Defining the Cultural Commons

  • 474 views
Uploaded on

Overview presentation to kick off the Cultural Commons track at the OK fest on the 19th of September 2012 in Helsinki, Finland

Overview presentation to kick off the Cultural Commons track at the OK fest on the 19th of September 2012 in Helsinki, Finland

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
474
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
14
Comments
1
Likes
2

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • the only thing is i wont do as part of this presentation is to define the cultural commons. my definition of the CC is a relatively simple one: those parts of our cultural past that are not in meaningful commercial circulation anymore or that are in the public domain or both. some of this stuff we are free to access and use and some of if we are currently not. that last part is - as far as i am concerned the real tragedy of the commons.\n
  • speak about involvement in these projects as kennisland and personally. summer of 2003 when we started with Creative Commons Netherlands\n
  • speak about involvement in these projects as kennisland and personally. summer of 2003 when we started with Creative Commons Netherlands\n
  • speak about involvement in these projects as kennisland and personally. summer of 2003 when we started with Creative Commons Netherlands\n
  • speak about involvement in these projects as kennisland and personally. summer of 2003 when we started with Creative Commons Netherlands\n
  • speak about involvement in these projects as kennisland and personally. summer of 2003 when we started with Creative Commons Netherlands\n
  • speak about involvement in these projects as kennisland and personally. summer of 2003 when we started with Creative Commons Netherlands\n
  • speak about involvement in these projects as kennisland and personally. summer of 2003 when we started with Creative Commons Netherlands\n
  • i want to answer 3 questions. obviously this is highly subjective but i hope that this provides a good overview and manages to provide a frame for the discussions during the rest of the day\n
  • i want to answer 3 questions. obviously this is highly subjective but i hope that this provides a good overview and manages to provide a frame for the discussions during the rest of the day\n
  • i want to answer 3 questions. obviously this is highly subjective but i hope that this provides a good overview and manages to provide a frame for the discussions during the rest of the day\n
  • before i continue with the rest of the presentation let me point out that in the following i will focus on projects and initiatives that have chosen (or are required) to operate within the limited space provided by copyright. In no way is this intended to ignore the important work that is being done by preservation projects that operate outside this space. the contribution of projects like karagarga, ubuweb or oxdb to preserving 20th century culture cannot be underlined enough. These are the projects that are currently saving us from our own foolishness.\n
  • the mother of all projects\n
  • incredibly important project (lots of respect to Mathias Schindler and everyone else involved). This really showed that it is possible to align the intrests of the commons movement and cultural heritage institutions.\n
  • interesting thing we have not heard that much about the flickr commons lately (poor flickr you have been mismanaged) still this is an important ressource and was a really important step in letting CHIs think outside the box (of their own websites) and the benefits of audience interaction.\n
  • lovely project. we had much fun doing this.. (very rewarding moment to be almost alone in a major museum with a bunch of determined amateurs + an equal number of guards) \n
  • lovely project. we had much fun doing this.. (very rewarding moment to be almost alone in a major museum with a bunch of determined amateurs + an equal number of guards) \n
  • lovely project. we had much fun doing this.. (very rewarding moment to be almost alone in a major museum with a bunch of determined amateurs + an equal number of guards) \n
  • interesting case at the intersection of government data and cultural heritage. probably aided by the fact that in NL we have this general rule that copyright of employees is automatically assigned to the employers.\n
  • shows the potential impact of open cultural data. video material in here was resonsible for 15 percent of all video on wikipedia. 3 m pageviews per month. also note that open beelden contains only a fraction of the material from the polygoon collection (ill come back to this in part 3)\n
  • in a way this is the current status quo. we have managed to upscale our interventions (we even manage to get paid). very much based on what i will discuss in section 2.\n
  • surprisingly difficult in the sense that we are talking about publicly funded institutions here were many of us instinctivly feel that there is a moral obligation to contribute to a digital commons. the fact that they do not own the rights is fundamentally different from sctors like academia, governement data or educational materials\n
