Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.
Defining	  the	  Cultural	  CommonsPaul	  Keller,	  OK	  fest	  Helsinki,	  19	  September	  2012
1. where	  do	  we	  come	  from?2. where	  are	  we	  now?	  3. what	  is	  to	  be	  done?
1. where	  do	  we	  come	  from?2. where	  are	  we	  now?	  3. what	  is	  to	  be	  done?
project gutenberg
Bundesarchief wikimedia commons
NA joins flickr
open images
opencultuurdata / rijksmuseum
What	  have	  we	  learned	  from	  this?Cultural	  heritage	  is	  a	  surprisingly	  difficult	  domain	  for	  building	 ...
What	  have	  we	  learned	  from	  this?• For	  the	  same	  reason	  many	  cultural	  heritage	  institutions	    have	...
1. where	  do	  we	  come	  from?2. where	  are	  we	  now?	  3. what	  is	  to	  be	  done?
Norm	  settingWith	  regards	  to	  norm	  setting	  we	  have	  actually	  made	  some	  pretty	  good	  progress	  in	  ...
Norms:	  Public	  Domain	  (1)	  The	  general	  principle	  that	  ‘what	  is	  in	  the	  public	  domain	  in	  analogu...
Norms:	  Public	  Domain	  (2)The	  main	  challenge	  for	  this	  principle	  is	  the	  need	  of	  institutions	  to	 ...
Norms:	  metadataThe	  general	  trend	  with	  (simple)	  descriptive	  metadata	  points	  into	  the	  direction	  of	 ...
metadata            objects                public	  domain  own           own	  copyrightcopyright            third	  part...
public	  domain   own	  copyrights
1. where	  do	  we	  come	  from?2. where	  are	  we	  now?	  3. what	  is	  to	  be	  done?
Third	  party	  copyrights	  (1)Central	  question	  is	  how	  do	  we	  deal	  with	  material	  that	  is	  under	  thi...
Third	  party	  copyrights	  (2)	  • Licensing	  rights	  (via	  collective	  rights	  management	    organizations).	  Ge...
Rights	  holders	  tend	  to	  be	  much	  less	  conservative	  than	  we	  generally	  assume	  (example	  below)       ...
What	  is	  to	  be	  done?	  (1)If	  we	  are	  serious	  about	  creating	  a	  true	  cultural	  commons	  (that	  does...
What	  is	  to	  be	  done?	  (2)This	  probably	  includes	  a	  different	  perspective	  on	  the	  PSI	  directive.	  T...
Defining the Cultural Commons
Defining the Cultural Commons
Defining the Cultural Commons
Defining the Cultural Commons
Defining the Cultural Commons
Nächste SlideShare
Wird geladen in …5

Defining the Cultural Commons

1.322 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Overview presentation to kick off the Cultural Commons track at the OK fest on the 19th of September 2012 in Helsinki, Finland

