I agree completely. In fact, I would weight "freely shares their own images
of PD works" and "releases their own IP under a CC license" much more highly
than "allows photography from the public".

What are the other criteria (beyond photographic policy) that we we would
expect to see in a GLAM that was "free-culture compliant"?


Peace, love & metadata

On 5 January 2011 15:22, Lee Gillentine <lgillent...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I like that idea.
> Personally, I think patrons taking photos in museums is annoying, and I can
> understand the reasons why museums would have a restrictive photo policy.
>  So an important thing to add to the criteria of rating museum's
> "free-culture-compliance"  is the availability of images of items in their
> collections through some type of creative-commons license.  This, of course,
> can be weighted differently than actually being able to take photos inside
> the museum.
> -Lee
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Liam Wyatt <liamwy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> (referring to previous thread: Yes, as several people have described,
>> Wikimedia takes assiduous care about copyright but cannot be responsible for
>> contracts (formal or implied) between third-parties e.g. a museum and its
>> patrons.)
>> Continuing from the link that Sammy posted,
>> http://hyperallergic.com/photopolicy/
>> this has got me wondering if it really is viable to create a museum
>> photography policy list... but much more than that...
>> I think this could work globally, but first I'd like to see if it works in
>> one area and I think that New York is as perfect a place as could be found
>> for such a trial.
>> What I'm thinking is whether it would be a good idea for Wikimedia to
>> sponsor the creating of a "free-culture-compliant" rating schema for
>> cultural organisations. If it worked properly, it could be updated and
>> "announced" annually with the best organisations in different categories
>> (National/less than 5 employees/libraries...) winning some kind of
>> recognition/award.
>> Where I'm basing this off is Greenpeace's "Guide to Greener Electronics"
>> which has been running for several years now:
>> http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/toxics/electronics/Guide-to-Greener-Electronics/
>> The deal with this is to take the public statements/policies of the major
>> tech organisations and rate them against a set of objective criteria. Each
>> year the new edition produces quite a bit of publicity e.g.
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/oct/27/apple-greenpeace-greener-electronics-rankings
>> Why I like this system is that it only assesses publicly stated policies
>> which means it does not require a complicated/expensive assessment system or
>> checking compliance with those policies. Also, by reducing things to a score
>> it makes it easy to rate the companies which allows for simple reporting
>> phrases (that the newspapers and corporate management like) such as "Nokia
>> stays in 1st place with the same score of 7.5 [green]".
>> Now, imagine if we could produce an objective list of "free-culture
>> criteria" that are applicable to cultural organisations (including but not
>> limited to photographic policies) and give each criterion a weighting. We
>> could make the list and the assessment process public, as is the wiki way,
>> which would also enable other organisations to self-assess if they wanted to
>> (something that cannot be done with Greenpeace's closed system). Then, once
>> an assessment had been done on all the institutions, we would be in the
>> position to be able to make a press release saying (for example):
>> "in 2011 The Brooklyn museum is the most free cultural institution in New
>> York, with the Tenement museum being the most improved whist the Frick
>> Collection became less free over the same period." This also allows smaller
>> institutions to be able to "beat" the big guys at something for the first
>> time!
>> What do you think of the idea in general? What do you think of the idea
>> specifically for NYC in 2011? And...before you think I'm just trying ask you
>> to do work, I should point out that the WMF has recently hired me on a 1
>> year fellowship (not yet announced) to improve our GLAM
>> outreach/collaboration capacity and therefore I would definitely be up for
>> helping to do the hard work on such a project.
>> Sincerely,
>> -Liam / Witty lama
>> wittylama.com/blog
>> Peace, love & metadata
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia_NYC mailing list
>> Wikimedia_NYC@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia_nyc
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia_NYC mailing list
> Wikimedia_NYC@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia_nyc
Wikimedia_NYC mailing list

Reply via email to