduction," he said, referring to that > Vermeer painting from around 1660." > > David Green > redgen at mac.com > @redgen > 203-520-9155 > > > On May 27, 2013, at 8:46 AM, Kenneth Hamma<khamma at me.com> wrote: > >> Thanks, Peter. >> >> It is dismaying that anyone could not imagine that there's any way around >> the wide variety of charges and procedures that collections - perhaps >> sometimes thoughtlessly? - interpose between themselves the public for whom >> they are stewards. For those, here are some starting points. >> >> https://images.nga.gov/en/page/show_home_page.html >> >> http://britishart.yale.edu/collections/using-collections/image-use >> >> http://www.britishmuseum.org/about_this_site/terms_of_use/free_image_s >> ervice.aspx >> >> https://www.lacma.org/about/contact-us/terms-use >> >> http://thewalters.org/rights-reproductions.aspx >> >> Knowing that it can be bothersome to visit websites and read, let me copy >> the simple image rights/use statement from the Walters Art Museum: >> >> All photography on our website(s) is governed by Creative Commons Licensing >> and can be used without cost or specific permission. Artworks in the >> photographs are in the public domain due to age. The photographs of >> two-dimensional objects have also been released into the public domain. >> Photographs of three-dimensional objects and all descriptions have been >> released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported >> License and the GNU Free Documentation License. >> >> Cheers, >> >> ken >> >> Kenneth Hamma >> >> Yale Center for British Art >> kenneth.hamma at yale.edu >> >> >> >> On May 27, 2013, at 7:05 AM, Peter B. Hirtle<pbh6 at cornell.edu> wrote: >> >>> For a different perspective from a different field, MCN-L readers might be >>> interested in a forthcoming paper from John Overholt addressing the future >>> of special collections in libraries. It is called "Five theses on the >>> future of special collections," and a preprint is found at >>> http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/10601790/overholt.pdf. >>> >>> One of his five theses speaks precisely to the issue of permissions. It >>> begins this way: >>> >>> The future of special collections is openness. >>> >>> We are not the creators of our collections; we are their stewards. They >>> were entrusted to us to preserve them, certainly, but preservation without >>> use is an empty victory. It ought to be our primary purpose at all times to >>> minimize barriers to use, so it is all the more shameful when we interpose >>> such barriers ourselves, not out of concern for the health of the >>> collections, but out of the misguided belief that we are entitled to >>> control, even to monetize, their use. When we claim copyright over our >>> digital collections, or impose permission fees or licensing terms on users, >>> we are arguably misrepresenting the law, and certainly violating one of the >>> central ethical tenets of the profession: to promote the free dissemination >>> of information. >>> >>> It would seem to me that image permissions would be much simplified if only >>> permission of the copyright owner had to be secured (and then only if the >>> use was not a fair use). >>> >>> Peter Hirtle >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf >>>> Of Deborah Wythe >>>> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 3:59 PM >>>> To: mcn-l at mcn.edu >>>> Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Permissions >>>> >>>> I don't think there's any way around the wide variety of charges and >>>> procedures, but I was struck by the frustration of the writer, who >>>> clearly had never done image acquisition before. It's a skill, just >>>> like any other. Filling in for our R&R coordinator, I've learned >>>> just how many emails it can take to get all the information we need to >>>> help them. >>>> >>>> I've often wondered if there was a way to connect museum staff with >>>> art history grad programs to get this topic on their curriculum. >>>> Shouldn't every budding writer have a brief tutorial on copyright, >>>> image acquisition, image quality, etc? >>>> >>>> Then again, when I was in grad school and suggested to my advisor >>>> that we put together a guide to doing primary source research, he >>>> put me off, saying that we should all be figuring it out ourselves >>>> and that was one way they sorted the wheat from the chaff. >>>> >>>> I won't address the differing policies and prices -- that's a >>>> different (and difficult topic) -- but putting chocolate on our fee >>>> schedules is an interesting concept. >>>> >>>> Deborah Wythe >>>> Brooklyn Museumdeborahwythe at hotmail.com >>>> >>>>> From: lesleyeharris at comcast.net >>>>> Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 12:06:38 -0400 >>>>> To: mcn-l at mcn.edu >>>>> Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Permissions >>>>> >>>>> Whoops--article is at >>>> http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/comment/opinion/opinion-snap- >>>> decisions/2003969.article. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On May 24, 2013, at 12:05 PM, Lesley Ellen Harris >>>> <lesleyeharris at comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> This article on obtaining permissions from museums will be of >>>>> interest to >>>> MCN members. >>>>> >>>>> Lesley >>>>> >>>>> lesley at copyrightlaws.com >>>>> www.copyrightlaws.com
