[MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions
Hello MCN, This may be a rather dense question regarding copyright law...but as it's outside my area of expertise I figured this community could provide a great reference point. My own research is not turning up an good answers/examples either! Do any institutions assign different copyright statements to derivatives of the same image, depending on that image's resolution? Take for example, a photo of a Greek urn in a museum collection. Would it be common practice for a high-resolution TIFF of this photo to bear a (c)Museum Institution, 2014 statement, while a medium-resolution JPG of the same photo would bear a (c) Creative Commons License? Does this scenario fit within basic copyright law or guidelines? If anyone is differentiating copyright statements based on image resolution, do you have this policy written/documented in a shareable way? Thanks for any feedback you might have! Kate Blanch Administrator, Museum Databases kblanch at thewalters.org / 410.547.9000 ext. 266 The Walters Art Museum 600 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD 21201 www.thewalters.orghttp://www.thewalters.org/
[MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions
Kate: If an image is a protected (copyrighted) work, it doesn't matter what size or format it's in. It's protected, and the copyright holder has the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute it and to make derivatives of it. (Thumbnail images for purposes of identification, for example in a database or search engine, would be the possible exception.) However, that doesn't mean one cannot make an institutional policy decision to treat different formats and sizes differently in terms of how you distribute, license, or give away image files for various purposes. This follows from the above. Amalyah Keshet Chair, MCN IP SIG Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources and Tel. +972-2-6708064 Fax +972-2-6771340 akeshet at imj.org.il The Israel Museum, Jerusalem -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Kate Blanch Sent: 12 March, 2014 4:58 PM To: 'mcn-l at mcn.edu' Subject: [MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions Hello MCN, This may be a rather dense question regarding copyright law...but as it's outside my area of expertise I figured this community could provide a great reference point. My own research is not turning up an good answers/examples either! Do any institutions assign different copyright statements to derivatives of the same image, depending on that image's resolution? Take for example, a photo of a Greek urn in a museum collection. Would it be common practice for a high-resolution TIFF of this photo to bear a (c)Museum Institution, 2014 statement, while a medium-resolution JPG of the same photo would bear a (c) Creative Commons License? Does this scenario fit within basic copyright law or guidelines? If anyone is differentiating copyright statements based on image resolution, do you have this policy written/documented in a shareable way? Thanks for any feedback you might have! Kate Blanch Administrator, Museum Databases kblanch at thewalters.org / 410.547.9000 ext. 266 The Walters Art Museum 600 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD 21201 www.thewalters.orghttp://www.thewalters.org/
[MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions
Technically, if your institution holds the copyright, you can license derivative works however you like (and cropping, resolution changes are technically derivations). BUT, I think it would be difficult to enforce resolution as a derivative work if you are putting both out on the web. I don't think it is a common practice--in my 5+ years of image acquisition experience, I have yet to come across it. Curious to be proven wrong, though! If you're putting the images online, I would make it super clear that the low res ones are CC vs the high-res versions by putting the CC ones under a special section with a notice about images you can use for these purposes for free with this credit and maybe include a watermark or something like that. If it's just your institution distributing the images, maybe listing the resolution in the description line on the license would work. I'm wondering, though, if the CC attribution license could be used for all of them? That one requires your institution's name to be credited regardless. What I have seen is: -A museum providing a low-res scan free on the site, but charging a repro fee to scan hi-res. -Museums being allowed to use low-res versions or portions of copyrighted materials under fair use (though I don't rely on this approach myself--too iffy and I don't really think it's super defensible). Cheers, Shana On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Kate Blanch kblanch at thewalters.org wrote: Hello MCN, This may be a rather dense question regarding copyright law...but as it's outside my area of expertise I figured this community could provide a great reference point. My own research is not turning up an good answers/examples either! Do any institutions assign different copyright statements to derivatives of the same image, depending on that image's resolution? Take for example, a photo of a Greek urn in a museum collection. Would it be common practice for a high-resolution TIFF of this photo to bear a (c)Museum Institution, 2014 statement, while a medium-resolution JPG of the same photo would bear a (c) Creative Commons License? Does this scenario fit within basic copyright law or guidelines? If anyone is differentiating copyright statements based on image resolution, do you have this policy written/documented in a shareable way? Thanks for any feedback you might have! Kate Blanch Administrator, Museum Databases kblanch at thewalters.org / 410.547.9000 ext. 266 The Walters Art Museum 600 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD 21201 www.thewalters.orghttp://www.thewalters.org/ ___ 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://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://mcn.edu/pipermail/mcn-l/
