CONTENT PROVIDERS SURVEY RESULTS
I. Type of organization
1. Please check
the term which best describes your parent organization:
21 Academic institution
7 Non-profit institution
3 For-profit institution
2 Government institution
2 Historical society
2. What function does your department perform within the
3. What is your role:
19 Project manager
14 Rights and permissions specialist
II. Description of collection:
1. What type of original materials are you digitizing:
37 Original photographs
21 Documents with both text and images
15 Text only documents
4 Moving images
4 Architectural drawings
2. What is the planned size of your digital archive in total
assuming availability of funding (include items you have previously
36 Under 50,000 items
17 Over 100,000 items
7 Under 100 items
7 Under 1,000 items
3 Under 100,000 items
3. Roughly how many individual scanned image files will this
number of items represent:
34 Under 50,000 items
19 Over 100,000 items
7 Under 100 items
7 Under 1,000 items
5 Under 100,000 items
4. What % of your collection earmarked for digitization has
been processed to date:
5. Are you primarily digitizing:
33 Materials for which your organization holds
31 Materials in the public domain
25 Materials under the copyright protection
of another party
19 Materials of unknown copyright status
6. How do you provide access to your digital surrogates
(check all that apply):
51 Database on website associated with your
12 CD-Rom/other removable media
7 Database on website associated with another
6 Stand-alone computer
7. Is your collection available with:
40 Some restrictions
18 No restrictions
If all or part of your collection has restrictions, which
of the conditions below apply:
31 Available over the web to the general public
25 Available for internal use only to selected
12 Available over the web to selected users
11 Available on CD-Rom or other removable media
6 by request
9 Available for on-site use to the general
8. If you use materials copyrighted by others, how do you
obtain permissions from copyright holders to digitize and
display their materials (check all that apply):
35 Request permission from copyright holder to make
materials available to all
9 Pay licensing fees to owners; no reimbursement
9 Pay licensing fees to owners subsidized by
5 Negotiate technological means, such as password
protection, to make materials available
6 With paying owners licensing fees
5 Without paying owners licensing fees
2 Negotiate other technological restrictions
such as tethering
2 With paying owners licensing fees
2 Without paying owners licensing fees
9. Are you satisfied with the effectiveness/cost efficiency
of this process:
10. How do you track the rights permissions process:
35 Via paper files
23 In a database
11. Have you received positive or negative reaction from
any copyright holders regarding dissemination of materials
on your site:
12. What do you feel are the strong and weak areas in your
policies for working with copyrighted materials:
Go to end of this document for answers to question #12.
13. What types of guidelines or information would be helpful
to you in your work with copyright protected material:
43 Permissions and clearances process/workflow
43 Digital rights management guidelines
38 Comparative chart of national practices,
37 Interpretation of copyright laws & analysis
in layman's language
35 Digital rights management metadata
27 Resource lists: websites, listserves, contact,
14. Are you responsible for developing your department's
copyright clearance procedures for your project:
Responses to question 12: What do you feel are the strong
and weak areas in your policies for working with copyrighted
"Strong -- we only put up stuff for which we have
permission, so do not have to worry about legal challenges.
Weak -- this strict policy means that lots of documents are
unavailable; I would love to find a legal way to make more
"Not co-coordinated or tracked. Specialized post
has been created to deal specifically with IP management."
"Strong: We have one person primarily responsible
for rights clearance making the process easily trackable and
ensuring that consistent and appropriate fees are required."
"Strength: try to work 100% in the public domain.
Weakness: therefore limited to particular set of works."
"The problems we experience are less in policies
than procedures for project proposals. People proposing
projects have extremely vague and hazy notions about how copyright
and intellectual property rights apply, and want to digitize
anything that we own in our institution. Thus, with
every project, one of the initial tasks is educating the project
leaders in copyright and IP rights."
"Identifying public domain materials, and documenting
the reasons why we believe this is in the public domain."
"It really restricts us in time, i.e. can't do much
of recent material which would be of great interest. Luckily
many of the archives obtained copyright when they got collections,
so some more recent material is available to be mounted."
