archaeology and intellectual property rights 2019-07-10 · 2 general principles: intellectual...

fffffeeeee

Archaeology and Intellectual Property RightsCARARE

CC-BY-SA

AuthorsArchaeology Data Service (ADS): Dr. Holly Wright, Dr. Katie Green

Deutsches Archaologisches Institut (DAI): Dr. Felix F. Schäfer

Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie Van Wetenschappen - Data Archiving and Networked Services (KNAW DANS): Drs. Hella Hollander, Drs. Heiko Tjalsma

2

TableofContents

Glossary.................................................................................................................................................4

1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................5

2 GeneralPrinciples:IntellectualProperty,CulturalHeritageandEuropeana................................6

2.1 Copyright...............................................................................................................................6

2.2 RelatedRights........................................................................................................................7

2.3 DatabaseRights.....................................................................................................................8

2.4 StackedIPR............................................................................................................................8

2.5 TheEuropeanaLicensingFramework....................................................................................9

2.6 ContentandMetadata..........................................................................................................9

2.7 DataOwnership...................................................................................................................13

3 IPRPolicyCurrentlyinUseforArchaeologicalData....................................................................15

3.1 ArchaeologyDataService(ADS),UnitedKingdom..............................................................15

3.1.1 TherelationshipsbetweendataprovidersandtheADS.............................................16

3.1.2 TherelationshipbetweentheADSanddatausers......................................................17

3.1.3 RelationshipbetweentheADSandaggregationplatformsforresourcediscovery....18

3.1.4 Identifyingcopyrightownership..................................................................................19

3.1.5 Licencedmaterials.......................................................................................................20

3.1.6 Commercialuseofdata...............................................................................................20

3.1.7 Sensitivepersonaldata................................................................................................21

3.1.8 Embargoperiods..........................................................................................................21

3.1.9 BarrierstoRe-use........................................................................................................22

3.2 DeutschesArchaologischesInstitut(DAI)/IANUS,Germany..............................................23

3.3 KoninklijeNederlandseAkademieVanWetenschappen-DataArchivingandNetworkedServices(KNAWDANS),Netherlands..............................................................................................24

4 IPRwithRegardtoDataType......................................................................................................27

4.1 DocumentsandTexts..........................................................................................................27

4.2 DatabasesandSpreadsheets...............................................................................................27

3

4.3 RasterImages......................................................................................................................27

4.4 VectorImagesincludingCAD...............................................................................................28

4.5 Audio-visualData.................................................................................................................28

4.6 AerialSurvey........................................................................................................................28

4.7 UnmannedAerialVehicle(UAV)Survey..............................................................................29

4.8 Geophysics...........................................................................................................................29

4.9 MarineSurvey......................................................................................................................29

4.10 LaserScanning.....................................................................................................................30

4.11 Close-RangePhotogrammetry.............................................................................................31

4.12 Dendrochronology...............................................................................................................31

4.13 GIS........................................................................................................................................31

4.14 VirtualReality......................................................................................................................32

5 KeyIssuesandRecommendations...............................................................................................33

6 Appendix1...................................................................................................................................37

7 Appendix2...................................................................................................................................42

4

GlossaryCommercial Actionsrelatedtoaprofit-makingenterprise.

Copyright Alegalrightcreatedbythelawofacountrythatgrantsthecreatorofanoriginalworkrightsforitsuseanddistribution.Thisisusuallyonlyforalimitedtime.Therightsarenotabsolute,butframedbylimitationsandexceptionstocopyrightlaw,includingfairuse.Amajorlimitationoncopyrightisthatcopyrightonlyprotectstheoriginalexpressionofideas,andnottheunderlyingideasthemselves.

Databaserights Alegalrightpertainingtotheprotectionofdatabases,asdiscussedinDirective96/9/ECoftheEuropeanParliament,stipulatingtheiruseonlybeingrestrictedfor15yearsafteradatabaseiscreated(orsubstantiallyupdated).

Exploitationrights Legalrightsthatcanbetransferredandlicenced,andconstitutetheeconomicvalueofthecopyright.

Intellectualproperty Intellectualcreationswhichareunderthesolecontrolofaparticularpersononentity,assignedasownersbylaw.

IntellectualpropertyRights

Protectionsgrantedtointellectualpropertycreators,including,butnotlimitedto,copyright,trademarksandpatents.

Moralrights Legalrightsthatarenon-transferrableandinsomeEuropeanjurisdictionsperpetual.Theyprotectthecreatoragainstslander,andguaranteethatattributionmustbegiven.

Non–commercial Actionsrelatedtoanenterprisethatisnotprofit-making.

Publicdomain Creativematerialsthatarenotprotectedbyintellectualpropertylawssuchascopyright,trademark,orpatentlaws.

Relatedrights(alsoreferredtoasneighbouringrights)

Rightsassociatedwithanintellectualcreationnotconnectedwiththeauthorofthecreation.Thislargelyreferstotherightsrelatedtoaudioandvideorecording,wherethesubjectoftherecordingretainsseparaterights.