Veröffentlicht in: Technologie, Business

Defining the Cultural Commons

  1. 1. Defining  the  Cultural  CommonsPaul  Keller,  OK  fest  Helsinki,  19  September  2012
  2. 2. 1. where  do  we  come  from?2. where  are  we  now?  3. what  is  to  be  done?
  3. 3. 1. where  do  we  come  from?2. where  are  we  now?  3. what  is  to  be  done?
  4. 4. project gutenberg
  5. 5. Bundesarchief wikimedia commons
  6. 6. NA joins flickr
  7. 7. RCE
  8. 8. open images
  9. 9. opencultuurdata / rijksmuseum
  10. 10. What  have  we  learned  from  this?Cultural  heritage  is  a  surprisingly  difficult  domain  for  building  a  commons.  The  works  are  concentrated  in  the  hands  of  institutions  that  generally  do  not  control  the  rights  in  these  works.  This  has  a  number  of  consequences:  • Cultural  heritage  institutions  often  feel  trapped  by   copyright.  Many  of  the  look  at  open  content  licenses  as   the  solution  to  their  problems  (and  are  disappointed  when   they  figure  out  that  they  aren’t)  • Where  institutions  do  have  the  rights  in  works  in  their                                                                                  collections  they  are  often  very  conservative                                                                                                                                          about  access  &  reuse.  
  11. 11. What  have  we  learned  from  this?• For  the  same  reason  many  cultural  heritage  institutions   have  a  almost  schizophrenic  relationship  with  the  public   domain:  They  value  the  fact  that  there  are  no  restrictions   on  works  in  the  public  domain  and  at  the  same  time  they   have  the  desire  to  exercise  control  over  such  works  (for   example  by  applying  CC  licenses).• Open  content  projects  like  the  ones  presented  here  often   have  the  function  to  be  able  ‘to  do  something’  and,  as  a   result,  they  often  distract  from  addressing  the  underlying                                                problems.
  12. 12. 1. where  do  we  come  from?2. where  are  we  now?  3. what  is  to  be  done?
  13. 13. Norm  settingWith  regards  to  norm  setting  we  have  actually  made  some  pretty  good  progress  in  the  last  couple  of  years.  Norm  setting  is  possible  in  those  areas  of  the  commons  where  the  cultural  heritage  institutions  themselves  control  the  rights  or  where  the  rights  have  expired:• Public  Domain  works  • Metadata  (and  ‘secondary  works’)• Works  where  the  copyright  is  with  the  institutions
  14. 14. Norms:  Public  Domain  (1)  The  general  principle  that  ‘what  is  in  the  public  domain  in  analogue  form  should  be  in  the  public  domain  in  digital  form’  is  gaining  ground:  • (COMMUNIA)  public  domain  manifesto  2010• Europeana  Public  Domain  Charter  2010• Committee  des  Sages  report  ‘the  new  renaissance’  2011• EC  Commission  recommendation  on  digitization  2011• LoC  request  for  information  on  private  digitization  2012• Europeana  Data  Exchange  Agreement  2012  
  15. 15. Norms:  Public  Domain  (2)The  main  challenge  for  this  principle  is  the  need  of  institutions  to  generate  revenue/pay  for  digitization:• Google  contracts  with  Libraries  grant  Google  a  15  year   period  of  ‘preferred  commercial  exploitation’  (PSI  directive   might  reduce  this  to  7  years)• LoC  request  for  information  asks  for  maximum  of  3  year   exclusivity.On  the  other  hand  first  experiences  of  the  Rijksmuseum  show  that  free  availability  doesn’t  hurt  revenue  generation.  
  16. 16. Norms:  metadataThe  general  trend  with  (simple)  descriptive  metadata  points  into  the  direction  of  free  (no  restrictions/conditions)  availability.  Metadata  is  widely  understood  as  a  tool  to  improve  the  discoverability  of  collections.• Various  Libraries  have  release  their  bibliographical  records   under  CC  zero  (Harvard  Library  System  alone  12M   records)  • Europeana  has  released  more  than  20M  records  from  all   types  of  institutions  under  CC  zero  last  week.
  17. 17. metadata objects public  domain own own  copyrightcopyright third  party  copyright
  18. 18. public  domain own  copyrights
  19. 19. 1. where  do  we  come  from?2. where  are  we  now?  3. what  is  to  be  done?
  20. 20. Third  party  copyrights  (1)Central  question  is  how  do  we  deal  with  material  that  is  under  third  party  copyright?  This  is  the  majority  of  20th  century  culture  (including  virtually  all  moving  images).  How  do  we  envisage  bringing  these  works  into  the  cultural  commons?  Suggested  strategies  include:• lobbying  for  exceptions  that  would  allow  heritage   institutions  to  make  use  of  such  works  (and  possibly   individual  end-­‐users  too)
  21. 21. Third  party  copyrights  (2)  • Licensing  rights  (via  collective  rights  management   organizations).  Generally  this  does  not  create  anything   resembling  a  commons.• Working  with  institutions  to  develop  strategies  to  ensure   that  new  acquisitions  can  be  made  available.• Getting  in  touch  with  rights  holders  to  obtain  permission   to  publish  works  under  open  licenses  (does  not  scale  very   well).
  22. 22. Rights  holders  tend  to  be  much  less  conservative  than  we  generally  assume  (example  below) Artists  contacted 429 Choices  made 267 CC-­‐BY-­‐NC-­‐ND 54 CC-­‐BY-­‐SA 64 Permission  to  use 145 No  permission 3 Special  contract 1
  23. 23. What  is  to  be  done?  (1)If  we  are  serious  about  creating  a  true  cultural  commons  (that  does  not  only  consist  of  the  leftovers)  we  need  to  work  on  the  issue  of  third  party  rights:• lobby  for  exceptions  that  allow  institutions  to  make   available  works  in  their  collections  online  (free?   renumeration?  how  to  differentiate  between  works  in   commercial  circulation  and  those  that  are  not?)  • lobby  for  exceptions  that  allow  private  individuals  (and   non-­‐profits?)  to  re-­‐use  works  from  those  institutions.
  24. 24. What  is  to  be  done?  (2)This  probably  includes  a  different  perspective  on  the  PSI  directive.  There  is  a  lot  of  resistance  among  cultural  heritage  institutions  to  be  included,  because  they  feel  that  this  limits  their  options.  I  would  argue  that  if  institutions  are  serious  to  be  part  of  a  cultural  commons  they  should  embrace  the  special  position  created  by  the  PSI  directive  and  position  itself  as  part  of  the  public  sector  (which  will  make  it  easier  to  claim  special  status  in  the  context  of  copyright).