"By dealing with materials that we own outright,
we do not need to devote staff time to negotiating copyright
"Many contributors and stakeholders do not understand
copyright; what is public domain, what is not. We spend a
lot of time educating and explaining why particular items
cannot be included in the project due to copyright restrictions
or difficulty locating copyright owner, for example."
"When ownership issues are muddied (physical items
owned by other than copyright owner), licenses are more complex.
Our turnaround for putting licenses together is extremely
long (months or years)."
"Strong: High informational and pedagogical value
of our project. Information should not be password protected
- it should be freely available. No other service provides
similar information. Widely respected. We have a copyright
statement on our website. Only 2 comments in 9 years!!! Weak:
Heavy reliance on fair use. Uncertainty about campus users
downloading images for classroom projection. I assume that
is fair use. Other institutions are ambivalent about what
we are doing: happy to have the resource, but nervous about
our position. Neutral: Some precedent for digital fair use,
but not much."
"The fact that we asked written permission first.
Also we are willing to remove any items on request (which
has not yet been necessary)."
"We don't keep a database of contact information
for copyright holders."
"Weakest areas are constantly requesting permission
for everything...inability for the museum to make judiciary
judgements. Artists and galleries making unreasonable demands
as relates to simple permission requests."
"Strong: written inst'l policy & procedure being
developed. Weak: no one to do the research so many staff get
"stuck" with the work, therefore harder to be consistent."
"The strong areas are that we do not publish works
that are copyrighted by another entity. The weak areas are
that copyright owners more than ever are seeking profit for
educational uses. Also, the web is difficult to police."
"How to determine copyright status of materials
acquired from 3rd party and ambiguous in ownership status."
"Strong: work together with publishers and authors.
Weak: in the case of journals it is impossible to find out
every single copyright holder, therefore we say that the permission
of the editor is sufficent (which is not true)."
"Dealing with the gray area between 1923 and 1965."
"Strong: fair use is certainly the case in our educational
setting. Weak: it is nearly impossible to deal with the copyright
issue under our current staffing levels."
"We are still on the beginning end of managing our
images. Our collections contain countless copyrighted images
and I would like to make them available but the prospect of
doing the necessary work without a sense of meeting a generally
accepted standard for every image is daunting."
"Strong - we've developed an intellectual property
policy to help make all museum staff aware of copyright considerations
in their own projects."
"Keeping it straight between theatrical release,
home video and international dept what rights were licensed
for certain photos. We try our best and have a pretty
good record in this area. We don't license for every poster
or ad, but many."
"Strong: the museum's dedication to honoring artist's
wishes in terms of how we use copyrighted works of art."
"Weak: We don't yet have a policy. It is currently
being written by yours truly. The other weak area is the lack
of institutional support for recognizing the need for policies
to guide our use and ownership of copyrighted materials."
"Strong: guidelines for image distribution
outside of institute. Weak: reinforcement of policies
and constant exceptions."
"We are currently working with very clear material,
so there is no problem with policy."
"Our policies allow our institution to preserve
our photographic material digitally and make our digital surrogates
available to patrons and staff on restricted basis. Each
distribution of a digital surrogate outside the library is
documented through our records of written permissions from
"The retraction of permission has convinced me to
get all permissions in writing before I start work."
"Mostly weak areas - communication to and compliance
by staff of policies - and especially making them aware of
copyright issues. People try to use things prior to our seeking
and being granted permission and this creates much stress
and work on all sides."
"Information about the objects must be clear and
finding addresses can be difficult."
"Our practices reflect reality. The vast majority
of our images (just as the vast majority of textual materials
in archives) are of unknown copyright holder or, through heirship,
the intellectual property of many copyright holders, most
or all unknown. For any commercial or editorial use,
we place the responsibility for copyright clearance on the
user. When the copyright holder is known, we supply
that information to the user. When acquiring collections
from the photographer or a commercial entity we make sure
the deed of gift is clear regarding copyright holder.
In the case of newspaper collections acquired years ago, we
are negotiating licensing agreements with the newspaper."
"There is no one unit or person in the library responsible
for working with policies."