[MCN-L] RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft)
"When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art." Trivial costs? Not according to our CIO. I'm struggling to get something like this online, due to the sheer cost, which is most certainly not paid for by "the people's money". And we need to remember that people aren't paying for "images of public domain art" (an abstract) but for image files + delivery + service. "As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" Perhaps the V&A is a fully-government-funded institution (with a very active commercial branch, V&A Enterprises, Ltd., to help support it -- including an excellent for-payment picture library). But not so my non-government-funded institution. We literally do not have a photography budget. High-quality images are paid for by individual exhibition catalog budgets, which are fully funded by private donations. Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources & Copyright Management The Israel Museum, Jerusalem ? From: Newman, Alan Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Image Sizes (later Image Theft) To: "Museum Computer Network Listserv" Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2009, 1:12 PM Nik, Matt, Ken, Nancy, Mike et al, Here's another music model --- from Radiohead (quoting from Wikipedia") "Radiohead's seventh album, In Rainbows, was released through the band's own website on 10 October 2007 as a digital download for which customers could make whatever payment that they wanted, including nothing; the site only advised, "it's up to you".[46] Following the band's sudden announcement 10 days beforehand, Radiohead's unusual strategy received much notice within the music industry and beyond.[47] 1.2 million downloads were reportedly sold by the day of release,[48] but the band's management did not release official sales figures, claiming that the Internet-only distribution was intended to boost later retail sales." So we adopt a museum convention in use at the Met and elsewhere for admissions: pay what you can afford for images. What could be more fair? What could draw more attention to our collections? Who knows, this might be the answer to Mariet Westermann's recommendation to streamline image licensing. When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art. As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" Nik, wish me luck getting this through. Alan Newman On 5/5/09 6:23 PM, "Nik Honeysett" wrote: > This reminds me of a classic example in the music industry in the early 90's. > Blue Note Record's legal team came across a 12" single called "The Band Played > the Boogie" featuring an illegal sampling of Grant Green's "Sookie Sookie", > enjoying a huge underground following. Rather than pursue a suit, Blue Note > hired the group and gave them access to their full back catalogue. The > resulting release was Blue Note's first platinum-selling album (Us3 - Hand on > the Torch). So, put your images out there, wait for someone to figure out > how to make money from them, then hire them. (wish me luck with getting that > through our general counsel). -nik ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/ ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/
[MCN-L] ??RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft)
Hi Amalyah, My point was that after the build the maintenance costs are trivial to keep the self-serve part of the system going. There is only automated file delivery and no human service...for that part of the program. The main question, debated here often, is whether this should be mission-driven public policy rather than thought off as a crucial revenue stream. In my imaginary proposal you get both. Alan -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu on behalf of Amalyah Keshet [akes...@imj.org.il] Sent: Thu 5/21/2009 4:26 AM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: [MCN-L] ??RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft) "When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art." Trivial costs? Not according to our CIO. I'm struggling to get something like this online, due to the sheer cost, which is most certainly not paid for by "the people's money". And we need to remember that people aren't paying for "images of public domain art" (an abstract) but for image files + delivery + service. "As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" Perhaps the V&A is a fully-government-funded institution (with a very active commercial branch, V&A Enterprises, Ltd., to help support it -- including an excellent for-payment picture library). But not so my non-government-funded institution. We literally do not have a photography budget. High-quality images are paid for by individual exhibition catalog budgets, which are fully funded by private donations. Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources & Copyright Management The Israel Museum, Jerusalem ? From: Newman, Alan Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Image Sizes (later Image Theft) To: "Museum Computer Network Listserv" Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2009, 1:12 PM Nik, Matt, Ken, Nancy, Mike et al, Here's another music model --- from Radiohead (quoting from Wikipedia") "Radiohead's seventh album, In Rainbows, was released through the band's own website on 10 October 2007 as a digital download for which customers could make whatever payment that they wanted, including nothing; the site only advised, "it's up to you".[46] Following the band's sudden announcement 10 days beforehand, Radiohead's unusual strategy received much notice within the music industry and beyond.[47] 1.2 million downloads were reportedly sold by the day of release,[48] but the band's management did not release official sales figures, claiming that the Internet-only distribution was intended to boost later retail sales." So we adopt a museum convention in use at the Met and elsewhere for admissions: pay what you can afford for images. What could be more fair? What could draw more attention to our collections? Who knows, this might be the answer to Mariet Westermann's recommendation to streamline image licensing. When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art. As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" Nik, wish me luck getting this through. Alan Newman On 5/5/09 6:23 PM, "Nik Honeysett" wrote: > This reminds me of a classic example in the music industry in the early 90's. > Blue Note Record's legal team came across a 12" single called "The Band Played > the Boogie" featuring an illegal sampling of Grant Green's "Sookie Sookie", > enjoying a huge underground following. Rather than pursue a suit, Blue Note > hired the group and gave them access to their full back catalogue. The > resulting release was Blue Note's first platinum-selling album (Us3 - Hand on > the Torch). So, put your images out there, wait for someone to figure out > how to make money from them, then hire them. (wish me luck with getting that > through our general counsel). -nik ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/ ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http:/
