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.
Advertising
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