Contemporary art/notes 03102012

http://wiki.okfn.org/Contemporary_art/Draft

Attendees:

Joris Pekel (OKFN) Sarah Stierch (GLAM-Wiki US) Sandra Fauconnier (Board member of Wikimedia NL, Art Historian, Archivist, V2,)

Goal

To develop a documentation guide to share with contemporary artists that promotes the use of open licenses (public domain, Creative Commons). This publication, which will be available CC BY SA, will be geared specifically towards artists and their representatives. It will be able to be utilized by GLAMs, open stuff community members, and organizations to promote the use of open license in the contemporary art world. This document will consist of a short booklet - 2-4 pages that explains clearly: Benefits of releasing works via these open licenses Explanation of three types of licenses (see below) Short case studies of contemporary artists doing so with visual examples Resources This document is meant to be shared with contemporary artists, buyers, collectors, and curators.

Licenses covered

CC 0 - "CC0 enables scientists, educators, artists and other creators and owners of copyright- or database-protected content to waive those interests in their works and thereby place them as completely as possible in the public domain, so that others may freely build upon, enhance and reuse the works for any purposes without restriction under copyright or database law. In contrast to CC’s licenses that allow copyright holders to choose from a range of permissions while retaining their copyright, CC0 empowers yet another choice altogether – the choice to opt out of copyright and database protection, and the exclusive rights automatically granted to creators – the “no rights reserved” alternative to our licenses." From: http://creativecommons.org/about/cc0 CC BY - "This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation. This is the most accommodating of licenses offered. Recommended for maximum dissemination and use of licensed materials." From:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ CC BY SA - "This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work even for commercial purposes, as long as they credit you and license their new creations under the identical terms. This license is often compared to “copyleft” free and open source software licenses. All new works based on yours will carry the same license, so any derivatives will also allow commercial use. This is the license used by Wikipedia, and is recommended for materials that would benefit from incorporating content from Wikipedia and similarly licensed projects." From: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/

JP: I would like to add the NC to this and why NOT to use it. We recently translated a document with 10 reasons why not to do it. We could pick something out and include it in a paragraph I strongly agree - SF.

SF: I'd like to add some info about the other options that artists have: - 'do nothing' in terms of licensing (what most artists do = indifference) and what the consequences are - be a member of a collecting society, and what the consequences are IMO, this will make the doc quite balanced. I also think it's good to not be too 'zealotic' about open licenses, just be clear about the pros and cons of each option.

SF: I'd also like to include the perspectives of - an art-loving Wikipedian who really wants to cover contemporary art very well, but is very much restricted in the use of images - a collection / archive holder of a contemporary art institution who is eager to share the material widely, but can't (I can write this - this is my story)

Questions
-Creative Commons Netherlands - Maarten Zeinstra, Paul Keller?, Timothy Vollmer (tvol)
 * Where will it live online?
 * Printing
 * Distribution
 * Timeline: December 1 is pretty tight, but important to Primavera; perhaps provide her a "sneak peek" document?
 * How will we handle credits?
 * Translations?

Table of Contents
* Conservative: be member of a collecting society * Indifferent to copyright=copyright * Open licenses Present this as a table; comparing the options * User perspective -Wikipedians -A GLAM voice -gallery that has free license work? *Monetary pros? (case studies) http://www.obeygiant.com/ (Sarah) Sebastiaan ter Burg? (Joris) Nina Pailey? (Sarah) Idea: Call for artists! Once we have a draft ready, we can launch a 'contest' where we ask artists to submit artworks to be printed in the booklet.
 * Intro - He Artist, what do you know about copyright?
 * Possible licenses, what are your options+consequences? A table?
 * What is in it for you? Opportunities e.g. Wiki Loves Art/Monuments
 * Case studies + Quality content + Quotes
 * Contact section - Resources
 * Back page - sponsors

TODO

JP: Ping Maarten - CC-involvement, CC Funding for printing/designing? SS: Ping Tvol, sarah will work on wikimedia SF: Ask Wikimedia NL for funding JP: Discuss with Jonathan about OKFN fundings SF: Try to get in touch with Margriet Schavemaker