5

1 IntroductionTheCARAREnetworkrepresentsanon-goingcollaborationofpartnerspreviouslyinvolvedintheCARAREproject,alongwithotherorganisations,fundedbytheEuropeanaDigitalServiceInfrastructure(DSI),throughtheConnectingEuropeFacility(CEF)Trans-EuropeanTelecommunicationsNetworksWorkProgramme.TheCARAREnetworkaimstosupportandinvolveitsmembersin:

• makingthedigitalcontentforthearchaeologyandarchitectureheritagethattheyholdavailableonlineforeducation,research,publicenjoymentandtosupporttourismandotheruses;and

• makingtheirdigitalcontentavailabletotheusersofEuropeanabyprovidingaggregationservices.

Thenetworkoffersitsmembersaccesstoexpertise,technicalsupportandadvice.ManyoftheCARAREpartnershavealonghistoryofworkingwitharchaeologicaldata,andarewell-placedtocontributetheirexpertiseandexperience.Thearchaeologicaldomainisoneofthemorecomplexwithintheculturalheritagesectorwithregardtointellectualpropertyrights(IPR).Thiscomplexitystemsfromthediversityofcontentassociatedwitharchaeologicalresearch,andtheoverlapbetweenthecommercialandnon-commercialsectors.Archaeologistsarealwaysquicktoemployanytechnologyormethodologytoadvancetheirresearchquestions,whichcanrangefromusingdronestodocumentordiscoverarchaeologicalresources,tothesimpleadoptionofthetrowelfromthebuilder’stoolbox.Thismeansdigitalarchaeologicalresources,whetherborndigitalortranslatedfromananalogueoriginal,cantakealmostanyformatincurrentuse.Theycanalsobetransformedfromonedigitalformattoanotherforreasonsofanalysis,preservationordissemination,andthesetransformationscanhaveimplicationsforownershipandre-use.

Theoverlap(orsomewouldsaydivision)betweenthecommercialandnon-commercialsectorsinarchaeologyfurthercomplicatesthediversityofdatageneratedbyarchaeologicalresearchwithregardtoIPR.Inmanycountries,themajorityofarchaeologicalfieldworkisnowcarriedoutbycommercialcompaniesororganisationswhichbidcompetitivelytodothearchaeologicalwork.Thisisdrivenbydevelopment,ratherthanaparticularresearchagenda,andoftenhaslocalandnationalgovernmentalcriteriatosatisfy,inadditiontotheirownintellectualpropertyneeds.Thisisnottosaythatacademicresearchprojectsdonothavetoconsidergovernmentalintellectualpropertyneeds,butmoreoftenexpectationscomefromfunders,publishers,andtheirownresearchinstitutions.

Thisreportaimstosetoutthecomplexitiessurroundingtheuseandre-useofarchaeologicaldatawithregardtoIPR,andprovidebestpracticeguidanceonmanagingrightsforarchaeologicalcontentsuppliedtoEuropeana.ThisguidancehasbeendevelopedinconsultationwiththeCARAREnetworkpartners,andismeanttofamiliarisepotentialEuropeanacontributorswithcommonscenarios,butcannotbeconsideredlegaladvice.

6

2 GeneralPrinciples:IntellectualProperty,CulturalHeritageandEuropeana

WithregardtoIPRandEuropeana,considerablefoundationalworkhasbeencarriedoutinpartnershipwiththeKennislandthinktank.KennislandbeganpartneringwithEuropeanain2009,focussingonpolicyandtoolcreation,tomakeresourcesmorewidelyavailableandre-usable.1InadditiontopartneringdirectlywithEuropeana,KennislandhaspartneredwithavarietyofEuropeanaprojects,includingEuropeanaConnect,EuropeanaAwareness,EuropeanaSounds,EuropeanaCreativeandEuropeanaCloud.Thecollectiveexperienceofworkingwiththeseprojectshasinformedtheirrecentpublication,IPRguidesforEuropeanaFoodandDrink.2ThisreportwascreatedinpartnershipwiththeCollectionsTrust,andwhiledesignedtomeettheneedsoftheEuropeanaFoodandDrinkproject(whichincludedtheCARAREpartners:HellenicMinistryofCultureandTourism,NationalTechnicalUniversityofAthensandVilniusUniversity),thereportsetsoutthegeneralIPRprinciplesforcontentwhichcanbeappliedtoculturalheritagedatagenerally.3CARAREpartnerswerealsoinvolvedinthe3DICONSproject(AthenaResearchandInnovationCenterinInformationCommunicationandKnowledgeTechnologies,NationalTechnicalUniversityofAthens,UniversidaddeJaen,VisualDimensionbvbaandTheCyprusResearchandEducationalFoundation),whichanalysedIPRrequirementsassociatedwith3Ddata.InadditiontofurthergeneralinformationaboutIPRwithregardtoculturalheritage,the3DICONSReportonIPRSchemeisusefulforarchaeology,asthearchaeologicaldomainmakesincreasinguseof3Ddata,whichhasspecificrequirementswithregardtoIPR.4

Assuch,thefollowingisashortsummaryofthemaintenetsofthesereports,includingupdatesmadeafterconsultationwiththeCARAREnetworkandtherecentlypreparedtrainingmaterialscreatedbyKennisland,incollaborationwiththeEuropeanaCopyrightCommunity,aspartoftheirworkwiththeEuropeanaAggregatorForum.Theintentionistoprovidesufficientbackgroundforthedomain-specificdiscussiontofollow,butforafullerdiscussiononthetopic,pleaserefertothemorecomprehensivetoolsandguidanceinthesereports.

