[MCN-L] Media Technology Departments
--Original Message-- From: Farling, Jessica R. jrfarl...@ou.edu To: mcn-l at mcn.edu mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Thursday, April 3, 2014 6:41:43 PM GMT+ Subject: [MCN-L] Media Technology Departments Greetings from Oklahoma! Under new leadership at the Fred Jones Jr. Museum of Art, we are currently creating a long-range plan for the next five years. We?ve been asked what positions or departments we would add to the current staff, and I would like the museum to add a department dedicated to technology. This department would help the Education department with digital learning initiatives, but also assist the PR department with creating and disseminating media. To be a successful museum in the 21st-century, we must look to technology. Without staff members dedicated to technology, however, the museum will fall behind given how quickly technology changes. I am interested in museums that have a staff member or department dedicated to technology. What works well? What does not work? We are really hoping to have some models from other institutions for a starting point. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. Warm regards, Jessica -- Jessica Farling Curator of Academic Programs Fred Jones Jr. Museum of Art 405.325.5990 | jrfarling at ou.edu Admission is always free thanks to the generous support of the OU Office of the President and the OU Athletics Department! ___ 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] 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
[MCN-L] RE: Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright?
And since this thread has continued, should note that unless the work went direct from studio to museum, it's quite possible it was published under common practices of exhibition or exhibition advertising -- so no copyright, anyway. --- On Sun, 11/21/10, Peter B. Hirtle pbh6 at cornell.edu wrote: From: Peter B. Hirtle p...@cornell.edu Subject: Re: [MCN-L] ??RE: Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? To: Museum Computer Network Listserv mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Sunday, November 21, 2010, 5:43 AM Amalyah Keshet wrote: ?Just curious:? If a work by Matisse had been purchased for MoMA from Matisse or his dealer *in France*, would the Pushman Doctrine still have applied?? I suspect that French law would think otherwise.? Did the Doctrine apply only to works purchased in the US?? That is an interesting question.? Off the top of my head, I don?t know of any common law court cases that address this jurisdictional issue.? My guess would be that NY courts would conclude that a sale that took place in France would likely be governed by French law.? If MoMA had purchased a work in France for delivery to the US, however, the NY courts might be willing to claim jurisdiction ? and apply NY law ? even when French law would, as you note, be different. But this is primarily a theoretical issue.? I don?t foresee many museums trying to assert copyright ownership ? especially when they might still be liable for infringement outside of the U.S. Peter -Inline Attachment Follows- ___ 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] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright?
There is a very useful chart laying out when copyrighted material in the United States enters the public domain at http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm. It will show, for example, why there is simply no way there could be a copyright in any image published around 1900. Conceivably some new copyrighted work could incorporate an uncopyrighted image, but that portion of the new work, and the image itself, of course would remain public domain. A straight reproduction of a public domain image -- as in a new souvenir postcard of such an image -- is something anyone could make, and publish in any form. Hope this is helpful. Regards, Virginia Rutledge --- On Thu, 11/18/10, Pandora Mather-Lees pandoraml at hotmail.com wrote: From: Pandora Mather-Lees pandor...@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 8:04 AM Hello You probably know that the photographer may not still be alive but the? rights will continue for 70 years after the end of the year of his or her death.? When Bridgeman Art Library accesses this type of material from our museums and we are unsure (often they have little information to give us) we usually flag up the image as 'copyright status unknown' and we would certainly do this for anything post 1900.? Sometimes you can track the rights through the photographic studio if there is a stamp there.? At least this way our clients are aware that there is some risk.? With very old photographs, we would usually take the decision to display them on our website however. Hope that helps, Pandora Mather-Lees, MD, Bridgeman Education From: FThomson at ashevilleart.org To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:30:49 -0500 Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? There are occasionally contemporary publishers that also assert copyright over vintage postcards that were published by companies they have bought out. We have so local postcards from around 1900 that a company claims copyrights over. Frank Thomson, Curator