|9.30-9.45||Welcome and introduction
Paul Maier, Director of the European Observatory, EUIPO
|9.45-11.15||Presenting the outcomes and impact of the EnDOW project
Maurizio Borghi: Enhancing access to orphan works in the EU: Rationale, results and legacy of EnDOW
Kris Erickson & Victoria Stobo: Archives, digitization and copyright: an inquiry into best practices of cultural heritage institutions.
Lillà Montagnani: Diligent search and access to sources across the EU
Maarten Zeinstra: Introducing the EnDOW diligent search tool
Chair: Ronan Deazley, Queen’s University Belfast
|11.45-13.15||The orphan works policy in the EU – Roundtable
Carlos Perez-Maestro, EU Commission
Rapolas Lakavicious, EU Commission
Mathias Schindler, EU Parliament
Paul Keller, Europeana
Chair: Maurizio Borghi, Bournemouth University
|13.15-13.30||Conclusion and end of conference|
The Study on Current Best Practices among Cultural Heritage Institutions when Dealing with Copyright Orphan Works, released today by EnDOW researchers Victoria Stobo, Kris Erickson, Aura Bertoni and Flavia Guerrieri, provides a baseline understanding of current practice in relation to copyright, orphan works, diligent search and rights clearance. The results provide also a benchmark against which to evaluate crowdsourcing (and indeed any other proposal) to address the challenge posed by orphan works. Respondents at 15 CHIs across the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Italy were interviewed, including the national library, the national archive and the national film archive. Qualitative and quantitative data was gathered about the institutions, their collections, their diligent search processes, the results rights clearance for specific digitization projects, their thoughts on the potential of crowd-sourcing as a solution, and their views on the current legislative framework.
The Study shows that:
There is wide variance in the level of readiness to engage with orphan works across the CHI sector
- Rights clearance remains expensive and ranges considerably depending on the nature of the work and the approach taken by the institution
- There is continued uncertainty regarding the scope of the Orphan Works Directive and the diligent search requirements
- Views on these uncertainties differ across institutions, suggesting that when interpretation of the legislation diverges, different institutions will implement the legislation in different ways, and best practices will diverge accordingly
- The decision to engage with the EU orphan works exception or, in the case of the UK, with the Orphan Works Licensing Scheme, was frequently expressed as an economic calculus.
To succeed, crowdsourcing must do two things: firstly, offer increased benefits to institutions beyond current practices, and secondly, avoid imposing unreasonable knowledge or integration costs on the institutions involved. Readiness to engage in crowdsourcing diligent search is influenced by these economic factors, but also partially by reputational concerns. Some respondents voiced scepticism that crowd-generated diligent searches would adequately withstand external scrutiny, and preferred to maintain control over decisions about orphan work status for that reason. However, other participants responded positively to the concept, suggesting potential volunteers, and emphasizing the positive aspects of rights research and the impact it can have in CHIs and on users.
The Diligent Search Manual is now available to assist users to carry out diligent searches using our bespoke online tool. The Manual explains the essentials of diligent search in a clear and accessible manner, so that also users with no specialized legal knowledge can complete the process requested by the Orphan Works Directive and implemented in the online tool.
The Manual has been developed by Vicky Breemen and is constantly updated.
The Orphan Works Directive requires that Member States determine, for each category of works, the sources that beneficiary organizations must consult when carrying out a diligent search. EnDOW researchers have conducted an extensive survey on the implementation of the Directive in 20 Member States. As part of the survey, they have collected the complete list of sources that are required under the laws of 20 Member States. This gives an impressive overall number of 1,768 sources for the countries covered by the project, not all of them freely accessible to the public (for a critical examination of the sources see the summary and the complete Reports in the Resources page).
Full details on the sources for each country are available in the Annexes to the Reports 1 and 2 (see Resources)
For an overview of data for the 20 countries (decisions processes and list of sources) click here.
Click on the links below to access the sources for each country:
Crowdsourcing is one of the great innovations of the 21st century, but can it help address the issue of diligent search in the use of orphan works? … Read the full report by Hayleigh Bosher on the IPKat (with contributions from PhD researchers Emile Douilhet, Dukki Hong and Matej Gera)
Read the programme of the symposium held in Bournemouth on 23 June 2018 here.
See some pictures of the event here.
The presentations are available on the Resources page.
The orphan work exception has the purpose of facilitating the circulation of works whose authors are not known or cannot be located, to the benefit of cultural institutions, and society at large. Because the different approaches embraced by the European Member States to the recognition of the orphan work status were recognized a major obstacle, the Directive on Orphan Works of 2012 was issued with the idea of harmonising this exception to copyright law across the EU.
The study conducted by EnDOW researchers in 20 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) shows that all the examined countries have implemented the Directive nearly literally as to the beneficiary institutions, the categories of works and kinds of activities to which the exception applies.
