Declaration on Open Access for Cultural Heritage

Declaration on Open Access for Cultural Heritage: What are our Guiding Principles for Ethically Practicing Open in GLAM institutions? Cultural heritage institutions have been doing significant work on digitization for the last twenty years. The results of those efforts are now starting to pay off, with more institutions adopting open access policies to share that digitized heritage with the world. However, as the survey by Douglas McCarthy and Andrea Wallace showed, there is no consensus on what “open” and “open access” means. There are also some fundamental considerations that need to acknowledge the complexities of managing cultural heritage and knowledge. Also, for those institutions that are less well resourced, more guidance is needed on how to take actual steps on enacting open access for cultural heritage.


Unknown Speaker 00:00
Like, feel free to introduce yourself in the chat and tell us where you are right now. And where are you showing us from. And we're also going to be doing small mentimeter poll because we want to know whether this project that we have been moving forward, it's actually useful for you as an institution. And so with that being said, this session is about the declaration and open access to cultural heritage. And Fiona Romeo, Andrea Wallace, and myself are going to be presenting this session. But before we move on, Fiona, would you like to introduce yourself?

Unknown Speaker 00:43
Yes, hello, I'm Fiona Romeo. I'm the Senior Manager for glam and culture at the Wikimedia Foundation.

Unknown Speaker 00:53
Andrea? Hi, I'm

Unknown Speaker 00:55
Andrea Wallace. I'm a senior Senior Lecturer in law at the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom, obviously, by my accent,

Unknown Speaker 01:06
no one could have told. And I'm Evelyn Cato. And I'm currently working on the open Graham initiative where we're sort of doing this project and many other projects with Creative Commons. Great, and I see that people can only like, speak to panelists not to each other. Which is kind of sad, because this is a great set of attendees that we have already by just looking at the presentations. But anyway, thanks a lot for being here. And with that being said, I want to go ahead and get started. And this is sort of our call to ask you, in particular, that if you're interested in following any of the topics, particularly with regards to copyright and intellectual property, and open access to culture or heritage, please please consider showing the special interest group on intellectual property mmcm. Understanding there, that, of course, like you can hold See, click because I don't know if you can have access to my presentation. But in any case, there's this link that you can show in if you go to them website anyways. And if not, you can also show in now there's our Slack channel, on the ncn. slack. And there's our Slack channel for the special interest group on IP. And we want to start with this being a little bit more interactive. So what we're going to propose to you if you can go to this address, which is multi door, comm code free, free, free 9048. And I'm going to ask either crystal or Amy, if they can share the code in the chat, since I think they are the only ones authorized to send messages to all the participants, that would be great. So they can have easy access to that. So it's There we go. Fiona can do that, too. So while we are there, I'm going to go to my multimeter presentation and start presenting. So we're our first question is, how much do you know about copyright open access to cultural heritage, Creative Commons, the conversation on traditional knowledge. And this is kind of a way for us to actually know what's sort of your level of confidence with some of the topics that we'll be presenting today. And I see some answers or re coming in. This is very fun. Like we do it only because we like like this sort of like, Oh, this is our best presentation mode. We sort of started saying funny things in the middle, I see that a lot of people feel more confident with copyright than with anything else. We very much welcome all the copyright owners out there in the room, we embrace you. We want you in this conversation. Oh, wow. And this is like the best mentimeter that we have had ever so far, like already 68 people filling it in 70. That's great. This is great. And so for those of you who are just joining, we're doing this small poll. So if you go to, free, free, free nine, serve 048 and we're sort of filling that. Okay, so kind of right in the middle, following a little better, a bit more on the more knowledgeable side. This is great. For those of you who are suffering, please Feel free to keep on. I think you can keep on filling the poll, even if we move to the next slide. So I'm going to do that I'm going to move to the next slide. And this is a very interesting question. Because we, Andrea, we have been also presenting in Europe in a lot of European conferences and in the European context. So I know that for folks out there in the US, most of you don't necessarily claim breads on the issue section of the collections. But we are sort of trying to understand whether folks are claiming some type of rights on the issue this digitization of their collections were is through creative commons license, or whether it's through a direct copyright statement. So I see that there are a lot of yes and no answers, mainly No.

Unknown Speaker 05:59
Which is good, and then a substantive portion that really doesn't know, which is fine, because your area of expertise might not necessarily be copyright. And I think that's an important aspect of the things that we want to cover on the declaration. There are some important things that are going to be around copyright questions. And then there are going to be some are questions that are going to be more around ethical considerations and community norms, and how to navigate all that complexity rather than just copyright. And Amy is saying char issue should not be fixed. So now you should all be able. People are saying no, yet, on my end, we really want to hear from you. But this is great, because we still have the multimeter. So that's a great way to do.