[MCN-L] RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft)
We have the same problem in our little institution. Ann Drury Wellford Photo Services Manager The Museum of the Confederacy 1201 East Clay Street Richmond, VA 23219 Phone: (804) 649-1861 x17 Fax: (804) 644-7150 www.moc.org -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Amalyah Keshet [akes...@imj.org.il] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:27 AM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: [MCN-L] ??RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft) "When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art." Trivial costs? Not according to our CIO. I'm struggling to get something like this online, due to the sheer cost, which is most certainly not paid for by "the people's money". And we need to remember that people aren't paying for "images of public domain art" (an abstract) but for image files + delivery + service. "As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" Perhaps the V&A is a fully-government-funded institution (with a very active commercial branch, V&A Enterprises, Ltd., to help support it -- including an excellent for-payment picture library). But not so my non-government-funded institution. We literally do not have a photography budget. High-quality images are paid for by individual exhibition catalog budgets, which are fully funded by private donations. Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources & Copyright Management The Israel Museum, Jerusalem ? From: Newman, Alan Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Image Sizes (later Image Theft) To: "Museum Computer Network Listserv" Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2009, 1:12 PM Nik, Matt, Ken, Nancy, Mike et al, Here's another music model --- from Radiohead (quoting from Wikipedia") "Radiohead's seventh album, In Rainbows, was released through the band's own website on 10 October 2007 as a digital download for which customers could make whatever payment that they wanted, including nothing; the site only advised, "it's up to you".[46] Following the band's sudden announcement 10 days beforehand, Radiohead's unusual strategy received much notice within the music industry and beyond.[47] 1.2 million downloads were reportedly sold by the day of release,[48] but the band's management did not release official sales figures, claiming that the Internet-only distribution was intended to boost later retail sales." So we adopt a museum convention in use at the Met and elsewhere for admissions: pay what you can afford for images. What could be more fair? What could draw more attention to our collections? Who knows, this might be the answer to Mariet Westermann's recommendation to streamline image licensing. When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art. As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" Nik, wish me luck getting this through. Alan Newman On 5/5/09 6:23 PM, "Nik Honeysett" wrote: > This reminds me of a classic example in the music industry in the early 90's. > Blue Note Record's legal team came across a 12" single called "The Band Played > the Boogie" featuring an illegal sampling of Grant Green's "Sookie Sookie", > enjoying a huge underground following. Rather than pursue a suit, Blue Note > hired the group and gave them access to their full back catalogue. The > resulting release was Blue Note's first platinum-selling album (Us3 - Hand on > the Torch). So, put your images out there, wait for someone to figure out > how to make money from them, then hire them. (wish me luck with getting that > through our general counsel). -nik ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/ ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://toronto.me
[MCN-L] ??RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft)
Alan, I really enjoyed reading about your creative solution to the perennial dilemma of image licensing, and I am keeping my fingers crossed that you can make "pay what you can afford" a reality and report back to all of us how you fared. You've got me at the edge of my seat. As for the initial cost of setting up such a system, which is of great concern to Amalyah and others: this, like so many other things museums are currently doing redundantly and at great cost in their own basements, would be a great opportunity for a collective service. If Alan's model succeeds, why would every museum have to develop / purchase their own licensing system, and run it locally? Shouldn't this be a configurable service in the cloud you could subscribe to for a reasonable fee? Cheers, G?nter -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Newman, Alan Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 5:17 AM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: Re: [MCN-L] ??RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft) Hi Amalyah, My point was that after the build the maintenance costs are trivial to keep the self-serve part of the system going. There is only automated file delivery and no human service...for that part of the program. The main question, debated here often, is whether this should be mission-driven public policy rather than thought off as a crucial revenue stream. In my imaginary proposal you get both. Alan -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu on behalf of Amalyah Keshet [akes...@imj.org.il] Sent: Thu 5/21/2009 4:26 AM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: [MCN-L] ??RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft) "When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art." Trivial costs? Not according to our CIO. I'm struggling to get something like this online, due to the sheer cost, which is most certainly not paid for by "the people's money". And we need to remember that people aren't paying for "images of public domain art" (an abstract) but for image files + delivery + service. "As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" Perhaps the V&A is a fully-government-funded institution (with a very active commercial branch, V&A Enterprises, Ltd., to help support it -- including an excellent for-payment picture library). But not so my non-government-funded institution. We literally do not have a photography budget. High-quality images are paid for by individual exhibition catalog budgets, which are fully funded by private donations. Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources & Copyright Management The Israel Museum, Jerusalem ? From: Newman, Alan Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Image Sizes (later Image Theft) To: "Museum Computer Network Listserv" Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2009, 1:12 PM Nik, Matt, Ken, Nancy, Mike et al, Here's another music model --- from Radiohead (quoting from Wikipedia") "Radiohead's seventh album, In Rainbows, was released through the band's own website on 10 October 2007 as a digital download for which customers could make whatever payment that they wanted, including nothing; the site only advised, "it's up to you".[46] Following the band's sudden announcement 10 days beforehand, Radiohead's unusual strategy received much notice within the music industry and beyond.[47] 1.2 million downloads were reportedly sold by the day of release,[48] but the band's management did not release official sales figures, claiming that the Internet-only distribution was intended to boost later retail sales." So we adopt a museum convention in use at the Met and elsewhere for admissions: pay what you can afford for images. What could be more fair? What could draw more attention to our collections? Who knows, this might be the answer to Mariet Westermann's recommendation to streamline image licensing. When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art. As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" Nik, wish me luck getting this through. Alan Newman On 5/5/09 6:23 PM, "Nik Honeysett" wrote: > This reminds me of a classic example in the music industry in the early 90's. > Blue Note Record's legal team came across a 12" single called "The Band Played > the Boogie"
RE: [MCN-L] RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft) - Survey into image use from search engines
Apologies for butting in on this very interesting discussion, but the cost of provision and access of images is close to our hearts at Bridgeman and it is something we are researching right now under one of our government funded projects. I hope it is not inappropriate therefore to present below our request for input on this from anyone on the listserv who is interested. It is mainly aimed at our University audience but we would be delighted for anyone else to participate. Please feel free to forward on. Many thanks, Pandora Mather-Lees. Call for participants ? short survey into use of image content from Google Bridgeman Education is currently investigating how images from Wikipedia and search engines such as Google are retrieved and used for educational use. At a time when some institutions are calling on staff to remove images taken off Google from their internal networks, there is increasing awareness of copyright issues and very opposing views on acceptable use ? particularly at different levels within the institution. Our Project team wish to substantiate existing data gained through focus groups and would like to hear from the community at all levels ? deans, school and faculty heads, tutors, curriculum leaders, librarians and of course the students themselves. Respondents will only be required to give a short telephone interview or questionnaire sharing their views on use of images from search engines, quality of metadata and file size, level of use and attitudes to copyright, plagiarism, fair use, fair dealing and how they see images used in education in the future. Bridgeman Education is carrying out this survey as part of a UK government funded project to research the future of e-learning, technology in education and the issues associated with providing useful access to learning materials. For more information on the project see: SILVER (www.silvereducation.org) Please confirm your interest via the email address below and we will contact you with further details. Responses will be treated in confidence and no names will be published. A summary of the research will be fed back to and shared with those who have been kind enough to give their time. Participants from any institution or country are welcome. Please reply to: pandora.matherlees at bridgemanart.co.uk www.bridgemaneducation.com > Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 09:45:14 -0400 > From: DWellford at moc.org > To: mcn-l at mcn.edu > Subject: Re: [MCN-L] ??RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft) > > We have the same problem in our little institution. > > Ann Drury Wellford > Photo Services Manager > The Museum of the Confederacy > 1201 East Clay Street > Richmond, VA 23219 > Phone: (804) 649-1861 x17 > Fax: (804) 644-7150 > www.moc.org > > > -Original Message- > From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of > Amalyah Keshet [akeshet at imj.org.il] > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:27 AM > To: Museum Computer Network Listserv > Subject: [MCN-L] ??RE: Image Sizes (later Image Theft) > > "When we build self-serve sites for image licensing which have trivial costs > after the build, and especially if we are using the people's money, it is > hard to justify charging for extant images of public domain art." > > Trivial costs? Not according to our CIO. I'm struggling to get something like > this online, due to the sheer cost, which is most certainly not paid for by > "the people's money". And we need to remember that people aren't paying for > "images of public domain art" (an abstract) but for image files + delivery + > service. > > "As Mark Jones, director of the V&A remarked, paraphrased as told to me, "the > people paid for this once, why should they pay again?" > > Perhaps the V&A is a fully-government-funded institution (with a very active > commercial branch, V&A Enterprises, Ltd., to help support it -- including an > excellent for-payment picture library). But not so my non-government-funded > institution. We literally do not have a photography budget. High-quality > images are paid for by individual exhibition catalog budgets, which are fully > funded by private donations. > > > Amalyah Keshet > Head of Image Resources & Copyright Management > The Israel Museum, Jerusalem > > ? > From: Newman, Alan > Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Image Sizes (later Image Theft) > To: "Museum Computer Network Listserv" > Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2009, 1:12 PM > > Nik, Matt, Ken, Nancy, Mike et al, > > Here's another music model --- from Radiohead (quoting from Wikipedia") > > "Radiohead's seventh album, In Rainbows, was released
