italian cultural heritage protection laws- cc world summit 2013

ITALIAN CULTURAL HERITAGE PROTECTION LAWS:

ACCESSING DIGITAL COLLECTIONS OF ART AND CULTURAL GOODS

Angelica Tavella

Nexa Center / CC Italia

August 24, 3013

The Policy

• 2004: the Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape (“Codice Urbani”) is passed.

The Ministry of Heritage and Cultural Goods (MiBAC) control permission to reproduce any cultural heritage good.

The Policy

• Permission is granted by local authorities (“sorpitendenzas”) on a case by case basis.

• The fee for a reproduction is dependent on:• who is in control of the cultural good (if it is not owned by the State),

• the purpose of the reproduction, • where and when the reproduction will be used,• the expected economic benefits coming from the reproduction.

The Case of Wiki Loves Monuments

• Began in 2011• Resulted 168,208 submissions to Wiki

Commons, from 18 countries• Largest photo competition in the world• All photos under CC-BY-SA license

Accordo Quadro Agreement

• Legal negotiations and (eventual) agreement written between Wikimedia Italia and MiBAC.

• Only “lesser known” goods could be used in the contest.

• It must be publicly acknowledged that the good remains property of MiBAC.

Source: interview with lawyer Avv. Deborah De Angelis

Outcomes

• Over 12,000 photos of Italian cultural goods were entered which are now available on Wiki Commons.

• People all over the world are able to view and learn about these monuments• MiBAC’s goal of increasing visibility of

Italy’s lesser-known goods succeeds.

Nicola D’Orta, con “Anfiteatro campano dell’Antica Capua” (Santa Maria Capua Vetere)

Giacomo Barbaro, “Fontana di Nettuno” (Bologna)

Unresolved Issue:

• No compatible solution to allow photos of Italian cultural goods to made available under CC (or any other) open license.• This includes the Wikimedia Commons, Europeana, or any other digital cultural organization aiming to promote cultural heritage.

Conclusions

•Legislation: Should be presented in a more pro-culture manner, not the current anti-share imposition.

Instead of saying the said use is prohibited unless a, b, and c steps are taken,say the use is allowed is x, y, and z steps are taken.

Conclusions

•Logistics: transaction costs to calculate fees and grant permissions are unnecessarily high.

Set standard costs for common uses.

Suggestions

• Identify and limit a few specific works/ cultural goods to be protected under the terms of Cultural Heritage Protection Laws.

Suggestions

• Reproductions may be subject to the application of a CC license + an ad hoc agreement concerning the CHPLs, identified by the cultural heritage institution.

Sources and Acknowledgements

• Thanks to the Nexa Center for Internet and Society • Interviews

• Deborah De Angelis- lawyer who wrote the “Accordo Quadro”

• Resources and information from Director and affiliates of the Nexa Center• Federico Morando- Director• Stefano Costa- Archeologist