Unknown Speaker 06:58
Yeah, and I'm always varying there on the chatter saying there are a lot of No, which is great to hear. And so if you haven't done so yet, please check out the spreadsheet that Andrea is sharing during the chat. Maybe Andrea, do you want to comment a little bit or what the spreadsheet is?

Unknown Speaker 07:17
Yeah, so I dropped a link into a survey of open glam instances. So sometimes individual collections or even entire policies have different cultural institutions, and even government archives universities that release Collections Online under open licenses or as public domain. So if you are one of those institutions, and you scroll down to the US section, and you don't see your institution there, please reach out because we would love to include you on the list. This is kind of capturing the global picture of all the different institutions that are working in open glam at the moment.

Unknown Speaker 07:59
Yeah, I'm now we are going to move to the next question that is like, what are the challenges that you face when approaching open access to cultural heritage? So for all of you that said, like, Oh, yes, we do claim rights, or different reproductions, but we would like to change that. So what are the main things that are main problems, challenges, issues that you face when approaching open access to cultural heritage? resources, expertise for rights research? That's a good question, a good part of communicating policy, resources, financial stuff to digitize records, lack of provenance and rights research capabilities, not enough stuff or expertise and not enough time. Right? Like, that's another important question, right? Like, it takes a lot of time to do rights research, convincing leadership and curators to let it go, or I love this one. federal guidelines resources for developing open source polishing standards, I'm seeing a lot of resources here, cross border copyright issues. That's a good one. We have seen that over and over happening again, even for public domain stuff, which is not only copyright, I mean, it's like copyright expiration of copyright. But that's great to protecting the intangible cultural heritage of indigenous groups we work with. That's great. Thank you for being thoughtful about the loss of revenue from image licensing or administrative for same. It is seen as our revenue source for the institution. No one knows what it is. I love that one. So basically, lack of awareness. Sure, authority and trust texapore plus one for convincing leadership to let it go. Modern collection, so I'm assuming that a lot of fun is in copyright, no IP policy for the museum, lack of prioritization from other stuff. Wow, there's a lot of things they are known little to no training, it's a lot of labor to do open access. It is fear of what will happen if we are no longer differentiating between open data and open access policy, lack of provenance and vice research. Not enough staff, or institution is much more conservative than we would like, we want to polish on their CCC rather than CC by, and this is the grade This is great. This is the reason why we're also doing them and Demeter, because you can share whatever is happening at your institution without sort of being outspoken there and losing, being afraid of like saying, what is the problem that you might be facing a new institution. So this is great. And then some people are like saying documentation, that's a good one. So more needs for case studies, how to do damage control, if there is some mistake, so many lack of cohesive cohesive strategy and tools, bring some digital files take time and selling them supports that person, great. frustration at the fact that we're open access, and others have not. So you want more people to show in the crowd, assure them all, for open access?

Unknown Speaker 11:32
This is great, please keep them coming. Because all this information is actually super important and interesting. Oh, that's great. Leadership don't like the quality of foreign missions, but we don't have photographers to be sure. We actually had a very interesting conversation about that today. Um, this is great. Please keep them coming. I'm gonna move to the next slide. Because otherwise, it's gonna take a lot of time. But if you're still hung up on that idea, and you want to share more, please, by all means, the multimeter. Like, it doesn't need me to be presenting that slide. So please send your comments alone. And how important do you think this issues are when considering open access to collections? So ethical and privacy considerations, following technical standards representing accurate metadata, traditional cultural expressions, accessibility considerations, and survey sensitive information, you might find that some of these things actually overlap with the things that you have also identified as challenges already. But it's good to know, what is specifically the way that you are assigning to some of these things. And also, you've sort of said, there on the previous slide, that there were a lot of challenges around the presentation training, lack of resources, lack of awareness, not a lot of knowledge. And so this is kind of a different set of questions. So this is very interesting. And thanks, again, for all of you who are joining us to kind of helping us complete this kind of very, I would say, like, very methodologically, nor appropriate survey, because we haven't as allogenic parameter, but we're sort of like getting a wealth of information with all the conferences and such that we've been kind of presenting this declaration. And we should actually add a new slide on the multimeter. That is, which one of all presentations Did you think it was the best, right? And last but not least, please keep on Feel free to keep on filling in the last slide. What would you like out of our Declaration on open access to culture? Hey, Dave. So if your institution or you as a professional advocate working the space, were to consider signing on such a product or project or process or endorsing it, were the things that you would expect from from other variation like this? And also what is kind of the, you know, expectation of what are the things that we could achieve five years from now, if we had this declaration? I think this one takes a little bit more because it's like, there we go. Flexibility, dignity, respect ethosce fairing standards, decolonization clarity, clear terms. So more definitions, inspiration, examples. community? I love that evidence of impact. Yes, stewardship expansion, accountability, transparency in process. Access, cultural rights, acknowledgement case studies, protect realistic. I love that one. Teaching and Learning context sensitivity wide buy in. I would love to know, to the person that say bye bye white in if there are like any specific thing that we should consider their unity, accessibility, ease of obligation. That's a good one knowledge. Humanity. Yes. Not only people don't assume called Community Center, yes, great. Thank you very much. For all the things that you are sharing with us. Here, this actually helps or work alone. Someone is also are in empathy for slower on this is great. And please, by all means, I'm going to now leave this multimeter. So we can actually go to the presentation. But as long as you have the code, you can