At the same time, while the Directive mandates a Diligent Search of right-holders before any work can qualify as an orphan work, it gives to the Member States the choice about what sources should be consulted in order to meet the requirement of a Diligent Search. According to the study, all countries under scrutiny have issued or are in the process of issuing lists of sources to be consulted. However, several discrepancies emerge in regard to the appropriate sources to carry out the Diligent Search, and the ways to document it. Most of all, the absence of hierarchical validity of the appropriate sources for Diligent Search leave the clearing of rights uncertain.
In addition, the study warns that Diligent Search not only depends on the number of sources that need to be consulted, but also on their accessibility. In particular, the number of national sources shown by the study spans from a minimum of 10 (Cyprus) to a maximum of 357 (Italy), with a total of 1,768 sources for the 20 countries. As already revealed by the Report on “Requirements for Diligent Search in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Italy”, this study confirms and provides further evidence that a significant share of the sources to be consulted in order to carry out a Diligent Search is not freely accessible online. Specifically, the analysis of the sources in 20 countries reveals that the ratio of freely online accessible sources varies significantly among Member States, ranging from the 91% of Lithuania to the 36% of Poland, with an average accessibility of 63%. Moreover, some of the sources identified as “appropriate” to carry out a Diligent Search can only be consulted offline (namely on-site), and this may make the Diligent Search more resource-intensive or simply unworkable.
In conclusion, according to the study, it is advisable that each Member State would provide for a detailed non-exhaustive list of sources and the definition of internal hierarchies among the listed sources, with a diversification between compulsory and optional sources, depending on their relevance and accessibility. Moreover, the study suggests to the legislature at EU and national level to consider the introduction of the principle according to which a search must be considered diligent if all relevant freely accessible online sources have been consulted.
Report 2 and its Annexes are available from the Resource page.
CREATe organized two events on Friday 20th January 2017 to launch the Digitising the Edwin Morgan Scrapbooks Project: a free training event about digitising photographs and the launch of the web resource. The collection of Edwin Morgan Scrapbooks – a unique and culturally significant mixed-media collection of artistic work from the early to mid-twentieth century – is one of the case studies selected by EnDOW researchers Kris Erickson and Victoria Stobo will carry out right clearance simulations.
The third progress meeting of EnDOW was organized by CREATe at the University of Glasgow, on 19-20 January 2017. The agenda covered, among other things, the consolidation of the analysis of diligent search in 20 countries and the final draft of the flowcharts of operations for the EnDOW digital platform, which will be in operation in the next months and will be officially presented in June.
The minutes of the meeting are available here.
The EnDOW team at the meeting in Glasgow: all wearing the official Tartan of CREATe
EnDOW researchers Kris Erickson, Marcella Favale and Maurizio Borghi have published “With Enough Eyeballs All Searches Are Diligent: Mobilizing the Crowd in Copyright Clearance for Mass Digitization” in the Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property (vol. 16, issue 1, 2016).
The article presents the conceptual framework that is at the basis of EnDOW and discusses the various dimensions of crowdsourcing as applied to diligent search for orphan works. The abstract of the article reads:
Digitization of 20th Century cultural heritage is severely restricted due to the real or potential subsistence of copyright and related rights. Under the laws on orphan works introduced in many countries, items whose copyright status is uncertain may possibly be lawfully digitized, on condition that a “diligent search” of the copyright owners has been performed. However, carrying out diligent searches on large collections is a lengthy and expensive process, which may discourage institutional users from embarking on large-scale digitization. While the problem of performing diligent searches has been so far approached in a “centralized” manner by individual institutions, the article suggests a de-centralized approach based on crowdsourcing certain phases of the diligent search process. The proposed solution may alleviate the problem of the high costs of diligent search, and may ultimately enable cultural heritage institutions to take full advantage of the orphan works legislation. Suitability of the crowdsourcing solution to the cultural heritage sector is discussed and challenges to implementation are identified.
The article can be downloaded here.
The preliminary results of the EnDOW survey on the diligent search requirement across 20 EU member states have been presented and discussed in a Meeting organized by the European Intellectual Property Office with the Competent National Authorities for the Orphan Works Directive and the Orphan Works Database. The meeting took place on 7 December 2016 in the premises of the EUIPO in Alicante, Spain.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the collaboration between EUIPO and competent national authorities aimed at promoting the use of the Orphan works Database, as well as the practical functioning of the Directive 2012/28/EU and the issue of the diligent searches. The European Commission and representatives of the competent national authorities of 22 Member States attended the meeting.
In his presentation, EnDOW’s project leader Maurizio Borghi discussed the key findings of the survey conducted by the EnDOW researchers on 20 member states. The survey collected evidence on the implementation of the Orphan Works Directive (including the adoption of soft law instruments), on the availability of alternative instruments for making use of orphan or out of print works, and on the sources to consult in order to perform a legally valid diligent search. The survey allowed EnDOW researchers to collect a database of around 1,400 sources across 20 member states. Interestingly – or rather worryingly – a significant proportion of those sources is not available for free consultation online, but their access is restricted in some form.
The presentation can be downloaded here.
The Report with the findings of the EnDOW survey will be soon published on the Resources page.