  • surprisingly difficult in the sense that we are talking about publicly funded institutions here were many of us instinctivly feel that there is a moral obligation to contribute to a digital commons. the fact that they do not own the rights is fundamentally different from sctors like academia, governement data or educational materials\n
  • surprisingly difficult in the sense that we are talking about publicly funded institutions here were many of us instinctivly feel that there is a moral obligation to contribute to a digital commons. the fact that they do not own the rights is fundamentally different from sctors like academia, governement data or educational materials\n
  • i must stress that i fully understand the situation many institutions find themselves in. There is a lot of pressure on them to generate income from their (digital) collections and public domain often look like the only ones suited for commercial exploitation. \n
  • i must stress that i fully understand the situation many institutions find themselves in. There is a lot of pressure on them to generate income from their (digital) collections and public domain often look like the only ones suited for commercial exploitation. \n
  • so i would argue that we are at a bit of a crossroads right now. we have experimented a lot, have managed do quite a lot, but if we are honest we have to conclude that we have barely scratched the surface.\n
  • the last part is what we have addressed in the projects i have discussed in the previous section \n
  • the last part is what we have addressed in the projects i have discussed in the previous section \n
  • the last part is what we have addressed in the projects i have discussed in the previous section \n
  • the last part is what we have addressed in the projects i have discussed in the previous section \n
  • the last part is what we have addressed in the projects i have discussed in the previous section \n
  • of course this is fundamentally a silly principle. the fact that many of us felt the need to elevate this self evident statement to a policy principle illustrates where we started\n
  • of course this is fundamentally a silly principle. the fact that many of us felt the need to elevate this self evident statement to a policy principle illustrates where we started\n
  • of course this is fundamentally a silly principle. the fact that many of us felt the need to elevate this self evident statement to a policy principle illustrates where we started\n
  • of course this is fundamentally a silly principle. the fact that many of us felt the need to elevate this self evident statement to a policy principle illustrates where we started\n
  • of course this is fundamentally a silly principle. the fact that many of us felt the need to elevate this self evident statement to a policy principle illustrates where we started\n
  • of course this is fundamentally a silly principle. the fact that many of us felt the need to elevate this self evident statement to a policy principle illustrates where we started\n
  • of course this is fundamentally a silly principle. the fact that many of us felt the need to elevate this self evident statement to a policy principle illustrates where we started\n
  • of course this is fundamentally a silly principle. the fact that many of us felt the need to elevate this self evident statement to a policy principle illustrates where we started\n
  • google euphemism for practical monopoly. and of course that famous case between the NPG and wikimedia seems to have generated the same insight as well \n
  • google euphemism for practical monopoly. and of course that famous case between the NPG and wikimedia seems to have generated the same insight as well \n
  • google euphemism for practical monopoly. and of course that famous case between the NPG and wikimedia seems to have generated the same insight as well \n
  • google euphemism for practical monopoly. and of course that famous case between the NPG and wikimedia seems to have generated the same insight as well \n
  • metadata most often is the product of institutions most often produced with public funding. there is a strong normative argument to be made that metadata must be made available under conditions that maximize the potential for re-use.\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • of course this is where the real question that we have been avoiding for a while lies burried\n
  • so i would argue that we are at a bit of a crossroads right now. we have experimented a lot, have managed do quite a lot, but if we are honest we have to conclude that we have barely scratched the surface.\n
  • To me is the key question. It is intresting to discuss in how far a solution like this would \n
  • To me is the key question. It is intresting to discuss in how far a solution like this would \n
  • To me is the key question. It is intresting to discuss in how far a solution like this would \n
  • To me is the key question. It is intresting to discuss in how far a solution like this would \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • and lets face it we suck at this. we have just lost a big battle with the oprhan works directive.\n
  • \n