Unknown Speaker 16:06
keep on, keep your responses coming in. And thank you so, so much for taking the time to participate and sort of try to engage with us. So hopefully, this is a fine activity for you. So now, even when you are still tired of hearing me, because I've done this work of trying to be like a presenter of the things that you were saying, I'm gonna go and keep on talking. I know you're tired of me. And I'm but I'm gonna take a few moments to just try to introduce you to the fact or to try to answer the question, Why are the coration why we think this work is important, and why we have like, so many work put into trying to build this community. So basically, one of the things that we want to mention is that in the last 10 years or more of institutions, doing open access, there have been a lot of kind of events, and evidence of some of the impact of open access policies has. But also institutions have been more and more being more vocal about what they are doing, how they are doing it. And why is it that they consider open access to be important. And, of course, I don't want to lose the opportunity to kind of like, say, again, thank you to Effie and her FA Cup, Sally's who is shining this presentation for her spearheading work at the Smithsonian, that portal, almost like 2.4 million if I don't remember incorrectly, objects in the public domain. But I'm also bringing that example because it's actually kind of a great example, again, of how local institutions are being about their open access policies. Yes, and people are thinking Effie on the chair, that's great. So we need to keep on doing that. And of course, one of the other things that we still see the spider, this all institutions sort of trying to agree on their practice and policy is that there are still very much a lot of boring practices in how to communicate copyright status of words across the sector. So some of them to CC by some of them to CC BY sharealike, some of them to other of their non commercial non derivatives options that the CC license have its right. And at the same time, one of the things that we did in 2018 was sort of ask some, some portions of the sector. Well, how do you feel about all these principles around open land that exist out there? And they're the answers that we receive sort of our knowledge then into more than once approaches, right? Not everything has to be open, not all the things are appropriate to be open. And so there needs to be a little bit more one approaches when it comes to releasing cultural heritage. And also, I'm noticing that these things actually take a lot of time. And another thing that, for me is important. And maybe like I want to bring the fact that I'm currently living in Norway, and I'm also from Argentina. So I come from the global south. And one of the things that it has happened in the, like 10 years despite that we have all this amazing evidence from institutions, mainly North America and Europe. When we see the map, we still see a lot of gaps. And, of course, there are some things that we said around like possible that are biases in collection for the survey of gam open access policy and practices. But even when that might be the case slightly might be the case. We also know that not all the institutions are necessarily bought into This yet, and that, like the ministry is the ability of our communities to actually find themselves on the internet. And that's actually quite problematic from a lot of perspectives. And, and so what we've done so far, it's kind of like collect some of this benefits and challenges and sort of wrap them up as evidence. And this is the thing that Andre is going to be talking about in a second. But I'm also putting this slide so people can sort of like see and kind of

Unknown Speaker 20:33
glance through some of the benefits and challenges that are institutions over and over and over have been reporting in case studies and documentation in webinars and talking with leaders in the sector. And that sort of thing, we've been able to collect this evidence. And so if you go to open damn door, pop up door org, you can see some of the benefits and challenges that are being accounted there. And, of course, we also want to notice that open gum is complex and cooperative. Communicating copyright is only one of the many concerns that damn institutions have. And here, I want to acknowledge that we're also talking mainly with our US audience where the funding situation, and the sort of like, ongoing, unfortunate collapse of some of these institutions is taking a big hurt on, it's like hurting a lot of people out there. So this is kind of like very problematic. And we want to acknowledge that, that if your institution is like, laying on staff, and in the middle of coping with a financial crisis crisis, communicating copyright might not be one of your top priorities. And so it's sort of fun acknowledgement that there are a lot of other things that also have an impact on, on how you might be able to communicate copyright. And because of that, we also sort of acknowledge that the way in which we have conceived some of this work is only as like surf setting, setting stone. So this is only one step. And then the road ahead. For us, it will be to actually provide more training on how to do some of these things, to build more case studies to be more communications and to build more networks that actually help the sector sort of buy in into the the open access idea. And with that being said, I want to sort of acknowledge what is the role of open, especially coming from an organization's like Creative Commons, that whose main area of work is the open more than the GM board? And so I want to make sure that we kind of like, say, what is the things that we do, right? And so I think that the first thing that we need to do is celebrate and support right, whenever an institution says, okay, we want to apply a CCC rule or digital reproductions of words, were like, yeah, and cheerleading those efforts, right. But we also want to offer some communication channels for professionals and advocates that want to share their experiences from doing open access. So we have set up the Twitter open glamour account, that is actually a guest curated account. So we have every two weeks, someone from some part of the world sharing their experience, then we have the medium open glam, where we're collecting a bunch of case studies. And I highly, highly recommend you to go there and look at the diversity of people practicing open access across the world. We are also offering trainings and resources such as webinars, we've been doing webinars with MTN our special interest group on IP for about a year. And then, more importantly, in order to create a space to have a more diverse global and challenging conversation. And now finally, I'm going to shut up. And I'm gonna give the floor to Fiona. So she can actually introduce some of the things that they've been working on in relationship to the declaration.

