Good question, huh? I bet you’ve all been thinking that silently. Let me begin with my personal, humanist perspective as a 21st Century citizen: We all know that the dynamics of the market have changed. Even I do. To keep business going, you need users to feel they belong to a community Communities are made up of common/shared values. Value is created/instigated when someone gives something away. The person who moves first and gives something shows that she cares You have to dare to give first in order to care for your business – basic dynamic of non-profit as well as commercial orgs
Traveling over here, I transferred at Schiphol AMS. Free wifi, public library, napping area, free admission to Rijksmuseum I’m not so naïve that I can’t figure out they are trying to sell Amsterdam ad the Netherlands as a friendly welcoming place for tourists. But it worked - I was positively surprised and felt like giving something back/support the endeavour (buy, share, encourage friends). I even wrote a grateful note in their guestbook, telling them that I was inspired to go back and do the same at SMK
I am now an ambassador for Schiphol and think highly of Dutch culture!
Museums have always thought their prime assets to be the artworks/their collections Web 2.0 has shifted focus to museum assets being experiences and relations around those In stead of being gods of knowledge we are servants of knowledge - - based on Joy’s Law: No matter where you work the smart people are always working somewhere else. Even the national gallery of DK will perform better if we invite our users to discuss and collaborate about current museum practice Museums – like other orgs – need to attract new users all the time. More and more we are measured on performance and our budgets are defined based on how well we perform and reach out We need to invite users in to make them feel ownership of the museum and the stuff we ”art experts” are here to care for: The artworks/collections
These are SMK’s traditional assets – our collections We have for many years been used to selling a product: High resolution images of artworks in our collections. Charge for access to stock on shelves, like running a store of digital image sales Traditionally we have maintained a controlled culture, being gatekeepers of this currency. Controlling transactions on the digitized copies But if we look at SMK’s core business model today, it is to increase cultural and social value
Mai needed hires images that have been in the PD for centuries, for educational purpose Her modest fee for giving the lecture would be eaten up by buying images from the state gallery that she’s already paid for via taxes
As state organisation, we need the support of tax payers. They must get reasonable value for their money, or they will vote against our continued existence We need our users to be ambassadors of the product we offer: Art experiences, knowledge of art In order to do that, we need to allow users to share and use our assets – otherwise they won’t be useful to them, and then why should they care? We must give something that makes our users feel appreciated, loved, so they will love us back. That surprising extra generous thing that makes users feel sympathy for us and not grump when they pay taxes, because they know and feel that it’s for a good, important, common cause Business thrives on users sympathy
SMK has a product that we don’t make substantial gross revenue on (100,000 USD a year in a total operating budget of approx. 30 mill. USD). The revenue we’re making is eaten up by heavy administration. And we’re tripping up the usage of tax financed common resources. If our images aren’t present and available where the users are – they simply don’t exist! And we want to exist! It is our obligation to exist for tax payer’s money. Photo sales of Public Domain images is a bad match with mission statement. O ur photo sales model obstructed the support of our users.
In a broader perspective: Recent studies have shown that the business model of museums selling hires images isn’t viable anymore. In the networked society, people are used to finding free images in abundance across the internet. So why pay for ours?
More and more museums around the globe are giving away digital copies of artworks in the Public Domain for free. Research has proven that the traditional business model of charging for access to and use of images is losing museums large sums of money. So there seems to be good reason in changing tracks. (Front runners: Yale University, Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, Victoria & Albert Museum, Metropolitan Museum of Art, National Gallery of Art Washington D.C., Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Walters Art Museum, British Museum…)
[LINK] The dynamic of online – just one example of the power of access and social sharing The trick of making Monty Python videos available for free online in 2009 boosted DVD sales of the comedy sketch show. It was a brilliant move, making their intellectual property officially available, labeled, sorted and categorized in high-quality If you compare DVD sales figures on Amazon before and after the creation of the Monty Python YouTube channel, the boost apparently tallies in at around 23,000% Business in a state institution is of course different than commercial business. Giving away something generously creates more value. Value redefined: Not control and scarcity of supplies - - but abundance, cornucopia, that creates attention, sympathy and loyalty in users
Introduce concept of Public Domain: Differences between EU and the States But fundamentally the notion of copyright only being applicable for a certain period of time before they are transferred to the public.
International tendency to release digitized cultural heritage resources that are in the Public Domain. Shows that we care best for the art by allowing users to find, share, and build upon images in the Public Domain. People care more if they have access, and if they can use the images – not just to appreciate from a distance but as a tool for learning and creativity.