Asheville Art Museum PO Box 1717 2 South Pack Square Asheville, NC 28802 828.253.3227 tel 828.257.4503 fax fthomson at ashevilleart.org www.ashevilleart.org -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Stephanie Weaver Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 3:00 PM To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Subject: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? Hi MCN, I know many of you deal with copyright so wanted to ask for your input. One of my clients would like to create new postcards from historic postcards of their site that they have collected or purchased (but not accessioned). At what point do mass-produced images become public domain? The original postcards are from the 1920s-1940s. Copies of these postcards are most likely in collections in our local historical society. Thanks, I appreciate you sharing your expertise. Best, Stephanie Weaver Visitor experience consultant experienceology: Because happy visitors return. San Diego, CA Skype: experienceology E-news: http://www.experienceology.com/newsletter/ For information on our book, blog, podcast, upcoming classes, and e-news, visit www.experienceology.com or follow me on twitter.com/experienceology. See samples of my classes here: www.youtube.com/experienceology. Watch the free archived version of my class on the visitor experience here: http://bit.ly/NlunE Upcoming presentations: Interpretation Canada online conference: November 30, 2010 Hawai'i Museums Association: January 2011 (TBD) Past presentations: Palo Alto Art Center: October 2010 Western Museums Association: October 2010 Heard Museum Phoenix Zoo: October 2010 Downey City Library: August 2010 American Association of Museums: May 2010 Tijuana Estuary docent training: April 2010 UCLA Extension: January 2010 ___ 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/ ??? ?? ??? ? -Inline Attachment Follows- ___ 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] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright?
Thanks are due Peter for making the chart -- and apologies for coming late into this conversation -- but take it as evidence that the chart is a terrific resource that people are eager to share once they know about it. Also worth noting Peter's usage below of the phrase rise into the public domain! --- On Thu, 11/18/10, Peter B. Hirtle pbh6 at cornell.edu wrote: From: Peter B. Hirtle p...@cornell.edu Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? To: Museum Computer Network Listserv mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 3:30 AM As far as I know, postcards had to follow the same rules as all published material to acquire copyright protection.? That is, there had to be a copyright notice on the postcard, and the copyright had to be renewed after 28 years.? If neither occurred, the postcard would rise into the public domain.? You can look at http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/ to determine when items enter the public domain in the U.S. You can learn more about copyright and the public domain in Copyright Cultural Institutions: Guidelines for Digitization for U.S. Libraries, Archives, and Museums, available for sale on Amazon or as a free PDF download at http://hdl.handle.net/1813/14142. Peter B. Hirtle Senior Policy Advisor Digital Scholarship Services Cornell University Library 2B53 Kroch Library? Ithaca, NY? 14853 peter.hirtle at cornell.edu t.? 607.255-4033 f.? 607/255-9524 http://vivo.cornell.edu/individual/vivo/individual23436 -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Stephanie Weaver Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 8:00 PM To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Subject: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? Hi MCN, I know many of you deal with copyright so wanted to ask for your input. One of my clients would like to create new postcards from historic postcards of their site that they have collected or purchased (but not accessioned). At what point do mass-produced images become public domain? The original postcards are from the 1920s-1940s. Copies of these postcards are most likely in collections in our local historical society. Thanks, I appreciate you sharing your expertise. Best, Stephanie Weaver Visitor experience consultant experienceology: Because happy visitors return. San Diego, CA Skype: experienceology E-news:???http://www.experienceology.com/newsletter/ For information on our book, blog, podcast, upcoming classes, and e-news, visit www.experienceology.com or follow me on twitter.com/experienceology. See samples of my classes here: www.youtube.com/experienceology. Watch the free archived version of my class on the visitor experience here: http://bit.ly/NlunE Upcoming presentations: Interpretation Canada online conference: November 30, 2010 Hawai'i Museums Association: January 2011 (TBD) Past presentations: Palo Alto Art Center: October 2010 Western Museums Association: October 2010 Heard Museum Phoenix Zoo: October 2010 Downey City Library: August 2010 American Association of Museums: May 2010 Tijuana Estuary docent training: April 2010 UCLA Extension: January 2010 ___ 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] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright?