Unknown Speaker 24:12
Hello, so I'm here from the Wikimedia Foundation, which is the nonprofit organization that stewards Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that's created, edited and verified by volunteers around the world. It's actually written in 300 languages, its content is open access. And its platforms are sustained by donations from individual readers and editors. It's the only top 10 website in the world that is a not for profit platform. And our vision here on the screen is to imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. And I'm sure there's a lot in that statement that would resonate with people working in museums, libraries and other cultural institutions. key phrases there is freely share. And really that's where open access comes into the conversation. As part of this mission, we want Wikimedia to be an essential infrastructure for libraries and cultural institutions. Important for promoting language diversity and knowledge preservation, linking collections across institutional boundaries, and giving institutions access to our broad global audience. access and use of the Wikimedia platforms is one of the ways you can realize the benefit of making your collections and materials open access. It's not just Wikipedia, though, I'm sure that's the one that everyone is most familiar with. But many of you will have also worked with our other projects like wiki data and wiki source. For those who haven't just to briefly introduce them. wiki data is a collaboratively edited database of structured information. More than a billion statements have been added to wiki data. It's a sort of Wikipedia of data that provides a general framework for bringing the metadata vocabularies and languages used by institutions to describe their collections to bring that together and to create bridges between those institutions. It opens up new possibilities for discovery and connection across repositories, and of weaving institutional knowledge into the Semantic Web. museums have often talked about finding ways to connect across those institutional boundaries, and Wikimedia as platforms provide tools to do that very directly. wiki source is probably a less well known project. It's a library of freely licensed source text and historical documents, including everything from poetry to government documents, constitutions of many countries and general literature. digitized images of texts and documents are they're transcribed by volunteers. And when they're complete, they're made available as ebooks. Importantly, wiki sources available in more than 70 languages. And it's the only transcription project that's readily available for most languages in the rest of the world. It's therefore a really important platform for both language preservation but also revitalization bringing languages into use on the internet. For more than 10 years, wikimedians have been collaborating with galleries, libraries, archives, and museums are united by the common goal of preserving cultural heritage and sharing knowledge with the world. Many of you I recognize in the chat for your collaborations with the Wikimedia movement. There are projects like the one lib one ref campaign, which runs twice a year, inviting librarians from all over the world to add a reference to the article of their choice on Wikipedia, which both improves the reliability of Wikipedia articles, but also demonstrates a shared commitment to the reliability and verifiability of information, something that's very topical right now. The editor thons hosted by museums and galleries have frequently focused on gaps of representation through campaigns like art and feminism, black lunch table and Africa crowd. But when we actually map our own content on the Wikimedia platforms, such as the wiki data catalog of the world's paintings known as the sum of all paintings, we find that we actually have the same partial coverage coverage, as in the map that Scann shared earlier. So to realize our vision of the sum of our knowledge, we need to collaborate with more institutions in under digitized and underrepresented parts of the world to transform their institutional knowledge into open knowledge. And for us, this declaration on open access to cultural heritage is a really important support for that process. It takes a global approach that tries to build a global consensus around what open access work would look like, and provides resources to help people engaging in that process. And I'm going to hand it over to Andrea now.

Unknown Speaker 29:07
Great, thanks, Fiona, and Scann. Am I taking control of your screen? Is that you want to

Unknown Speaker 29:14
take off my screen you can.

