1. WP3: Gathering data from cultural institutions to inform and evaluate EnDOW Kris Erickson CREATe, University of Glasgow 20 th January 2016

2. Aims of research Characterise the costs encountered by cultural institutions when digitising collections; Compare existing empirical research on digitisation projects to set benchmarks: proportion of orphan works, rate of success, and total cost per work; Assess cases where crowdsourcing is appropriate

3. Characterise costs of rights clearance InstitutionProjectWork Cost of exhibition development (calendar time, scheduling, space) Knowledge costs related to handling IP PR / reputation costs arising from dispute Fees to access databases used in DS Labour cost of examining works Labour cost of searching for rightsholders / DS Labour cost of corresponding with rightsholders (Covey (2005; Stobo et al, 2016)) Material cost of communicating with rightsholders (Covey, 2005) Alterations to project design incurred by rightsholder requests Fees paid to rightsholders located by DS Fees paid to license orphan works in UK scheme or ECL Alterations to display of work at request of rightsholder Takedown of work on rightsholder reemergence (Schofield & Urban, 2015) Compensation paid on rightsholder reemergence

4. Existing empirical studies InstitutionStudyNo. worksResults Carnegie Mellon University Libraries Troll Covey (2005) 277 in-copyright books Unable to identify rightsholder: 19% Rightsholder permission given:24% Permission not given: 30% No response: 27% Time spent on DS per work: ~3.25 hrs / $15USD UK Wellcome Library Vuopala (2010)1,400 postersUnable to identify rightsholder: 30% Rightsholder permission given:19% Permission not given: 3% No response: 48% Time spent on DS per work: 0.5 hrs / €50 UK National Archives Vuopala (2010)1,114 legal documents Unable to identify rightsholder: 35% Rightsholder permission given:61% Permission not given: 4% No response: 0% Time spent on DS per work: £31 GBP

5. Existing empirical studies cont. InstitutionStudyNo. worksResults British LibraryStratton (2011)140 books published between 1870 and 2010 Unable to identify rightsholder: 31% Rightsholder permission given:17% Permission not given: 26% No response: 26% Time spent on DS per work: 4 hrs BBCHargreaves (2011) IPO (2014) 1,000 hours of factual TV programming Unable to identify rightsholder: assumed 0% Rightsholder permission given: assumed 100% Time spent on DS per work: 6.5 hrs / £91 University of Glasgow Libraries Stobo et al (2016) Sample of 433 individual works in a collage / scrapbook Unable to identify rightsholder: 80% Rightsholder permission given:>8.5% Permission not given: 5% No response: 6.5% Time spent on DS per work: 0.2 hrs

6. Crowdsourcing? Institution Exhibition design Information on collection Digitisation Identify work ‘Diligent search’ Identify author Locate author Contact author Exhibit Manage exhibition of work Emerging rightsholder

7. Crowd configurations Massive, heavyweight (fandom) Focused heavyweight (PCI) Massive, lightweight (clicktivistm) Focused, lightweight (membership drive) Cost to contribute LowHigh Amount of contribution Low High Adapted from Haythornwaite (2009)

8. Interview candidates InstitutionScaleCollection type British Film InstituteNationalVarious Glasgow City ArchivesLocalVirtual Mitchell digitisation Cheshire Record OfficeLocalVarious Wakefield Record OfficeLocalVarious – mostly name- rich records Scottish Screen ArchiveSpecial/LocalVarious Leeds Heritage OnlineLocalPhotographic and Playbill collections Birmingham LibraryLocalVarious collections National Video Game Archive NationalPhysical hardware, software, websites & periodicals

9. Interview script 1.What are the resources available to conduct rights clearance in your organisation (number of archival staff, level of copyright knowledge)? 2.Please provide a description of the collection(s) that you wish(ed) to make available. 3.Please describe what you wanted to do with the collection(s): digitisation for purposes like education, public outreach, research, private study, or commercial uses like promotional material, exhibitions etc. 4.Please give an estimate of the overall number of works to be digitised in the collection(s), or awaiting digitisation in your overall collections (some institutions might engage in mass digitisation). 5.MB – ask about how they conducted diligent search (sources consulted, etc.). 6.Within this total, how many are ‘orphan works’ e.g. the copyright holder is unknown? 7.In the digitisation project described, please estimate the proportion of works for which a rightsholder was located. Within that group of works, how many gave permission, how many declined and how many did not respond?

10. Interview script cont… 7. Please summarise costs involved for the digitisation project you describe. (e.g. hours of staff time for copyright search and clearance, upload of data/processing, IPO application fees, other licensing fees, etc.). 8.If possible, please provide the data above in terms of hours per work and GBP per work, in a collection where rights clearance was attempted. 9. Have you had a takedown request or other contact from a rightsholder? How do you plan to manage requests if they arise? 10. Who are the eventual users of the digitised works? Can you think of a community who could undertake portions of rights clearance task if they were empowered to assist? 11. Highlight any thoughts, negatives or positives about the uses currently permitted by the UK licensing scheme or EU Directive (if applicable). 12. If your institution was going to digitise in future, what would be suggested technical or regulatory solutions for putting orphan works online?