Europeana, Copyright & Data Quality

613 views

Published on

Talk at the Zagreb Festival of Digital Heritage about copyright. The issues are addressed and how Europeana together with the network tries to solve this. It also gives an overview of the different licenses being used and finally focusses on what makes good quality metadata.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
613
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Europeana, Copyright & Data Quality

  1. 1. Copyright and Data Quality !! Joris Pekel Zagreb, Croatia 11/04/2014@jpekel
  2. 2. Content à Copyright, why is it important? à Why is there an issue? à Metadata vs. Content à Rights labels of Europeana @jpekel
  3. 3. Why is there an issue? @jpekel
  4. 4. Why is there an issue? @jpekel à Copyright not made for the digital world
  5. 5. Why is there an issue? @jpekel à Copyright not made for the digital world à Fear of doing it wrong
  6. 6. Why is there an issue? @jpekel à Copyright not made for the digital world à Fear of doing it wrong à Expect curators/librarians/archivists to become ‘amateur lawyers’
  7. 7. Why is there an issue? @jpekel à Copyright not made for the digital world à Fear of doing it wrong à Expect curators/librarians/archivists to become ‘amateur lawyers’ à Unclear for (re-)user what is allowed
  8. 8. Why is there an issue? @jpekel à Copyright not made for the digital world à Fear of doing it wrong à Expect curators/librarians/archivists to become ‘amateur lawyers’ à Unclear for (re-)user what is allowed à Decrease of the Public Domain
  9. 9. Why is there an issue? @jpekel à Copyright not made for the digital world à Fear of doing it wrong à Expect curators/librarians/archivists to become ‘amateur lawyers’ à Unclear for (re-)user what is allowed à Decrease of the Public Domain
  10. 10. Why is there an issue? @jpekel à Copyright not made for the digital world à Fear of doing it wrong à Expect curators/librarians/archivists to become ‘amateur lawyers’ à Unclear for (re-)user what is allowed à Decrease of the Public Domain
  11. 11. Why is there an issue? @jpekel à Copyright not made for the digital world à Fear of doing it wrong à Expect curators/librarians/archivists to become ‘amateur lawyers’ à Unclear for (re-)user what is allowed à Decrease of the Public Domain
  12. 12. 4 Layer #1: Digital objects (on the site of the provider)! Layer #2: Previews (lower quality versions of #1) ! Layer #3: Metadata (descriptive object information)! EDM:rights! Preview & Digital Objects are licensed as described in EDM: rights ! CCO! @jpekel
  13. 13. 5 Twelve Rights Statements available for EDM: rights! @jpekel
  14. 14. 6 Twelve Rights Statements available for EDM: rights! @jpekel
  15. 15. @jpekel
  16. 16. @jpekel
  17. 17. Open culture on culture @jpekel
  18. 18. Open culture on culture à What is in the Public Domain stays in the Public Domain @jpekel
  19. 19. Open culture on culture à What is in the Public Domain stays in the Public Domain à If you have the rights to openly license content, do so @jpekel
  20. 20. Open? @jpekel http://opendefinition.org
  21. 21. Open? @jpekel “A piece of data or content is open if anyone is free to use, reuse, and redistribute it — subject only, at most, to the requirement to attribute and/or share-alike.” http://opendefinition.org
  22. 22. Rights Labelling
  23. 23. Rights Labelling à G
  24. 24. Rights Labelling à G
  25. 25. Decrease of the Public Domain @jpekel
  26. 26. Decrease of the Public Domain à Re-licensing of digital reproductions of Public Domain works @jpekel
  27. 27. Decrease of the Public Domain à Re-licensing of digital reproductions of Public Domain works à Extensions of copyright duration @jpekel
  28. 28. Decrease of the Public Domain à Re-licensing of digital reproductions of Public Domain works à Extensions of copyright duration à Public Private partnerships @jpekel
  29. 29. Decrease of the Public Domain à Re-licensing of digital reproductions of Public Domain works à Extensions of copyright duration à Public Private partnerships à Unclear legal situation @jpekel
  30. 30. Decrease of the Public Domain à Re-licensing of digital reproductions of Public Domain works à Extensions of copyright duration à Public Private partnerships à Unclear legal situation à Digitisation and storage not for free - new business models are needed @jpekel
  31. 31. Open culture on culture @jpekel
  32. 32. The rights statements in Europeana
  33. 33. @jpekel Paid Access - No Reuse
  34. 34. @jpekel Free Access - No Re-use
  35. 35. @jpekel CC-BY-NC-ND
  36. 36. @jpekel CC-BY-NC-SA
  37. 37. @jpekel CC-BY-NC ! !
  38. 38. @jpekel CC-BY-ND ! !
  39. 39. @jpekel CC-BY-SA
  40. 40. @jpekel CC-BY !
  41. 41. @jpekel CC0
  42. 42. @jpekel Public Domain Marked
  43. 43. @jpekel Orphan Work ! !
  44. 44. @jpekel Looking for Re-usable Content ! !
  45. 45. @jpekel Looking for Re-usable Content ! !
  46. 46. @jpekel Looking for Re-usable Content ! !