Unknown Speaker 29:18
Okay, great. There we go. So right, so this is this is where the project kind of comes into place. Scann and I and Fiona started having conversations about what a declaration might look like. Thinking about the fact that there's been 10 years of open glam, there's an incredible amount of work that's been done. And having a bit of a perception about kind of what that looks like and realizing, well, we still need to lay out all of the things that really need to be considered the arguments that need to be made. Because we're we're missing out on a lot of institutions and a lot of areas in the process. So how do we make this work? process a bit easier for everyone and reduce some of the barriers to entry. And something that, of course, we thought about was a white paper, like, let's do a white paper on this. So we start the research. And I think one of the things that has that kind of started to then make us see that this needs to be a bit of a much bigger project, is the fact that there are so many institutions, and there are organizations, community archives, that haven't been able to engage in open glam for a number of reasons. And there's a lot that obviously, we could go into around that. But one of the biggest barriers is copyright and the question around copyright, and all of the different kind of tears, fears and tensions that were reflected in the mentimeter. So we thought, well, let's focus on copyright. And let's look at the spread of institutions and what people are currently doing, to try to kind of categorize and grasp where there's need for support. And of course, rather than a white paper kind of turned into a research paper, because in doing all of this, we realize that, you know, there's institutions and organizations that haven't yet been able to kind of enter the open glam sphere for various reasons. There's institutions and glams, and different organizations that are kind of dipping their toes in the water and thinking about it, but still continue to claim, copyright and all of the different materials that we're about to discuss. There's institutions that are maybe adopting a little bit here and there. And then there's institutions that, of course, have gone completely full open. And I think a lot of the open discussion has been focusing on, you know, kind of the going forward and the exciting things that we can be doing. But we really wanted to make sure that in the process, all of the different approaches that were taken, maybe had some sort of standardization that brought some consistency to users specifically, one of the ways though, you know, we're communicating this to users, that don't create a lot of conflict in terms of how they can reuse and access certain things. Because I think there's a lot of stuff that doesn't necessarily need to be open. And we should be thinking a bit more critically around some of this. And to kind of reduce the stigma around non open and make it very clear that there's some content that just shouldn't be used and can't be made available in this sort of thing. It's something else that we also wanted to kind of consider and capture. So if I can go to the next slide, it's not. There we go. So of course, what is the papers focus? So the paper is essentially meant to answer a lot of these questions and gather a lot of information together in a way that allows us to start having conversations and do some public consultation on a draft of the declaration that we then make work for all of us. So Who is it for?

Unknown Speaker 32:49

Unknown Speaker 32:49
I think glamour we think about glam, it's a phrase of some very institutionalize for very many good reasons. But when we think about the fact that you take copyright off, or you release things under licenses, that people that are able to use it, we have a lot of other people, they're actually engaging in open glam, including the pedia including even commercial organizations that may influence some of the decisions that are made behind the scenes during the digitization process. So really wanted to kind of expand our idea of what open glam is to an audience. That is anyone who is working with cultural heritage and making cultural content around that. And especially even the public users, people who see themselves as engaging with the content. We also wanted to think what are our goals, and some of those are what I just mentioned before, but we really wanted to establish some clear standards around what specifically open means and what meaning that should carry in a way that then allows people to kind of think, aha, this is okay. And some of these other sensitive questions can be set aside. And also why now, it's really important at the moment, because there's a few different legal changes that are going on, especially in Europe, we have article 14, and the digital single market directive, that's supposed to be kind of pushing everyone in the direction where no new rights should arise in faithful reproductions of public domain works. And so we thought, Okay, this is a perfect opportunity to make sure that article 14 really kind of takes hold, and that we make a lot, we provide a lot of the arguments and the data around why we need to be doing these things. So that we make that process easier for people who are now starting to implement it and try to change the minds of all of the you know, kind of the things that we're raising the mentimeter, which I just can't wait to nerd out on and read more later. So, again, it's a big task, and there's a lot of reasons why stuff can be made available online. So the the very, very, very narrow focus, which still ends up being a lot of content is we're only looking at the layer of REITs that glams do have control over and we also want glams to start to see themselves is a bit differently when they're thinking about their own intellectual property, and the different types of assessments that go into the decision about whether to commercialize that or to release it under open parameters. Because there are a lot of institutions that may count themselves out of open glam because they think, Well, my collection is all in copyright. So this is not something that's for me. But we want institutions to think about their collections, data, and even other type of data workflow around digital, digital reproduction, even for in copyright collections, and different materials that can be useful for anyone anywhere, as that's part of open glam two.

Unknown Speaker 35:41
One of the things we really wanted to focus on is building shared understandings around this narrow question of copyright and reproduction media, public domain domain works, because this is something we really have to establish consensus on. And different areas of the world have different understandings about what this means. And they also have different understandings about what it means in other areas of the world. So like, everyone in Europe is like, well, that's illegal in the United States, you know, and it ends up being something where you're like, actually, no. So we wanted to also kind of develop some of these shared understandings around what specifically should be happening with this content. Because I'm sorry, there's a bit of a delay scan, I don't know if part of the issue is once you remove copyright, and because we've been focused on copyright for so long, you then think, aha, we're fine, we're good. But there's a lot of other questions that we need to be asking, in relation to open that are falling to the wayside, or kind of happen as an afterthought, because suddenly, we realize, Oh, wait, this isn't something that we've been thinking about as well. And some of those questions will actually feed back down into the digitization process and make us think, should we be digitizing this, should we be making it available online, so there's different ways that we can start to think about open glam as a methodology for collections treatment that goes all the way back to the actual material works. Um, so we really wanted to make sure that even when stuff is put online, those things are shared responsibly by users separate from established institutions, for people who may have different understandings or knowledge to be able to contribute.

