Memorandum submitted by Museums Copyright
Group
The Museums Copyright Group (MCG) thanks the
CMS Committee for the opportunity to respond to the inquiry into
new media and the creative industries. MCG was formed in 1996
to answer an increasing number of concerns about copyright expressed
by professionals working in the museums and galleries community.
These concerns were prompted by:
— the increasing need for museums and
galleries to raise income;
— an awareness that museums and galleries
were acting in isolation with the result that expertise was not
shared and resources were wasted;
— changes in legislation; and
— the spreading use of digital technology,
including the Internet.
MCG now has over 100 members primarily representing
museums and galleries, including national and regional institutions,
and those attached to universities and local authorities as well
umbrella organizations representing the broad interests of a number
of museum-related organizations and copyright specialists.
Although the MCG includes a number of libraries
in its wider membership, its primary focus is the UK museum community.
MCG also works in partnership with LACA (Libraries and Archives
Copyright Alliance) on areas of mutual interest to museums, libraries
and archives.
New technologies, electronic tools and digitisation
offer real potential for museums to increase virtual access to
their collections, to develop new audiences and to introduce e
learning remotely or using in-gallery systems. Many museums already
have extensive virtual collections and on-line programmes. The
DCMS consultation "Understanding the Future: Museums and
21st Century Life" (2005) specifically addressed the opportunities
and challenges for museums' use of ICT.
Like many other content-driven businesses in
the creative industries, museums are involved in both management
and exploitation of rights, both as creators of content
and materials for interpretation of collections, and as users
of content. For example, for art works in copyright they seek
licences from artists or collecting societies such as the Design
and Artists Copyright Society (DACS), for the use of images and
reproductions of works in collections and exhibitions. Acquisitions
of works of art transfer physical title, but the copyright in
the work remains with the artist until licensed to the museum.
The increasing volume of new media activities and projects increases
the complexity and scale of the licensing environment for museums.
However, the public benefit mission of museums
plays a critical role in the formulation of museum policies in
this area. Educational and access objectives are paramount in
the achievement of this mission, and there can be tensions between
these objectives and the purely commercial objectives of raising
revenue. Museums therefore occupy a very particular place in the
creative content distribution chain, and are uniquely positioned
to negotiate the potential conflicts between a non-profit making
ethos and the commercial imperative.
We welcome this inquiry because it provides
us with an opportunity to present this unique position of museums,
but also to articulate that the present legislation and cultural
environment does not fully cater for the wide ambit of contemporary
activities in the museum sector. Copyright law as it stands imposes
constraints on the use of museum-derived content which can clash
with the achievement of the public benefit objectives of museums.
Whilst we will be making a separate and more
detailed contribution to the Gowers Review, we would wish to point
to several issues in response to the specific questions raised
by the CMS Committee:
The impact upon creative industries of recent
and future developments in digital convergence and media technology
Digital convergence offers huge opportunities
for increasing access and engaging new audiences. Museums are
having to adapt accordingly in terms of ensuring they are operating
legitimately within the copyright framework in pursuing their
non-commercial and educational functions, while also developing
licensing mechanisms for revenue-generating potential. This has
revealed problems in the copyright regime as it applies to museums.
However, museums recognise the potentially huge role and impact
of new media in engaging new audiences and fulfilling their public
access remit.
The effects upon the various creative industries
of unauthorised reproduction and dissemination of creative content,
particularly using new technology; and what steps can or should
be taken—using new technology, statutory protection or other
means—to protect creators
Because of the nature and capability of new
technology, we acknowledge its benefits in providing greater access
to our collections for more people. However, criminalizing certain
activities of infringement, and the use of Digital Rights Management
systems which can lock down access to content in contravention
of the "permitted acts" regime in copyright legislation,
is in the view of the museum community, harmful and counter-productive
and may in future have negative effects upon museums use of this
content. Best practice in our sector concentrates instead on "educating
the user" to be more responsible regarding our rights and
those belonging to third parties.
We are also concerned that the current legislation
(as outlined in the Copyright and Related Rights Regulation
2003) restricts legitimate circumnavigation of technological
measures to protect content and this can be to our detriment when
we need to have the freedom to be able to interact with content
for the purposes of fulfilling our core missions.
The extent to which a regulatory environment should
be applied to creative content accessed using non-traditional
media platforms
The lack of exceptions in the digital environment
is seriously challenging museums in their basic collections management,
in a way that was not the case for traditional media. The MCG
sees a good case for a review of exceptions and uses of digital
material. Many museums are paying for permission to reproduce
their own collections for use in non-profit making and educational
contexts. This does not seem justifiable in the context of the
balance of interests that has developed over a long period of
time between owners and users of copyright material.
Where the balance should lie between the rights
of creators and the expectations of consumer in the context of
the BBC's Creative Archive and other developments
The museums community welcomes the initiatives
of BBC's Creative Archives and also the flexible licences offered
by Creative Commons, especially if this serves to make material
more widely available on relatively unrestricted terms. However,
although these licences may offer museums the ability to license
out some content produced by them (especially content whose creation
has been paid for with public funds), they are not uniformly fit
for all purposes:
(i) Unlike other organisations operating
across the public private divide (such as the BBC) museums have
not had in the past (and still today lack) the resources to commission
large quantities of third party material on terms that the rights
belong to museums, or on terms giving museums freedom to determine
how this content is licensed on to users and other third parties.
Many museums manage collections in which the rights are retained
by the original creators. This does limit the usefulness of Creative
Commons to this material.
(ii) As indicated above, the current funding
model for museums requires them to trade in order to make good
use of their intellectual property and to generate the revenue
required (inter alia) to continue investing in new means of engaging
with their audiences. Creative Commons is problematic in this
context.
Therefore, from a museum perspective, initiatives
such as Creative Archive and Creative Commons do need to take
into account that many institutions operate a number of access
models for different audiences and one size does not fit all.
28 February 2006
| 
