Has anyone taken this discussion to Wiki Commons? If not, the Village Pump 
might be a good place to introduce it, and to get a wider discussion.

Malcolm




--- On Thu, 1/6/11, Liam Wyatt <liamwy...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Liam Wyatt <liamwy...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia NYC] Free-culture-compliant GLAM awards was: Museum of 
Art and Design lifts photo ban
To: "New York City Wikimedians" <wikimedia_nyc@lists.wikimedia.org>
Cc: "Mathias Schindler" <mathias.schind...@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, January 6, 2011, 9:35 PM

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"?

-Liam

wittylama.com/blog


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





-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to