Unknown Speaker 37:16
And to bring that discussion into the research paper as well. And then the idea is that, you know, we've started publishing different sections of it as they're almost ready or as they are ready, it's going to enforce, it isn't forming the shape of the declaration draft and the final, the process for finalization. So the draft for the declaration is almost finished to and that will be made public. And then we'll start a public consultation process, which Scann is going to talk about a bit later. But if you go to the open glam pump hub, you'll see that the structure is set up in a way that actually begins to think about the different categories of institutions and where people are in their open glam journey. But again, expanding that idea of institutions to smaller organizations, community archives, anyone who deals with cultural content, and may have control over what they're doing with the data they produce around it. So the introductory materials are things that are supposed to set everyone up to be able to approach the resource itself, background really kind of breaks down all of the different things that may influence some of the decisions, we really tried to focus on providing arguments for people. So it does take an argumentative approach to some of these topics, but also in the sense that if we don't establish consensus, now, this is going to become even more frazzled. And I think something that was great in the mentimeter was thinking about what a mess things have been in the past, in terms of like collection, management and tracking some of this information, and we have all these different technology structures and infrastructures that are changing that then make that harder, we're really trying to think about like the future of collections management and how to make that job easier for feature curators and people who are coming in into contact with some of this. So then, you know, when you get to justification, some of the things that we focus on, especially in clarifying open, are about making sure that the user is centered in everything that we're doing going forward. Because I mean, that's the point of open glam. And that's the point of everything that everyone is doing. It's always about the public, it's always about sharing and making things available for people to be able to engage with collections. So how does that meaning, then communicate to the user what they can do with it, rather than kind of capture what the own institutions may be understanding of that is, because when you look at the spectrum of open, you know, it goes anywhere from we make our collections available online, all rights reserved, but that's open access, because we're thinking about the platform, rather than materials themselves. And you know, when you go along the line to that spectrum for the user, it just, it doesn't make sense. There may be additional restrictions and terms and conditions and various locations on the website. So how do we agree on some standards that like help us and also help users and then also remove the stigma from things not being Open, like, we should just accept that there's a lot of stuff that can be made open, you can actually have access to it, or maybe we display it online, but you can't reuse it in the same way. And so really, that comes down to making sure that people understand open these to be aligned with international frameworks that allow for commercial reuse. But there's still that legal question about whether or not a copyright is appropriate in the first place. Because we then start to think about CC by and CC bias, a being used as a way to maintain the attribution to the institution. And there's never really an intention to enforce this. I mean, we see this because this is still an open legal question. And a lot of jurisdictions, no one's suing users and saying, like, Oh, you always this amount of money. Like that's something Getty does, right. But when we think about, like, how we're engaging with this, why not set people up to be better about crediting and referencing back to the institutions in this sort of thing? And how do we do that in a way that then removes the copyright claim that may not even be valid in the first place, right. And then, of course, in going through all of this, we started to see a lot of really, really important themes and connections and examples of good practice that are out there that are happening, where people are asking questions around them. So accessibility, there's a lot of questions around what happens when you use a digital or you use a public domain work to make an accessible format copy, which then will attract copyright? And how do we think about that, and it's in a different way, than some of the ways that we've been thinking about it in the past, right? decolonization and indigenisation. So we really go through some of these questions, and don't necessarily tell people what they should do, but lay it out in a way that people are able to make their own decisions and provide a lot of examples around good practice in the process. So everything that's in black on this screen is already published, the stuff that's in gray is forthcoming. And the stuff with stars next to it is like imminent. So we thought we would start publishing things in pieces so that people would be able to start digesting and reflecting on the content. And more content will be coming. But essentially, this research paper is there for people to either dive into individual sections, or really kind of back out and read it from beginning to end, in this order. However, they would like to engage. So I think that's me scan is back to you.