Transcript

  • 1. Defining  the  Cultural  CommonsPaul  Keller,  OK  fest  Helsinki,  19  September  2012
  • 2. 1. where  do  we  come  from?2. where  are  we  now?  3. what  is  to  be  done?
  • 3. 1. where  do  we  come  from?2. where  are  we  now?  3. what  is  to  be  done?
  • 4. project gutenberg
  • 5. Bundesarchief wikimedia commons
  • 6. NA joins flickr
  • 7. RCE
  • 8. open images
  • 9. opencultuurdata / rijksmuseum
  • 10. What  have  we  learned  from  this?Cultural  heritage  is  a  surprisingly  difficult  domain  for  building  a  commons.  The  works  are  concentrated  in  the  hands  of  institutions  that  generally  do  not  control  the  rights  in  these  works.  This  has  a  number  of  consequences:  • Cultural  heritage  institutions  often  feel  trapped  by   copyright.  Many  of  the  look  at  open  content  licenses  as   the  solution  to  their  problems  (and  are  disappointed  when   they  figure  out  that  they  aren’t)  • Where  institutions  do  have  the  rights  in  works  in  their                                                                                  collections  they  are  often  very  conservative                                                                                                                                          about  access  &  reuse.  
  • 11. What  have  we  learned  from  this?• For  the  same  reason  many  cultural  heritage  institutions   have  a  almost  schizophrenic  relationship  with  the  public   domain:  They  value  the  fact  that  there  are  no  restrictions   on  works  in  the  public  domain  and  at  the  same  time  they   have  the  desire  to  exercise  control  over  such  works  (for   example  by  applying  CC  licenses).• Open  content  projects  like  the  ones  presented  here  often   have  the  function  to  be  able  ‘to  do  something’  and,  as  a   result,  they  often  distract  from  addressing  the  underlying                                                problems.
  • 12. 1. where  do  we  come  from?2. where  are  we  now?  3. what  is  to  be  done?
  • 13. Norm  settingWith  regards  to  norm  setting  we  have  actually  made  some  pretty  good  progress  in  the  last  couple  of  years.  Norm  setting  is  possible  in  those  areas  of  the  commons  where  the  cultural  heritage  institutions  themselves  control  the  rights  or  where  the  rights  have  expired:• Public  Domain  works  • Metadata  (and  ‘secondary  works’)• Works  where  the  copyright  is  with  the  institutions
  • 14. Norms:  Public  Domain  (1)  The  general  principle  that  ‘what  is  in  the  public  domain  in  analogue  form  should  be  in  the  public  domain  in  digital  form’  is  gaining  ground:  • (COMMUNIA)  public  domain  manifesto  2010• Europeana  Public  Domain  Charter  2010• Committee  des  Sages  report  ‘the  new  renaissance’  2011• EC  Commission  recommendation  on  digitization  2011• LoC  request  for  information  on  private  digitization  2012• Europeana  Data  Exchange  Agreement  2012  
  • 15. Norms:  Public  Domain  (2)The  main  challenge  for  this  principle  is  the  need  of  institutions  to  generate  revenue/pay  for  digitization:• Google  contracts  with  Libraries  grant  Google  a  15  year   period  of  ‘preferred  commercial  exploitation’  (PSI  directive   might  reduce  this  to  7  years)• LoC  request  for  information  asks  for  maximum  of  3  year   exclusivity.On  the  other  hand  first  experiences  of  the  Rijksmuseum  show  that  free  availability  doesn’t  hurt  revenue  generation.  
  • 16. Norms:  metadataThe  general  trend  with  (simple)  descriptive  metadata  points  into  the  direction  of  free  (no  restrictions/conditions)  availability.  Metadata  is  widely  understood  as  a  tool  to  improve  the  discoverability  of  collections.• Various  Libraries  have  release  their  bibliographical  records   under  CC  zero  (Harvard  Library  System  alone  12M   records)  • Europeana  has  released  more  than  20M  records  from  all   types  of  institutions  under  CC  zero  last  week.
  • 17. metadata objects public  domain own own  copyrightcopyright third  party  copyright
  • 18. public  domain own  copyrights
  • 19. 1. where  do  we  come  from?2. where  are  we  now?  3. what  is  to  be  done?
  • 20. Third  party  copyrights  (1)Central  question  is  how  do  we  deal  with  material  that  is  under  third  party  copyright?  This  is  the  majority  of  20th  century  culture  (including  virtually  all  moving  images).  How  do  we  envisage  bringing  these  works  into  the  cultural  commons?  Suggested  strategies  include:• lobbying  for  exceptions  that  would  allow  heritage   institutions  to  make  use  of  such  works  (and  possibly   individual  end-­‐users  too)
  • 21. Third  party  copyrights  (2)  • Licensing  rights  (via  collective  rights  management   organizations).  Generally  this  does  not  create  anything   resembling  a  commons.• Working  with  institutions  to  develop  strategies  to  ensure   that  new  acquisitions  can  be  made  available.• Getting  in  touch  with  rights  holders  to  obtain  permission   to  publish  works  under  open  licenses  (does  not  scale  very   well).
  • 22. Rights  holders  tend  to  be  much  less  conservative  than  we  generally  assume  (example  below) Artists  contacted 429 Choices  made 267 CC-­‐BY-­‐NC-­‐ND 54 CC-­‐BY-­‐SA 64 Permission  to  use 145 No  permission 3 Special  contract 1
  • 23. What  is  to  be  done?  (1)If  we  are  serious  about  creating  a  true  cultural  commons  (that  does  not  only  consist  of  the  leftovers)  we  need  to  work  on  the  issue  of  third  party  rights:• lobby  for  exceptions  that  allow  institutions  to  make   available  works  in  their  collections  online  (free?   renumeration?  how  to  differentiate  between  works  in   commercial  circulation  and  those  that  are  not?)  • lobby  for  exceptions  that  allow  private  individuals  (and   non-­‐profits?)  to  re-­‐use  works  from  those  institutions.
  • 24. What  is  to  be  done?  (2)This  probably  includes  a  different  perspective  on  the  PSI  directive.  There  is  a  lot  of  resistance  among  cultural  heritage  institutions  to  be  included,  because  they  feel  that  this  limits  their  options.  I  would  argue  that  if  institutions  are  serious  to  be  part  of  a  cultural  commons  they  should  embrace  the  special  position  created  by  the  PSI  directive  and  position  itself  as  part  of  the  public  sector  (which  will  make  it  easier  to  claim  special  status  in  the  context  of  copyright).