[MCN-L] FW: Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions
I should clarify that I am referring to the museum-created photograph/digital image only, ignoring for the moment the copyright status of the underlying work of art appearing in the photograph. Amalyah -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Amalyah Keshet Sent: 12 March, 2014 5:12 PM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions Kate: If an image a photograph is a protected (copyrighted) work, it doesn't matter what size or format it's in. It's protected, and the copyright holder has the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute it and to make derivatives of it. (Thumbnail images for purposes of identification, for example in a database or search engine, would be the possible exception.) However, that doesn't mean one cannot make an institutional policy decision to treat different formats and sizes differently in terms of how you distribute, license, or give away image files for various purposes. This follows from the above. Amalyah Keshet Chair, MCN IP SIG Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources and Tel. +972-2-6708064 Fax +972-2-6771340 akeshet at imj.org.ilmailto:akeshet at imj.org.il The Israel Museum, Jerusalem -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edumailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Kate Blanch Sent: 12 March, 2014 4:58 PM To: 'mcn-l at mcn.edu' Subject: [MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions Hello MCN, This may be a rather dense question regarding copyright law...but as it's outside my area of expertise I figured this community could provide a great reference point. My own research is not turning up an good answers/examples either! Do any institutions assign different copyright statements to derivatives of the same image, depending on that image's resolution? Take for example, a photo of a Greek urn in a museum collection. Would it be common practice for a high-resolution TIFF of this photo to bear a (c)Museum Institution, 2014 statement, while a medium-resolution JPG of the same photo would bear a (c) Creative Commons License? Does this scenario fit within basic copyright law or guidelines? If anyone is differentiating copyright statements based on image resolution, do you have this policy written/documented in a shareable way? Thanks for any feedback you might have! Kate Blanch Administrator, Museum Databases kblanch at thewalters.orgmailto:kblanch at thewalters.org / 410.547.9000 ext. 266 The Walters Art Museum 600 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD 21201 www.thewalters.orghttp://www.thewalters.org/http://www.thewalters.org%3chttp:/www.thewalters.org/ ___ 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.edumailto:mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://mcn.edu/pipermail/mcn-l/
[MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions
It's a great question and a fascinating topic, Kate. I've cross-posted this question over to the Open Knowledge Foundation's Open-GLAM mailing list. (I'm pretty sure the discussions are available in a public archive, I just can't put my finger on the link right now. D'oh!) As a point of reference/argument, I'd like to see OKFN's Open Glam Principles (http://openglam.org/principles/) champion the practice of providing equal/permissive rights to all derivatives of a given image/resource. I've often seen institutions congratulate themselves on providing open access to collections, when what they're actually doing is providing a somewhat restrictive license on thumbnail images, and enclosing higher quality images behind a more restrictive licensing/access regimen or paywall. There are many instances, particularly in research and for re-use, in which access to a thumbnail is no help at all. Of course, it's certainly within the property owner's rights to do this, but I'd prefer that these graduated access arrangements not be confused with the kind of open environments that the Getty, the National Gallery of Art, the Walters, the Rijksmuseum, and many others are providing. ;) On 3/12/14 11:11 AM, Amalyah Keshet akeshet at imj.org.il wrote: Kate: If an image is a protected (copyrighted) work, it doesn't matter what size or format it's in. It's protected, and the copyright holder has the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute it and to make derivatives of it. (Thumbnail images for purposes of identification, for example in a database or search engine, would be the possible exception.) However, that doesn't mean one cannot make an institutional policy decision to treat different formats and sizes differently in terms of how you distribute, license, or give away image files for various purposes. This follows from the above. Amalyah Keshet Chair, MCN IP SIG Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources and Tel. +972-2-6708064 Fax +972-2-6771340 akeshet at imj.org.il The Israel Museum, Jerusalem -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Kate Blanch Sent: 12 March, 2014 4:58 PM To: 'mcn-l at mcn.edu' Subject: [MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions Hello MCN, This