 |
 |
mike, the problem with your experimental design is that all "museum images" are not created equal. a small number of iconic objects have a value that derives from the recognition factor (and since people ask for what they know, these are the works that are often re-published and re-reproduced.) but it's a very small number. when we did studies of the content of introductory art texts, in the context of AMICO, we found a surprisingly small art history 'cannon'; the same works in most of the text books. others are entirely fungible, and one can substitute for another of the same class. museum images [and that's a misnomer, because there is a huge variation between a reproduction of an antony gormley, the landing at dieppe, a vacuum tube, and a pot shard] have very different values in different contexts. and museums have different goals in reaching different audiences. which is why the V&A, and The Metropolitan Museum of Art have developed specific licenses and fee structures for educational use. i think the framework provided by CC-plus http://wiki.creativecommons.org/CCPlus would give the sector a chance to balance often conflicting mandates. With a bit of co-ordination, we could find some common terms that could extend the cc licenses in ways that many museums felt comfortable with, and satisfy the requirement not to give away the farm. /jt At 5:30 PM +0100 4/17/08, electronic museum wrote: >All > >I think this is a really interesting thread. > >Understanding what value can be had from exposure is obviously key. There's >lots of evidence out there that getting more eyeballs to your >stuff (and accepting that some "stealing" will take place) is a much better >business model than hiding your assets away and people simply not getting to >it at all. > >The evidence often clusters around PDFs downloads: see >http://torrentfreak.com/alchemist-author-pirates-own-books-080124/ where >Paulo Coelho, author of "The Alchemist" says this: > >"In 2001, I sold 10,000 hard copies. And everyone was puzzled. We came from >zero, from 1000, to 10,000. And then the next year we were over 100,000. [Š] >I thought that this is fantastic. You give to the reader the possibility of >reading your books and choosing whether to buy it or not. [Š] >So, I went to BitTorrent and I got all my pirate editionsŠ And I created a >site called The Pirate Coelho." > >With the demise of music DRM apparently on the horizon, it's a hot topic >with the major music labels, too. Ian Rogers from Yahoo! wrote a fantastic >post with slides entitled "Losers wish for scarcity. Winners leverage >scale". I've written about this on my blog: >http://electronicmuseum.org.uk/2008/01/14/scarcity-vs-scale/ ... > >What would be fantastic (if unlikely) would be if a museum or gallery agreed >to take part in a quantitative study: take one selection of images and hide >them away behind watermarking, DRM and thumbnails; take another and make >these widely and hugely available via Facebook, MySpace, Flickr, blogging, >etc. Offer both sets for purchase in hi-res, then sit back and measure over >a period of time. Common sense says that people will steal all the small >ones and not bother buying: increasing bodies of evidence show the opposite >is actually true. > >I'd personally argue that once stuff is on the web, it's being "stolen" >anyway, so we can fight this or go with it and do what we can to encourage >sales off the back of the "scale". But I don't run a picture library so I'm >more than ready to put my neck on the line > >So. Any museums going to step up to the "make it free" challenge? :-) > >ta > >Mike > >________________________________________________ > >electronic museum > >..thoughts on museums, the social web, innovation > >w: http://www.electronicmuseum.org.uk >f: http://electronicmuseum.wordpress.com/feed >e: [log in to unmask] > > >On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Ridge, Mia <[log in to unmask]> >wrote: > >> Frankie Roberto wrote: >> >> > At the conference there did seem to be a vague consensus that we >> > should be moving towards giving access to these images (the public >> > domain ones at the very least) away though - especially with the >> > general buzz around Flickr Commons. >> > >> > Does anyone have any thoughts about this? And what are the >> > barriers we need to overcome? >> >> I think we gain more than we lose when we provide access to our images, >> but then I'm an old hippie and open source geek. >> >> I think we need to show that it's going to benefit our audiences and our >> institutions; and particularly that it's not going to lose money for our >> institutions. >> >> I'd love to see the figures for total expenditure on commercial image >> licensing and print services versus total income - do these services >> currently make a profit, and would that profit be enhanced by increased >> exposure and 'discoverability' or would that profit be dented if people >> no longer feel the need to pay for images? Do our museums even know if >> their image services are truly profitable, and if so does anyone want to >> volunteer their data? >> >> Someone's just started a discussion on the MCN list (http://www.mcn.edu) >> with the subject 'Monetizing museum web sites' and that thread might >> also throw up some useful suggestions. >> >> cheers, Mia >> >> >> Mia Ridge >> Database Developer, Museum Systems Team >> Museum of London Group >> 46 Eagle Wharf Road >> London. N1 7ED >> Tel: 020 7410 2205 / 020 7814 5723 >> Fax: 020 7600 1058 >> Email: [log in to unmask] >> www.museumoflondon.org.uk >> Museum of London is changing; our lower galleries will be closed while >> they undergo a major new development. Visit www.museumoflondon.org.uk to >> find out more. >> London's Burning - explore how the Great Fire of London shaped the city we >> see today www.museumoflondon.org.uk/londonsburning >> Before printing, please think about the environment >> >> ************************************************** >> For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the >> website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk >> ************************************************** >> > > > >-- > >************************************************** >For mcg information and to manage your >subscription to the list, visit the website at >http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk >************************************************** -- __________ J. Trant [log in to unmask] Partner & Principal Consultant phone: +1 416 691 2516 Archives & Museum Informatics fax: +1 416 352 6025 158 Lee Ave, Toronto Ontario M4E 2P3 Canada http://www.archimuse.com __________ ************************************************** For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk **************************************************