Indeed, copyright has been made too complex! Fortunately cases involving posthumously published works aren't all that common. (And there's a lot more to the Dickinson example.) Sadly, at present copyright overreach is much more common. But considering all possible circumstances and technicalities, it would be more accurate for me to say that there is no simple way for an image published in 1900 to still be in copyright. In order for an entity to have a valid copyright claim in such an image, some unusual circumstances would have to obtain, beginning with unauthorized reproduction, then proper registration and renewal and observance of formalities, a valid chain of copyright title if the entity isn't the legal successor of the original owner It's a lot to assume, but not impossible. It would be interesting to hear from the company if so. --- On Thu, 11/18/10, Frank E. Thomson FThomson at ashevilleart.org wrote: From: Frank E. Thomson FThomson at ashevilleart.org Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? To: Museum Computer Network Listserv mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 2:00 PM Interesting, but copyright is a complex issue. For instance, Harvard maintains copyright control of some Emily Dickinson poetry and she has be dead over a hundred years. http://rpo.library.utoronto.ca/poet/94.html Frank Thomson, curator Asheville Art Museum PO Box 1717 Asheville, NC 28802 2 South Pack Square 828.253.3227 tel 828.257.4503 fax www.ashevilleart.org fthomson at ashevilleart.org -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Virginia Rutledge Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 2:54 PM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? There is a very useful chart laying out when copyrighted material in the United States enters the public domain at http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm. It will show, for example, why there is simply no way there could be a copyright in any image published around 1900. Conceivably some new copyrighted work could incorporate an uncopyrighted image, but that portion of the new work, and the image itself, of course would remain public domain. A straight reproduction of a public domain image -- as in a new souvenir postcard of such an image -- is something anyone could make, and publish in any form. Hope this is helpful. Regards, Virginia Rutledge --- On Thu, 11/18/10, Pandora Mather-Lees pandoraml at hotmail.com wrote: From: Pandora Mather-Lees pandor...@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010, 8:04 AM Hello You probably know that the photographer may not still be alive but the? rights will continue for 70 years after the end of the year of his or her death.? When Bridgeman Art Library accesses this type of material from our museums and we are unsure (often they have little information to give us) we usually flag up the image as 'copyright status unknown' and we would certainly do this for anything post 1900.? Sometimes you can track the rights through the photographic studio if there is a stamp there.? At least this way our clients are aware that there is some risk.? With very old photographs, we would usually take the decision to display them on our website however. Hope that helps, Pandora Mather-Lees, MD, Bridgeman Education From: FThomson at ashevilleart.org To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:30:49 -0500 Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? There are occasionally contemporary publishers that also assert copyright over vintage postcards that were published by companies they have bought out. We have so local postcards from around 1900 that a company claims copyrights over. Frank Thomson, Curator Asheville Art Museum PO Box 1717 2 South Pack Square Asheville, NC 28802 828.253.3227 tel 828.257.4503 fax fthomson at ashevilleart.org www.ashevilleart.org -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Stephanie Weaver Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 3:00 PM To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Subject: [MCN-L] Using old postcards to create new souvenirs: copyright? Hi MCN, I know many of you deal with copyright so wanted to ask for your input. One of my clients would like to create new postcards from historic postcards of their site that they have collected or purchased (but not accessioned). At what point do mass-produced images become public domain? The original postcards are from the 1920s-1940s. Copies of these postcards are most likely in collections in our local historical society. Thanks, I appreciate you sharing your expertise. Best, Stephanie Weaver Visitor experience consultant
[MCN-L] NYC area program on Orphan Works, Tuesday, October 20, 6-8pm
On Tuesday, October 20th, from 6-8pm, the New York City Bar Association will present Lost and Found: A Practical Look at Orphan Works. Please join us? for a discussion of the latest proposals for use of orphan works, and particularly, orphan images. ? Speakers: Brendan M. Connell, Jr., Director and Counsel for Administration, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation ? Frederic Haber, Vice President and General Counsel, Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. ? Eugene H. Mopsik, Executive Director, American Society of Media Photographers ? Maria Pallante, Associate Register for Policy International Affairs, U.S. Copyright Office ? Charles Wright, Vice President and Associate General Counsel, Legal and Business Affairs, AE Television Networks ? Moderator: June M. Besek, Executive Director, Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts, Columbia Law School ? The program is free and open to all. For more information and to register: http://www.nycbar.org/EventsCalendar/show_event.php?eventid=1222.