A strong statement, setting the agenda: More than 250,000 hires images released
Yale, as of May 2011
NGA, as of February 2012
An excellent example of why freely available images with no copyright restrictions serve museum mission well: Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam has released hires images for free download under CC0 The problem of the Yellow Milkmaid - - explain briefly and add figures of before and after
[LINK] The open licensing has enabled Wikimedia Commons to harvest their images. Show how these have pushed out older, poorer versions (scans from books, lores photos etc.) and replaced with high quality linking back to the source, thus generating traffic and interest for the museum
[LINK] Furthermore, the freely available and usable images are enriching Wikipedia articles, and spurring new ones. Wikipedia being the no. 1 source of knowledge search in the world. This is digitized cultural heritage working for the common good.
This crucial development in museum practice has given a group of SMK people new perspectives on our own business model: Might there be better sense in giving this product away for free to see if that will create more value? Given this, it felt necessary to catch the attention of senior management and make them prioritize free sharing – but in a time of financial crisis. To care for our organization, for our future users. In all honesty, senior management didn’t understand how disruptive this development would be to the organization and our identity, but we’ve taken one small step at a time. The process is messy and badly planned and metrics are not established. We’re building the airplane while flying. These are the things that helped us get started to establish a culture for sharing and daring and get things done.
Collaborations and pilot projects across institutional boarders Getting people to sit down around the table and join efforts to solve common challenges Challenge for museum sector: We risk being outmatched by other entertainment offers with far bigger marketing budgets Working hypothesis: To be competetive, museums need to collaborate and support remix culture. On tight budgets and in time of financial restraint, we need to create shared solutions to common challenges. We need to create synergies between our collections/platforms in order to send users on to each other and increase the general interest in and support for art/culture.
Pilot projects 2009-11: how to establish free image sharing between Danish art museums (theory) 2011-: building a shared networked mobile platform (practice) Throughout these pilots, we have learned that Danish museums are waiting for SMK to take leadership in the change process. If we move first and start sharing our assets for free, others will follow. Practical example: After SMK released our GAP contribution under CC BY, The Glyptothek is considering following along.
Inspiration, network, and benchmarking gained during a month long professional research visit to USA to meet and learn from a range of international first moving institutions What I learned there supported our endeavours with substantial evidence. Free and open access is being implemented in large institutions and they are not losing money, but gaining users and community goodwill
Important networks Twitter International digital museum conferences Danish cultural heritage
Advisory board: Bringing in high profile external advisors from large international institutions of high renown = highly effective Smithsonian, Tate, MoMA, Metropolitan Museum, Walker Art Center, Centre Pompidou, etc. Advice: Think Big, Start Small, Move Fast - - and Make Mistakes Edson: A year from now, what have you accomplished?
Patience, and flexibility – if the fish don’t bite when you use this kind of bate you have to change tactics.
Our own initiatives to raise awareness and set an agenda about openness in the cultural heritage sector
[LINK] SMK and Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek the only two Danish museums so far who have joined the art project. A chance to raise awareness of Danish art collections (a small cultural area) through a vast international portal that many users will find. Show the nice interface but also that GAP is a walled garden
SMK saw GAP participation as an opportunity to go further
SMK wants our content to be available on as many platforms as possible to enhance the probability that users will find it. It is our obligation as state subsidized national gallery to reach as many users as possible. Creative Commons licenses enhances findability and communicates openness.
Free download – easy, no login, no barriers, and a license that allows all use types as long as you credit the source CC case study – inspire other museums in the community by sharing our reflections and experiences, hoping to urge others to follow This is a small pilot inspired by others, and now inspiring others.
Show CC license in action
159 CC licensed images also up on Flickr
and Pinterest So, to sum up: We are sharing Now High resolution images Video productions Experience In the near future (hopefully) Production facilities Raw data (API) Open Source database solution Publication platforms Research content
What every museum person dreads: Our artworks adorning cookie jars! But what we should encourage and be curious about is how new creative works are developed based on old ones.
[Hip Hip Today (2007) by Larissa Sansour and Søren Lind. A digital retelling of one of Danish art history’s most famous paintings – P. S. Krøyer’s Hip Hip Hurra (1888). Hip Hip Today is a digital photografy and a video – shot on location in Skagen. A comment on the original artists colony in Skagen, updated with a contemporary ethnicity and gender perspective.]
Museums are concerned what the users will do with our content. Instead, we should ask ourselves if we see the potential in trusting our users with valuable high quality content and data? They could be ambassadors for us, performing tasks that generate value back to us.
Developer Wayne Bishop from Arbutus Software Inc. used Brooklyn Museum’s open collection API to build a free iPad app providing access to viewing and learning about approx. 25.000 artworks Loss of control? No, we are taking control by offering higher quality + leading a beneficial development
At SMK, we don’t have proof yet that sharing our resources for free will create new revenue streams, but we have pointers
Smithsonian Web and New Media Strategy and the Commons Project (Michael Edson’s reserach) Mellon report anticipated by the museum community in the fall of 2012 – documenting (NGA Images, Yale, LACMA etc.) What will free access mean to these institutions, financially and in terms of usage? We are taking a risk with a pilot selection, based on an ethical approach + the fact that we can’t afford not to!
