Download to read offline
Uploaded byAxiell ALM
Centralized Rights Management - the Licensing Module
The document summarizes the development of a licensing module for the Canadian Museum of History's KE EMu collection management system. It discusses the museum's experience managing copyright and licensing information, the processes a licensing module would support, and a wishlist for the module, including supporting interrelated processes, flexibility, and increasing usable data across the museum. The presentation provides an overview of the museum's rights management history and the development process for a new licensing module in their KE tool.
Centralized Rights Management - the Licensing Module
- 1. KE EMu LicensingModule Tanya Anderson (Previously Advisor, Intellectual Property) Business Partnerships and Information Management May 3, 2018
- 2. Presentation Overview • Abrief history of rights management at the Canadian Museum of History • KE tool development process • Licensing module overview • Questions
- 3. The CMH experience ©at ACQUISITION© at ACQUISITION Review of the Acquisition / Deaccession Process Review of the Acquisition / Deaccession Process Review of the Exhibition process Review of the Exhibition process Centralized Copyright and Licensing servicesCentralized Copyright and Licensing services
- 4. If rights informationis stored in paper contracts or inside word-processing documents, then it cannot drive system behaviours or be easily analysed to make decisions. Demian Hess, 2015, Managing digital rights with rights expression languages, Journal of Digital Media Management, Vol. 4, No. 1, pgs. 21 - 35 2016 2017
- 5. THREE COPYRIGHT WORKPROCESSES 1.Licenses issued to external clients 2.Licenses obtained for internal projects 3.Documentation of copyright and licensing for collection
- 6. Module wishlist • SUPPORTSthe process – Processes are distinct but interrelated • FLEXIBILITY • Increase USEABLE DATA – Viewable to all staff – Data and data types have been identified – KE fields requiring links highlighted
- 21.
Editor's Notes
- #4 Around 2008 – 2009 we began looking at how copyright was being handled in the Acquisition process. Over the next 2 – 3 years a committee met regularly to collect information from stakeholders and discuss needs, and approach around copyright and licensing. Recommendations for centralizing data / approach / resources and new tools (license templates) Over time, this led to the creation of a centralized copyright services department. The CMH eventually (around 2012), reviewed two of its central processes – the Acquisition – Deaccession process and the Exhibition Development process. Within this review, Copyright was identified as a piece of the puzzle that needed to be brought in earlier in both processes. Our department grew as we undertook licensing CMH content out – licensing third party content in (primarily for the exhibition process), and general copyright support. Being integrated now meant that our colleagues wanted access to our information. Additionally, we needed the ability to manage our licenses so as not to duplicate efforts and have data in order to be more strategic.
- #5 Prior to centralizing – our licenses for CMH content were saved on shared drives – Word docs or PDFs – by name, generally, and in folders by year. Licenses for third party materials could be found in many places – archives, corporate records, employees’ files… Obviously not ideal.
- #6 We explored the possibility of using other systems to manage our licenses and eventually determined that KE would be the best solution. It would allow us to build what we needed, it would support three pillars of our copyright work, two of which are directly related to the collection: The copyright status of a given work (RIGHTS module) The licensing of the use of our collection And third – works we license for use in projects – knowing that the CHH was going to pilot the management of their project in KE – the decision was obvious.
- #7 We began the project by illustrating our process and defining the steps when granting or acquiring permissions. It was important that the module support the process but the module couldn’t BE the process (it couldn’t be step by step, pushing the user to the next field or next required action). This would have been too limiting. We absolutely needed flexibility. One client one object one © one use We could have many variables: One project (say an exhibition) with many internal contacts (clients) and many uses within the project. We could own one object which has many rights holders (this could be an artwork by multiple artists or an audio-video production with many layers of rights) We could own one object (many rights holders) Standards and licensing practices can also adapt over time. Processes will collect data (client info, rights holder info, licenses, etc.). System should allow staff to see links and histories (ie. how object has been used, past requests by clients, objects in collection where © is held by same person, etc.) Requests populate the system and documents (invoices and licenses) are reports generated by system using inputted data
- #8 Project – importance of Annie Important to have a Business Analyst position who understands our needs / general museum processes (how they are connected) and how the system works. Also – I can promise you that I will not describe this correctly… First page – same for external licenses or internal - .. Show fields…
- #9 Client – this is linked from the Parties record
- #10 In this example – this is an internal request (so for CMH exhibition project) – and so we get our Source tab which gives us our list of sources which we will contact in order to order content. We can then link out by source to the next level
- #11 Here – Project Info and Client info would be greyed out. And now we start to fill in what we’ll request from the Met…
- #12 Here is where we record our asset information – we would create a provisional catalogue record – and indicate what we’ve asked for (JPEG in this case), and what type of use we require (publication, exhibition, etc.) We have the ability here to parse out each right, or describe it more generally for example All project uses. Indicating “accepted” here will create our next level (giving us the ability to indicate “rejected” should the project team change their mind mid-order). From here we enter the Project Details level – here is where we capture more specific information on the project.
- #13 Info Asset 1 and Info Asset 2 are two tabs that are just cut and pasted from the EOM – it will contain information about the title of the object – this was added to simply ease some of the moving around KE to locate relevant data.
- #15 As I mentioned – we go to project details – link out to capture relevant project details. This also isn’t obligatory – there may be situations that do not require us to capture this level of detail.
- #16 As I mentioned – we go to project details – link out to capture relevant project details. This also isn’t obligatory – there may be situations that do not require us to capture this level of detail. We can describe print run, title , producer, etc. here.
- #17 We have two tabs here – depending on if you are negotiating an internal license (for an internal project) or an external license (of our content to an outside party). Here you can record things like fees, and lots of notes fields which was important… obtaining the files / formats, etc.
- #18 And, just to show you the External Nego tab – this is a bit simpler – recording fees and if there are any rights / restrictions on the material (CMH) that we need to relay to the client.
- #19 Ke also provided us with this correspondence tab so that we could document the back and forth – sometimes the projects in which we are involved with licensing content can go on for months, sometimes even over a year.
- #20 This tab records the final details included on the license – taxes, surcharges, etc. We can also capture here if there was an amendment, if we have received the signed license and / or the product (usually a publication.
- #21 Tasks – we can set reminders or assign something to someone (check a file or deliver a file, or send the license by mail…) Also – to mention – we have thrown this at people with little training / background (Anneh – student) and they managed – so it is somewhat intuitive…