[MCN-L] NYC area program on Orphan Works, Tuesday, October 20, 6-8pm
For those in the New York City area, below and attached is information on a public program on orphan works that should be of interest to anyone working with images. Please feel free to post and forward -- the panel is terrific and we expect this to be highly informative. Best regards, Virginia Rutledge Chair, Art Law Committee, New York City Bar Association Lost and Found: A Practical Look at Orphan Works ? On Tuesday, October 20th, from 6-8pm, the Art Law Committee and the Copyright and Literary Property Law Committees of the New York City Bar Association, in conjunction with Columbia Law School?s Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts, will present Lost and Found: A Practical Look at Orphan Works. Please join us in the Association Meeting Hall at 42 W. 44th Street for a discussion of the latest proposals for use of orphan works, and particularly, orphan images. ? Speakers: Brendan M. Connell, Jr., Director and Counsel for Administration, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation ? Frederic Haber, Vice President and General Counsel, Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. ? Eugene H. Mopsik, Executive Director, American Society of Media Photographers ? Maria Pallante, Associate Register for Policy International Affairs, U.S. Copyright Office ? Charles Wright, Vice President and Associate General Counsel, Legal and Business Affairs, AE Television Networks ? Moderator: June M. Besek, Executive Director, Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts, Columbia Law School ? ? The program is free and open to all. More information can be found in the attached flyer. Please register at http://www.nycbar.org/EventsCalendar/show_event.php?eventid=1222. -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 10-20-09 Lost and Found--A Practical Look at Orphan Works - Flyer.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 325029 bytes Desc: not available URL: http://mcn.edu/pipermail/mcn-l/attachments/20091007/0c21cddf/attachment.pdf
[MCN-L] rights question
Just a reminder that permissions are not required for any use of work that is fair under U.S. law, or similar law of other jurisdictions. The question of use of orphan works -- if that is what is being raised -- *may* be different, but only if the use is NOT fair. All fair uses are OK whether a work is orphaned or whether a known copyright holder objects -- including in situations where one may actually have already requested permission and been denied. However, it is true that currently there is no provision in U.S. copyright law that offers any safe harbor for use of orphan works that is not fair. That's a pity where such a use might increase distribution of the work to the larger public benefit. Let's hope we get some good legislation to cover those situations. Best regards, Virginia --- On Mon, 9/14/09, Lesley Ellen Harris lesleyeharris at comcast.net wrote: From: Lesley Ellen Harris lesleyehar...@comcast.net Subject: Re: [MCN-L] rights question To: Museum Computer Network Listserv mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Monday, September 14, 2009, 1:06 PM Bill, legally if you do not have permission, you may not use the work. There is no mechanism in US copyright law to help you.? However, if? you are based in Canada, there is an unlocatable copyright owner? provision which can help you just in that circumstance.? And it is possible that you can use it if using a? Canadian work (though I would have to double check to see who is? eligible if you are not in Canada.) Lesley Lesley Ellen Harris lesley at copyrightlaws.com www.copyrightanswers.blogspot.com On Sep 14, 2009, at 2:29 PM, Weinstein, William wrote: We are evaluating our policy regarding obtaining rights for images of works we publish in our online collection section.???The issue of what to do with works where there is an apparent copyright holder that can either not be contacted or does not respond to repeated permission requests.? Does anyone have a position of what to do regarding works in this particular state of limbo? Bill Weinstein ___ 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] Image Sizes (later Image Theft)
Just a cheer in support of creative thinking! And of course, creative lawyering. Best regards, Virginia Special Counsel, Creative Commons Chair, Art Law Committee, New York City Bar Association --- On Wed, 5/20/09, Newman, Alan A-Newman at NGA.GOV wrote: From: Newman, Alan a-new...@nga.gov Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Image Sizes (later Image Theft) To: Museum Computer Network Listserv mcn-l at mcn.edu 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 VA 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 NHoneysett at getty.edu 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/
[MCN-L] Image Sizes