Unknown Speaker 42:24
Yeah, yeah, I just want to say quickly, and then if people want to ask questions on the site chatter, that would be great. I mean, I see that there's like one question there. From Kim falls, I hope I'm pronouncing that correctly, on what barriers are in place for misleading information. And so I think that's for you, Andrew, because you were just talking about some of the yes, some of the CCBC things, I think, but basically, I'm supposed to talk about the public consultation process, sorry. So we are still working on how that's gonna roll out. I think that part of the issue, too, is like, we are kind of like doing this presentations, in part to kind of gather a little bit of feedback from the sector. Particularly when it comes to the draft of the Declaration, we want to make sure that we're actually delivering something that people like it's expecting some of the things that we already have, like, of course, we have like a draft of a room that we're working on. But it's good to see what people are actually meeting. And so we expect to collect feedback and comments and on the declaration draft, but in the meantime, there are several ways in which you can actually get involved. So you can go to open And you can also go to open gum, or And so there, you can actually leave your comments directly on the research paper. But if for whatever reason, the only problem with that is that you will have to Well, it's actually not a problem, right? Like you need to make have a pop up account for commenting. But if for whatever reason you don't feel comfortable with leaving comments with your name. You can also reach out to us at info at open GM and I'm going to share a slide we're with them email. You can also subscribe to the open GM mailing list, which is where we mainly of course you cannot see any of the links because the thank you Fiona. Right. Thanks for that. So basically Fiona is now pasting all the links and they are in my presentation. I'm gonna share the presentation again. But you can follow those like different things. mediums and channels that we have for communication, the mailing list, the Twitter account, the medium, the you can write us an email. Or if you feel comfortable with please, by all means, start commenting on the pub pub. And then oh, Fiona, you had one more? Yes.

Unknown Speaker 45:20
Yeah, I just wanted to sort of come back, because in my earlier piece I was talking about, you know, the importance of glands engaging with open access, so that they can take part in this vision of a world where everyone can freely share and all knowledge. And I just wanted to acknowledge that, you know, this process will present challenges for everyone. And I think in the work that Andrea and Evelyn have been doing already, particularly in thinking through the more ethical dimensions of open access for glams, they're actually challenges that our volunteers working on Wikimedia projects will also need to think through as as part of this process. So I said earlier that Wikimedia communities and museums have been working together already to address address gaps and of representation. But I would say that both the decolonizing work that's underway in some museums, and the ethical considerations that Andrea is writing about for the declaration might demand that some things are actually taken out of view or reframed, you know, what would it mean to decolonize? The comments for Wikimedia? So, for instance, our images policy right now, only addresses copyright and technical standards, like is it in the right technical format? Is it open license, then it can go on Wikimedia projects and be reused. But some of the questions that volunteers might also start to consider in view of this work, is actually the consent of people depicted in images. The potential takedown of images that depict spiritual works funerary objects, or human remains, you know, potentially collecting and sharing more information about the provenance of the underlying work of art or object that the photograph is showing, and involving source communities in the revision of metadata and description of images. There was one case recently that just really interested me where Google streetview removed the Uluru work, walk from Street View, they made it inaccessible, responding to a request from parks Australia, to respect the sacred site, and to not allow people to transit that site even digitally. For provenance, I could imagine a wiki data project responding to Dan Hicks's list of bending objects in his book, The British museums, I think there's a lot that Wikimedia communities could be responding to as well. So I'm not here to say that we've got it all figured out. And we understand open access. And we invite you all to take part, I think there are things we can learn from galleries, libraries, and museums. And there are things we can sort of support them on around open access. So I imagine it as a collaboration. And I think we're all learning together. So back to you, Scann.

Unknown Speaker 48:09
Yes, great. So I think one of the last things that I want to say is that we're going to have tomorrow actually a deep dive on some more specific questions. So if you're interested, Andrew is going to be kind of like answering one on one questions, because that's kind of a smaller call and conversation. And that's going to happen at 2pm UTC. And you have the link there. But Fiona, thankfully, it's also showing it on the side chart on the only thing is that you need to register, and she'll show up, and you're more than welcome. And we've actually been collecting questions from rapana and other places where we have been sort of putting this out to people to share their thoughts and ideas. So we're also gonna go through some of those. And we still have 10 minutes left. Sorry, 10 minutes left. So under I think there was a question around funding, if you had any idea on funding, and then I'm seeing a couple more questions. Someone? Yeah. Yeah,