Success criteria and metrics are being developed in the wake of the release As I said it’s a messy process! Evaluation: Analysis of increased traffic, usage of SMK images on other platforms (Wikipedia, blogs, creative communites, practical userfacing projects, effect on fundraising/philanthropy, decline in photo sales revenue etc.) will be tracked and investigated.
An ending remark from a piece of Public Domain art that I am passionate about: Poverty comes from fear. Dare to share!
A study"Everyone interviewed wants to
recoupcosts but almost none claimed to actuallyachieve or expected to achieve this… Eventhose services that claimed to recoup fullcosts generally did not account fully forsalary costs or overhead expenses."Simon Tanner, Reproduction charging models & rights policyfor digital images in American art museums, 2004
A case"Since 2006 the commercial
market for [images]has undergone a revolution, with consumers nowexpecting images free of charge, free of usagerestrictions, and instantly available for use……more people want more content, from morecomplex sources and at more speed, but are lessprepared to pay for it.“Jo Prosser, Managing Director, Victoria and Albert Enterprises
Public Domain benefits• Building blocks
for the creation of new knowledge• Access to cultural heritage through information resources• Promoting education through the spread of information, ideas, and scientific principles• Enabling follow-on innovation• Enabling low cost access to information w/o the need to locate owner• Promoting the democratic process and values http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain
Smithsonian Instituion“Commons are usually created
when a popertyowner determines that a given set of resources –grass for grazing sheep, forest for parkland,software code, or intellectual property – will createmore value if freely shared.”Smithsonian Web and New Media Strategy, 2009, p. 19http://smithsonian-webstrategy.wikispaces.com/file/view/20090729_Smithsonian-Web
Yale University“…as the legal designation
“public domain” issupported by the rationale that eventually allcreators and/or owners of content must relinquishtheir monopolies over such content making suchcontent available for unmitigated access and use,attempts to restrict access through licensingprovisions may be neither legally enforceable norethically prudent.”Memo on open access to digital representations of works in the public domainfrom museum, library, and archive collections at Yale University (5 May 2011)
Better for business“It is likely
that the Smithsonian will makemore money by promoting “free” resourcesto a large audience than it can makecharging small amounts for smalltransactions to a small audience, and it is amuch better fit with the mission.”Smithsonian Web and New Media Strategy, 2009, p. 21http://smithsonian-webstrategy.wikispaces.com/file/view/20090729_Smithsonian-Web
"The fear that somehow everyone
will expect us to controleverything with our name on it - - not only is this not areasonable fear based on the way the technology works,but society has internalized the idea that the re-purposing isnot the same as the purpose. And to be a platform and tobe a convener means opening up to kinds of uses you dontexpect, and also kinds of uses you dont have to feelresponsible for."Clay Shirky, keynote speaker at the Smithsonian 2.0 conference, 2009http://smithsonian20.si.edu/schedule_webcast4.html(quote begins at 25:30)
”…potential for a new revenue
model based on users andcontent. Amazon’s success is linked to the way it harnessesthe collective intelligence of its huge base of users throughrecommendations and rankings. Google develops powerfulinformation-access tools, then gives them to its users – forfree – and makes billions by selling ads. In these models, therevenue-generating potential of a Web site is exponentiallyamplified by the size and activities of its audience.”Smithsonian Web and New Media Strategy, 2009, p. 16http://smithsonianwebstrategy.wikispaces.com/file/view/20090729_Smithsonian-Web-New-Me
Outcome of free download?• Increased
usage (blogs, Wikipedia, education, publications, TV productions, print products, creative projects, hackathons etc.)• Increased traffic to smk.dk (CC BY asks the users to credit the source)• More visitors to SMK• In short = more users and usage
"When SMK releases images of
159 artworksunder CC BY, it means that we in Wikipediaare able to write better articles about boththe artists, the artworks, and the motifs.”Ole Palnatoke Andersen, Wikipedia Denmarkhttp://wiki.creativecommons.org/Case_Studies/Highlights_from_SMK,_The_National_
”One example: In 1646, Jan
van Goyen painted a prospect of the city ofArnhem. This image is not only fit to illustrate the article about van Goyen, but also theone about Arnhem, 1646, tonal landscape painting, and tulipomania - not just in Danish,but in all the languages that Wikipedia is available in.” Jan van Goyen, View of the City of Arnhem, 1646
Why daring pays off• Running
government smarter – Public Domain content should be free• Running business smarter – Building a loyal & supportive community of users And, most importantly…• Supporting a culture of sharing – An environment where innovation and creativity thrives