may be a rather dense question regarding copyright law...but as it's outside my area of expertise I figured this community could provide a great reference point. My own research is not turning up an good answers/examples either! Do any institutions assign different copyright statements to derivatives of the same image, depending on that image's resolution? Take for example, a photo of a Greek urn in a museum collection. Would it be common practice for a high-resolution TIFF of this photo to bear a (c)Museum Institution, 2014 statement, while a medium-resolution JPG of the same photo would bear a (c) Creative Commons License? Does this scenario fit within basic copyright law or guidelines? If anyone is differentiating copyright statements based on image resolution, do you have this policy written/documented in a shareable way? Thanks for any feedback you might have! Kate Blanch Administrator, Museum Databases kblanch at thewalters.org / 410.547.9000 ext. 266 The Walters Art Museum 600 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD 21201 www.thewalters.orghttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://www.t hewalters.org/k=diZKtJPqj4jWksRIF4bjkw%3D%3D%0Ar=OrleOIb4%2FRXNkzweNOIBM A%3D%3D%0Am=wL0PXJcQg%2Bvw13a7za8xzkNTUBz%2Fpc8H9qCXT9PYrng%3D%0As=3c1cd ed5fd5b36c4476d444291c8025dbd4b25cf6bf0219ed9449f2357981d31 ___ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://www.mcn.edu/k=diZKtJPq j4jWksRIF4bjkw%3D%3D%0Ar=OrleOIb4%2FRXNkzweNOIBMA%3D%3D%0Am=wL0PXJcQg%2B vw13a7za8xzkNTUBz%2Fpc8H9qCXT9PYrng%3D%0As=c1db4be32e3cfa28c1554916868a1d 9c0310327bdf458aa6292cf98ccbec0639) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo /mcn-lk=diZKtJPqj4jWksRIF4bjkw%3D%3D%0Ar=OrleOIb4%2FRXNkzweNOIBMA%3D%3D% 0Am=wL0PXJcQg%2Bvw13a7za8xzkNTUBz%2Fpc8H9qCXT9PYrng%3D%0As=a850c0b0fd549 5d5c075e4eabecee4134a464e0d39988add52fee3dfa4795882 The MCN-L archives can be found at: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://mcn.edu/pipermail/mcn-l/ k=diZKtJPqj4jWksRIF4bjkw%3D%3D%0Ar=OrleOIb4%2FRXNkzweNOIBMA%3D%3D%0Am=w L0PXJcQg%2Bvw13a7za8xzkNTUBz%2Fpc8H9qCXT9PYrng%3D%0As=af428652d17fe7f2045 077dcf7e52fc8d0870c79dd219241a7fe2d7368f36be2
[MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions
I think I see two possible misunderstandings in your original question. First, there is only one copyright here: the copyright in the photograph of the urn. (I am going to assume, like Amalyah, that the Greek urn itself is ancient and now in the public domain.) A medium resolution version is not a copyright derivative even though it may have been derived from a high-resolution original. It is just a copy. As the Copyright Office pamphlet on derivative works states: To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a new work or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Furthermore, in order to have a copyright separate from the original photograph, it must possess, according to the Feist decision, at least some minimal degree of creativity. So your medium-resolution version fails on both counts: it is not a derivative, and it does not embody any creativity of its own. You instead have two versions of one copyrighted work. Now let's think about the CC license. The copyright statement for both versions would be the same: (c) Museum Institution, 2014. The medium version's CC license would license the copyright and not any specific manifestation of that copyright. So the license that applies to the medium version would also apply to all other expressions of the copyrighted work - including the high-resolution version. And remember that the CC licenses prohibit you from imposing terms on the use of the copyrighted work that would prevent others from doing what the license allows. So if you licensed the medium resolution version as CC BY, you can't then impose other restrictions when you distribute a high-resolution version of it. (Or rather, you could impose those restrictions, but you would have no legal basis for objecting if someone ignores your terms.) It seems to me that if you want to impose different use restrictions on different resolutions, you are going to have to do that with contract terms that you devise and not a CC license. But there is some question whether contractual downstream use restrictions are legal. More importantly, you have to decide if you are willing to go to court to sue one of your customers/users. If not, it seems silly to try to impose the restriction in the first place. This, of course, is not legal advice and IANAL, just a simple archivist. Peter B. Hirtle, FSAA Research Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet Society, Harvard University Senior Policy Advisor, Cornell University Library peter_hirtle at harvard.edu phirtle at cyber.law.harvard.edu peter.hirtle at cornell.edu t.? 607.592.0684 http://vivo.cornell.edu/individual/individual23436 Copyright and Cultural Institutions: Guidelines for Digitization for U.S. Libraries, Archives, and Museums: http://hdl.handle.net/1813/14142 -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Kate Blanch Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:58 AM To: 'mcn-l at mcn.edu' Subject: [MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions Hello MCN, This may be a rather dense question regarding copyright law...but as it's outside my area of expertise I figured this community could provide a great reference point. My own research is not turning up an good answers/examples either! Do any institutions assign different copyright statements to derivatives of the same image, depending on that image's resolution? Take for example, a photo of a Greek urn in a museum collection. Would it be common practice for a high-resolution TIFF of this photo to bear a (c)Museum Institution, 2014 statement, while a medium-resolution JPG of the same photo would bear a (c) Creative Commons License? Does this scenario fit within basic copyright law or guidelines? If anyone is differentiating copyright statements based on image resolution, do you have this policy written/documented in a shareable way? Thanks for any feedback you might have! Kate Blanch Administrator, Museum Databases kblanch at thewalters.org / 410.547.9000 ext. 266 The Walters Art Museum 600 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD 21201 www.thewalters.orghttp://www.thewalters.org/
[MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions
Hello All -- It's always worth noting that a fair use can be made of any image, no matter theresolution or size. Whether and how an institution chooses to control access to images of works in its care is of course a different question. Michael points to some great examples of institutions that are opting to provide more access to images of art -- in many cases, art which is itself no longer in copyright. Which leads to another important point about proper and improper assertions of copyright -- There can be no valid copyright in images that are merely slavish reproductions of two-dimensional works, no matter that some institutions may continue to make such claims. So with respect to those slavish types of images, questions about resolution and size are simply irrelevant from a legal perspective -- and no CC license attached to any such image could be valid. Photographs of objects, installations, architecture, performance (etc.) often need to be treated differently. Those images may be properly copyrighted. But on the question of claiming a separate copyright in any image merely because of a difference in resolution or size, the right answer from the legal perspective is no. If anyone has different authority, or an organizational policy with respect to this, it would be enormously helpful if you could share that, on or off this list. Where a CC license is properly attached to any image, the terms of that specific CC license would apply to all resolutions and sizes of that image. All best, Virginia (formerly VP and GC of Creative Commons) ? From: Edson, Michael EDSONM at si.edu To: Museum Computer Network Listserv mcn-l at mcn.edu Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 10:24 AM Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions It's a great question and a fascinating topic, Kate. I've cross-posted this question over to the Open Knowledge Foundation's Open-GLAM mailing list. (I'm pretty sure the discussions are available in a public archive, I just can't put my finger on the link right now. D'oh!) As a point of reference/argument, I'd like to see OKFN's Open Glam Principles (http://openglam.org/principles/) champion the practice of providing equal/permissive rights to all derivatives of a given image/resource. I've often seen institutions congratulate themselves on providing open access to collections, when what they're actually doing is providing a somewhat restrictive license on thumbnail images, and enclosing higher quality images behind a more restrictive licensing/access regimen or paywall. There are many instances, particularly in research and for re-use, in which access to a thumbnail is no help at all. Of course, it's certainly within the property owner's rights to do this, but I'd prefer that these graduated access arrangements not be confused with the kind of open environments that the Getty, the National Gallery of Art, the Walters, the Rijksmuseum, and many others are providing. ;) On 3/12/14 11:11 AM, Amalyah Keshet akeshet at imj.org.il wrote: Kate: If an image is a protected (copyrighted) work, it doesn't matter what size or format it's in.? It's protected, and the copyright holder has the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute it and to make derivatives of it.? (Thumbnail images for purposes of identification, for example in a database or search engine, would be the possible exception.) However, that doesn't mean one cannot make an institutional policy decision to treat different formats and sizes differently in terms of how you distribute, license, or give away image files for various purposes.? This follows from the above. Amalyah Keshet Chair, MCN IP SIG Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources and Tel. +972-2-6708064 Fax +972-2-6771340 akeshet at imj.org.il The Israel Museum, Jerusalem -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Kate Blanch Sent: 12 March, 2014 4:58 PM To: 'mcn-l at mcn.edu' Subject: [MCN-L] Different Copyrights / Different Image Resolutions Hello MCN, This may be a rather dense question regarding copyright law...but as it's outside my area of expertise I figured this community could provide a great reference point. My own research is not turning up an good answers/examples either! Do any institutions assign different copyright statements to derivatives of the same image, depending on that image's resolution? Take for example, a photo of a Greek urn in a museum collection. Would it be common practice for a high-resolution TIFF of this photo to bear a (c)Museum Institution, 2014 statement, while a medium-resolution JPG of the same photo would bear a (c) Creative Commons License? Does this scenario fit within basic copyright law or guidelines? If anyone is differentiating copyright statements based on image resolution, do you have this policy written/documented in a shareable way? Thanks for