Unknown Speaker 49:29
I think there's, um, there's a question that says thoughts about funding, which I'm actually I'm not totally sure what that's referring to. So if you'd like to do a little bit, maybe a little bit more context, I'm happy to go into that. But there's a few other things that people have said in here. And I think one of the things that's been really difficult but also, also, maybe a strength of this process is the situation that we're all currently working in it. A moment, which is just kind of unreal with COVID-19, with all of the issues around funding for cultural institutions, maybe that's what this was in reference to, but how difficult it's going to be to start thinking about openness, or even making these conversations when cultural institutions are literally grasping at every single dollar and dime. And we originally had a completely different plan for this because we started this project around October of last year and starting to do the preliminary research. And of course, had to take a completely different approach. And part of that approach was just thinking, how do we do the heavy lifting and the legwork to get all of us to a point where we can have a conversation around some of this, because of trying to reduce the burden and the fatigue and everything, terms of, you know, what we're working with. And I think something else actually, that might be an interesting thing to kind of end on. I love that Fiona brought up the Benin bronzes, because these bronzes, you know, the exist in, I think 160 institutions around the world. And when we think about this as kind of like an example around open access, plusses, and minuses, all of these types of things, you know, we have institutions that have digitized them and made available cc zero, which is awesome, excellent. But you think about the fact that none of these bronzes are actually currently in Britain, but then has been requesting them back working on an institution to bring them back to London. And we, one of the things I'm really interested in is what this idea of of faithful reproduction is and how we're reproducing things and creating this narrative around a very flat encounter, that then feeds into how we perceive it. And you know, in a copyright kind of context, that can be completely disconnected from the work. But even the fact that now that we have all these images that are ccz are out there, and people are able to use them and study them, including the people. And then if these things go back to Benin, and are there and they want to digitize them, and commercialize them in the exact same way that the institutions that have been caring for them for so long happen, that cc zero actually undercuts the market, right? So when you think about the commercial aspects of copyright, and how that has kind of been used, you know, in different ways, and for different arguments and these types of things, and who's benefiting from the possession of them, the idea of copyright, which is a colonial invention, which was created in the United Kingdom, the beginning of the 18th century, now kind of operates in the digital space in a completely different meta level in terms of how we proper die is and consider and understand these works and how we encounter them. And I just want to the book that Fiona referenced Oh, you can't see it. Because my background, let me turn it

Unknown Speaker 52:57
off real quick. Also, I want to ask people, if they are still there and still want to engage with us, we only have five minutes left. But basically, if you want to go to, on the code is five, aid. Yes. 58070. Sorry, I'm starting two zeros, even odd, Sir 07978. And sort of give us your ideas on what will help you to get your institution on board with the Declaration on open access. That would be great.

Unknown Speaker 53:37
Okay, great. So just to jump right back on here. So this is the cover of the book, which has an image of the bit in bronze. And the first thing I did, of course, was jumped to see where the, you know, the copyright for the image is, and it says copyright trustees at the British Museum. So so the licensing fee has gone to the British Museum to be able to use this image. And you think about all of the licensing fees in the aggregate and these arguments, you know, that we make around leading the revenue and this sort of thing. None of that is actually going to the communities at the moment, who are responsible for creating this culture that we all treasure and share. So there's so many different aspects and layers, I think that we start to kind of unpack or thinking about some of these questions that, you know, we just want to kind of open it up for discussion and think about what a more nuanced understanding of open glam, and even Intellectual Property Management means when the cultures that were making these decisions around may not, you know, be the people who were actually making the decisions for them. So, and I think Saskia actually brought something up, which is great, because she talked about open science, she talks about open access, and something that's really I think, unique when we were thinking about hope and glamour relates to all of this, all of the materials that are in cultural institutions kind of distributed among all the various open movement. that exists out there. Right? So not only are we thinking about how those materials specifically fit into those, but then open glam processes in general. And so I think open glam has a really interesting and kind of unique way as, as Scann was talking about earlier to think about the collective influence that glams and people who were working in open glam can have around shaping some of these movements to be more equitable. And yeah,

Unknown Speaker 55:27
yeah, and I think we are probably running out of time, or Yeah,

Unknown Speaker 55:31
I can see you've got three minutes.

Unknown Speaker 55:33
We've got a few minutes. But if people can also help us under sunbutter, what do you think are the elements darker assists you in your work towards open access? That will be great. And with hands on activities, we're also referring to workshops and the like. And as I said, the multimeter is still going to be running for a little more. So if we run out of time, please, your answer actually helped us a lot. And the same is with the previous slide. Yeah. And if you have any more questions, come to the session tomorrow. And thank you, Fiona and Andrea, for being here. And thanks, everyone, for being here.

Unknown Speaker 56:19
Thank you for coming.

Unknown Speaker 56:23
We're still gonna like be the last few minutes, right. So people can actually like, see what their collective responses?

Unknown Speaker 56:31
Yes. Also, there's, um,

Unknown Speaker 56:34
the someone clarified the question that says, I'm wondering if the declaration would address funding problems for institutions that have good intentions, but lack resources, I think this is a great one to end on. Because we all have good intentions, right? No one's out there. I think I think part of this conversation needs to be about being able to fail forward and think about how we, you know, use what other people are doing to continue to build upon this and always make it better. But funding is the number one thing and that is actually up to governments. And so part of what we're also hoping to do is think about ways that we can create data, or collect data that may exist among different institutions, to be able to make those arguments at a governmental level, because funding is crucial to everything. So I think this is like really the beginning of everything, rather than, you know, saying that we have any answers at all, but trying to create a space where we can work on all of this together. So yeah, thanks, um, without

Unknown Speaker 57:36
interfering, like saying with this is the beginning of everything. With that we end the conversation. Thank you so much for being here. Yeah.

Unknown Speaker 57:46
Thank you.