This page has been validated.
- implementing and sustaining such programmes.[1]
- A 2010 report by Simon Tanner and Marilyn Deegan studied the opportunities, benefits and impacts of digitised resources for the UK, laying important groundwork for (re)evaluating how value can be transformed and measured through digital initiatives that provide access to the UK’s heritage collections.[2]
- Work by Kenneth Crews and Melanie Brown between 2010-2012 examined the broad website terms of use and licensing policies of 50 art museums in the United States. Crews and Brown uncovered a range of “copyright overreach” strategies limiting reuse in ways that inhibit new creativity, scholarly exploration and pose a threat to the public domain.[3]
- Kristin Kelly’s 2013 report surveyed 11 art museums in the United Kingdom and United States at various stages of opening up public domain collections. Kelly found that fears around loss of control and revenue loss either faded, or did not materialise, while the evidence of both internal and external benefits of open access steadily grew.[4]
- The 2015 Striking the Balance Report studied the ways in which a lack of clarity, standardisation and funding around open licensing shaped the business models and access policies of various United Kingdom cultural institutions. The report highlighted the significant investment gap between goals for digital remits and the resources available to realise them.[5]
- A 2016 paper by Effie Kapsalis revisited the museums featured in Kelly’s 2013 report and documented the impact of funding obligations and public expectations on increasing open access to collections and the demonstrated benefits for cultural institutions. Kapsalis’s work laid the groundwork for the Smithsonian’s own shift to open access in 2020.[6]
- A 2018 report by Martine Denoyelle, Katie Durand, Johanna Daniel and Eli DoukaridouRamantani detailed the complex systems regulating the circulation of art images in French collections and the impact of copyright on downstream reuse, finding commercial objectives were at the root of the problem.[7]
- In Australia, a 2021 report explored audiences’ expectations around, and engagement with, art through new technologies, including how COVID-19 has accelerated the shift to digital cultural engagement and the development of a growing ‘dual economy’.[8]
These studies document almost two decades of research undertaken on how technology has changed the ways cultural institutions document and manage their collections, and the new barriers and opportunities that can arise through licensing and open access. All overlap with findings from this study.
- ↑ https://sca.jiscinvolve.org/wp/files/2009/04/sca_2009symp_ipr_casestudies-final.pdf
- ↑ https://kdl.kcl.ac.uk/what-we-do/consultancy/strategic-thinking-and-practice/inspiring-research-inspiring-scholarship/
- ↑ https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2026476
- ↑ https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub157/
- ↑ https://www.nationalmuseums.org.uk/media/documents/publications/striking_the_balance.pdf
- ↑ http://siarchives.si.edu/sites/default/files/pdfs/2016_03_10_OpenCollections_Public.pdf
- ↑ https://www.inha.fr/fr/recherche/le-departement-des-etudes-et-de-la-recherche/domaines-de-recherche/programmes-en-cours/images-usages.html
- ↑ https://australiacouncil.gov.au/advocacy-and-research/in-real-life/
A Culture of Copyright
10