  47. 47. @jpekel Looking for Re-usable Content ! !
  48. 48. Commonly heard issues @jpekel
  49. 49. Commonly heard issues à We have our own licensing policy @jpekel
  50. 50. Commonly heard issues à We have our own licensing policy à Our collection is very complex @jpekel
  51. 51. Commonly heard issues à We have our own licensing policy à Our collection is very complex à Europeana Rights Statements do not apply to us @jpekel
  52. 52. Commonly heard issues à We have our own licensing policy à Our collection is very complex à Europeana Rights Statements do not apply to us à We don’t need to provide a Rights Statement - that is clear from our website @jpekel
  53. 53. Commonly heard issues à We have our own licensing policy à Our collection is very complex à Europeana Rights Statements do not apply to us à We don’t need to provide a Rights Statement - that is clear from our website à We don’t know which Rights Statement applies @jpekel
  54. 54. How we are trying to solve these @jpekel
  55. 55. How we are trying to solve these à We have clear and readable rights statements @jpekel
  56. 56. How we are trying to solve these à We have clear and readable rights statements à We provide tools to determine rights statements @jpekel
  57. 57. How we are trying to solve these à We have clear and readable rights statements à We provide tools to determine rights statements à We organise workshops with institutions about copyright @jpekel
  58. 58. How we are trying to solve these à We have clear and readable rights statements à We provide tools to determine rights statements à We organise workshops with institutions about copyright à We push for copyright reform and harmonisation on a European level @jpekel
  59. 59. How we are trying to solve these à We have clear and readable rights statements à We provide tools to determine rights statements à We organise workshops with institutions about copyright à We push for copyright reform and harmonisation on a European level à We advocate for an open approach via publications and blogs @jpekel
  60. 60. How we are trying to solve these à We have clear and readable rights statements à We provide tools to determine rights statements à We organise workshops with institutions about copyright à We push for copyright reform and harmonisation on a European level à We advocate for an open approach via publications and blogs à We monitor the usage and appropriateness of the Rights statements @jpekel
  61. 61. Metadata quality
  62. 62. How can we define Metadata Quality? DATA PROVIDER EUROPEANA AGGREGATOR ! A COLLABORATIVE PROCESS END USER
  63. 63. Why should we improve metadata quality? à Institutions benefit à End users benefit à Makes searches easier à Creates an emotional connection with the digital object 
 v. important in relation to images à Richer resource à Wider end user base (research/academia) à More page view and longer page stays à Greater click through rates à But how do we get it?!
  64. 64. What is good metadata quality? à Mandatory elements à Depth of description (meaningful titles) à Direct links to digital object à High quality previews and digital objects à Accurate rights statements à Geo coordinates (geonames, edm:place) à Persistent Identifiers (less broken links, Google indexing) à Vocabularies / external resources for enrichment à EDM
  65. 65. What Europeana currently asks for: à Preferably EDM à 9 Unique meaningful elements in EDM (unless UGC) ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! à These are only the minimum elements required
  66. 66. What that looks like practically Via EuropeanaPhotography
  67. 67. What that looks like practically Via EuropeanaPhotography
  68. 68. What metadata quality looks like
  69. 69. What metadata quality looks like
 Web resource class
  70. 70. What that looks like practically…
 Agent Class
  71. 71. What can be improved in Metadata
  72. 72. Meaningful titles
  73. 73. Meaningful titles and images
  74. 74. Thumbnails, persistently working links, image quality, mandatory elements
  75. 75. Attribution and Rights Labeling Showing the EDM:rights under the image and dc:rights in the record
  76. 76. Metadata quality recommendations à Metadata is a circular process à Metadata is the only way to reach our end users à It should be considered as your product à Make your product as salient as possible by providing as much meaningful data as you can manage! à Meaningful content in the EDM mandatory elements plus recommended elements makes for a great readable record with increased traffic à Metadata is a circular process
  77. 77. Key Messages
  78. 78. Europeana Ingestion Process and Metadata Quality • Aiming to improve communication for data providers • More structured processes and policies • Clear and transparent approach towards rights labels • Helping partners with their metadata to create a better experience for end users and create more traffic for institutions
  79. 79. Thank you Joris Pekel Joris.pekel@kb.nl@jpekel

×