Thomas Margoni from the Institute for Information presents his research where he asks the question: When does a digital reproduction of existing (protected or unprotected) materials give riseto a new subject matter protected by copyright and or related rights?

1. Digitizing the cultural heritage
OKFN Conference – Berlin 2014
t.margoni@uva.nl

2. ●
Cultural heritage is largely analogue
●
To make it widely available it needs to be
digitized and freely accessible through the
Internet
●
What are the legal (or at least copyright)
related obstacles?
Definition of the problem
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 2
t.margoni@uva.nl

3. When does a digital reproduction of existing
(protected or unprotected) materials give rise
to a new subject matter protected by
copyright and or related rights?
Main research question
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 3
t.margoni@uva.nl

4. ●
What are the underpinnings of the legal status of the
photographed/scanned/digitized material: mere
objects (not works); works (copyrighted or fallen in
the public domain), material protected by related
rights?
●
How the different processes and techniques of
digitization can influence the resulting legal status?
(e.g.: automatic scans vs. professional photographs,
semi-automatic digitization, etc).
Sub-questions considered
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 4
t.margoni@uva.nl

5. ●
Legal research
●
Desk research (International/EU/MS)
●
Questionnaires (28 MS +)
– General questions
– Multiple choice (case scenario)
– Validation of results
Methodology
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 5
t.margoni@uva.nl

6. 2 parts:
– General questions on copyright fundamentals
– Multiple choice questions on specific acts of
digitization
Questionnaire
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 6
t.margoni@uva.nl

7. ●
We developed 1 case scenario with 3 different
hypothetical situations that summarize 3 different types
of digitization processes
●
Subject matter covered: images (painting, drawings,
maps, photos, etc.), texts (books, newspapers, letters,
etc.), objects (statues, sculptures, vases, coins, etc.),
films, phonograms, and TV or radio broadcasts
Hypothetical cases
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 7
t.margoni@uva.nl

8. ●
Automated reproduction/digitization
realized in absence (or negligible
presence) of human intervention (e.g.:
Google scanning automatically all books
of the entire collection).
3 Types of digitization:
Automatic scanning
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 8
t.margoni@uva.nl

9. ●
Reproduction operated by a specifically
hired professional with the objective to
realize high quality outputs (e.g.:
photographer taking different shots in
different light conditions to create hi-
resolution images to be made available on
the institution’s website)
3 Types of digitization:
Photographs realized by artists
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 9
t.margoni@uva.nl

10. ●
Automated reproduction realized by
human operator (e.g.: human operator
taking pictures/manually photocopying
collections for inventory/classificatory
purposes)
3 Types of digitization:
In between...
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 10
t.margoni@uva.nl

11. ●
Originality
●
Derivatives
●
Neighbouring rights (especially non original
photographs)
●
Scope of protection of phonograms/broadcasts
Definition of copyright key
concepts
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 11
t.margoni@uva.nl

12. ●
The general work hypothesis seems
confirmed, i.e.:
– Mere acts of digitization do not create new
rights (they are considered “reproductions”)
– The creation of “artistic photographs” creates
new subject matter
– Simple photographs (where exists) can be
relevant to acts of simple digitization
Some (very preliminary) results
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 12
t.margoni@uva.nl

13. ●
However the main problem (as usual) is to define
what is the level of originality that need to be added
to the digital representation to have something
“new”
●
Many times the scope of this type of digitization is
to reflect as closely as possible the reality, so no
space for added originality
Some preliminary results
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 13
t.margoni@uva.nl

14. ●
One of the main tasks/objectives is to look
for MS case law offering an interpretation
of the law in cases like the one at stake
(eg: case reported in Poland)
●
An ideal result would be to create a
graphical representation indicating the
type of new rights that can be created by
digitization
Some preliminary results
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 14
t.margoni@uva.nl

15. ●
Complete study
●
Website with maps and data
●
Academic paper/s
●
Extend geographical coverage
●
Possibly extend research questions
(cultural heritage legislation, Database,
etc).
Forthcoming results
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 15
t.margoni@uva.nl

16. t.margoni@uva.nl
Thanks!
14-7-16 Institute for Information Law - IViR 16
t.margoni@uva.nl