Jennifer, I appreciate your posting the background information on the Art Museum Image Consortium (AMICO). I am very interested in the efforts you describe and look forward to learning more about the work of AMICO.
<snip>background on AMICO deleted</snip> > > Your own interest in a very specific subject, and your afilliation with an > academic press, seems to indicate a focus to your query that you haven't > shared with us. What is the roadblock that prompted your question? Actually there is no specific roadblock that prompted my query. I am presently employed by Scholars Press but attended the conference I mentioned with the support of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL). I will become a regular employee of the SBL early this next year and will be involved with efforts to use technology to make both primary and secondary materials more accessible over the Internet. As I mentioned in my first post there were several comments at the conference to the effect that scholars were being limited by restrictions imposed by museums from distributing scholarly quality reproductions of materials. The ensuing discussion on this list has demonstrated that some museums are quite willing to advance scholarly research but also have legitimate concerns about possible sources of revenue. (I happen to disagree with the economic model suggested as justification for restricting access but have no disagreement on any arrangement that supports and furthers the work of museums.) From the comments in this discussion it can be said that some museums are more forthcoming that others and more than one writer has acknowledged there are both good and bad reasons for restricting access. The recent history of ancient near eastern (including biblical materials) studies is replete with stories (some publically acknowledged) of access to materials that was/is restricted for no legitimate reason. (Note, personal opinion which does not represent the view of any group or organization.) To the extent that the rhetoric used for such restrictions can be isolated, then it can be meet by suggested alternatives that meet the publically stated objections. For example, in a case where a museum voices concern about licensing rights, a scholar could offer to deposit images they make with AMCIO. Or for no other reason than to establish that these are the images taken by Prof. X of the Y materials at museum Z, which might be an important fact to establish in the case of commercial use (without permission). PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying all concerns of museums are simply rhetoric but the same arguments are used by those who would restrict access for less than admirable reasons. I am suggesting that if ways can be found to meet the legitimate concerns of museums then such means will deprive unreasonable restrictions their legitimacy. I feel I have learned a good deal from this discussion concerning the legitimate concerns of museums and hope that the dialogue continues on ways to meet those concerns as well as providing access to scholars. Patrick -- Patrick Durusau Information Technology Services Scholars Press [email protected] Manager, ITS