Amalyah, Without giving legal advice, I do think it is important to note that Bridgeman is law within the Southern District of New York (and many commentators believe it would be followed not only in the Second Circuit, but other US circuit courts as well). Should any of the many museums who are within the SDNY jurisdiction seek to contest or overturn that ruling, they would have to go to court. Of course, business practices aren't always strictly legal, even when they're standard, and business practices aren't necessarily litigated, even when they are illegal. It would be really interesting to see some hard numbers on profit and cost with respect to museum image licensing practices generally -- not just the licensing of images of two-dimensional works in the public domain that was at issue in Bridgeman -- from a lot of museums. There have been a few studies, I realize, but none comprehensive or, many think, conclusive. However, I've been told by a number of people that their organizations would either not be able to determine those numbers, because for example they don't track and analyze staff time involved, and/or that their organizations would not want to make those numbers public. Query both those responses, particularly for publicly-supported entities. I wonder how many of the museums represented on this list would be willing to account for and disclose their numbers? It might be an important step toward understanding how to build better and more profitable business models -- perhaps collaborative? -- involving images. While museums obviously must work under the copyright regimes of their various jurisdictions, images are a global business today. And obviously any monetary profit a museum can make while serving its mission is good. Thank you for this most interesting thread. Regards, Virginia --- On Wed, 5/6/09, Amalyah Keshet [akeshet at imj.org.il] akeshet at imj.org.il wrote: From: Amalyah Keshet [akeshet at imj.org.il] akes...@imj.org.il Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Image Sizes To: 'Museum Computer Network Listserv' mcn-l at mcn.edu Date: Wednesday, May 6, 2009, 3:40 AM Stanley: The decision in the Bridgeman v. Corel case is binding upon the two parties in that case, period.? It is neither legislation nor a Supreme Court decision, and therefore is not law.? It is not a change in the US copyright law, nor a new fair use exception.? It is a precedent that may be taken into consideration by a court deciding future cases. And it obviously has no bearing on the copyright laws of other countries. Amalyah Keshet Head of Image Resources Copyright Management The Israel Museum, Jerusalem -Original Message- From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Stanley Smith Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 10:21 PM To: mcn-l at mcn.edu Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Image Sizes If you think that your images are not out there, you are mistaken.? At the Getty we have taken pains to manage how our images migrate from our walls, but a quick Google image search of Irises and Van Gogh will yield hundreds of hits (the most hilarious of which is a line of dog-themed ceramic plates with the painting serving as background to visages of various breeds).? This is not too concerning, as the artwork itself is in the public domain, and Bridgeman v. Corel says that we can't claim photographic copyright-so all's fair in love and war. Speaking of Bridgeman, though, I recently tried to order a print of the same painting from Bridgeman's website. I am conducting research for a possible print-on-demand service at the Getty --(yes Will, if there is money to be made we should be the ones making it!) -- I wanted to see what other commercial ventures were doing with our images-mostly a quality survey.? I foolish used my Getty mailing address when placing the order (a 20 x 24 archival inkjet print on fine-art paper for about $70).? Two days later I got an email from Bridgeman stating: We regret to inform you that your order of 'Irises,1889' (supplier code BAL40070) cannot be processed due to the transparency being unsuitable for reproduction. The Bridgeman Art Library have advised that the quality of this particular print would be compromised by enlarging it beyond the image size and as a result we have been? forced to cancel and refund your order. The image will be removed from our site within the next couple of days to avoid any future? disappointment. Even Bridgeman was nervous about copyright issues!? Irises was removed from their website the next day.? There is really no possible way to prevent your images from getting out in the world.? Those CD's or transparencies that you have sent for scholar requests or publications over the years are still out there, and can fall into any number of hands.? Current imaging software is very good at rezing up small image image files into ones that can be used for print.? Current stitching software can