2.1 Copyright

Archaeologyisapartofoursharedculturalheritage,andthedatacreatedwithinthearchaeologydomainresultsinawidevarietyofculturalworks,and“…allculturalworksareinthepublicdomain,exceptforthelimitedtimeperiodwhentheyarerestrictedbyIntellectualPropertyRights.Works

1Kennislandwebsite:https://www.kl.nl/en/cases/europeana-making-europes-cultural-heritage-available-reuse/(viewed2LisetteKalshoven&MaartenZeinstra(Kennisland),IPRguidesforEuropeanaFoodandDrink(Amsterdam2015),https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/(CCBY4.0).3Kennislandwebsite:https://www.kl.nl/en/publicaties/cultural-heritage-data-usage-ipr-guide/(viewedonApril20th,2016).43D-ICONSwebsite:http://3dicons-project.eu/eng/Resources/D7.2-Report-on-IPR-Scheme(viewedonApril22nd,2016).

7

thatareinthepublicdomaincanbeusedandreusedasseenfitbyusers…IPRareintendedtogivethecreatorofaworkanexclusiverighttoexploit(copy,distribute,publish,useorreuse)hisorherworkforalimitedperiodoftime.”5ThewayIPRareimplementedisthroughtheuseofcopyright.KalshovenandZeinstradescribethekeyaspectsofcopyrightas:

• “…anexclusiveandassignablerightthatexistsincreativeworksthathaveenoughoriginality(individualcharacter)towarrantsucharight.Copyrightexistsinliteraryandartisticworksintheliterary,scientificandartisticdomains.Thetypeofexpressionmakesnodifferenceintheprotection,andtherightisgivenautomaticallytothecreatorwhentheworkiscreated…;

• Copyrightrestrictionshaveatimelimit:inEuropetheruleofthumbis70yearsafterthedeathofthelatestcreatorofapublishedwork.Insomecountries,whentheauthorisnotanaturalperson(e.g.aninstitution)ortheauthorisanonymous/pseudonymousthetermofprotectionis70yearsafterfirstpublication.Whenrestrictionsbasedoncopyrightend,aworkentersthepublicdomain…;

• Copyrightcanbesubdividedintotworights:exploitationrightsandmoralrights.Asthenamesuggests,exploitationrightsarethosethatcanbetransferredandlicenced.Thisistheeconomicvalueofthecopyright.Moralrightsarenon-transferrableandinsomeEuropeanjurisdictionsperpetual.Theyprotectthecreatoragainstslander,andguaranteethatattributionmustbegiven”.6

2.2 RelatedRights

KalshovenandZeinstraalsodiscussRelatedRights(alsoreferredtoasNeighbouringRights7)whichmayadditionallyapplyto(mosttypically)audio(visual)material.Whilethismaynotapplytomosttraditionalarchaeologicaldata,archaeologistsusemanyavenuesfordocumentingandcommunicatingtheirworkanditcouldapply.AnexamplewouldbethevideodiariescreatedaspartofthereflexiveworkflowatÇatalhöyük.8Thesubjectsofthevideodiaries,ortheÇatalhöyükprojectmayholdtherightstothediaries,butifavideoproducerwerehiredtocreateapromotionalvideofortheÇatalhöyükvisitorcentreusingfootagefromthevideodiaries,theeditorwouldthenholdrelatedrightsassociatedwiththepromotionalvideoasitrepresentsanewintellectualoutput,butremainsdependentontheoriginalrights.TheproducerwouldhavetocomplywiththeIPRassociatedwiththediarieswhencreatingthepromotionalvideo,andtheprojectwouldhavetocomplywithIPRofthevideoproducerwhenusingthepromotionalvideo(assetoutinwhateveragreementismadebetweenthetwoparties).Thiswouldnotapplyhoweveriftheagreementstatedthattheprojectwillalsoretaintherelatedrights.

5LisetteKalshoven&MaartenZeinstra(Kennisland),IPRguidesforEuropeanaFoodandDrink(Amsterdam2015),https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/(CCBY4.0).6LisetteKalshoven&MaartenZeinstra(Kennisland),IPRguidesforEuropeanaFoodandDrink(Amsterdam2015),https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/(CCBY4.0).7Kennisland2016,Copyright&DigitisationofCulturalHeritage,PowerPointpresentation,Kennisland,Amsterdam.8Çatalhöyükwebsite:http://www.catalhoyuk.com/research/videos(viewedonApril20th,2016).

8

2.3 DatabaseRights

KalshovenandZeinstraadditionallydiscussDatabaseRights,whichtheydescribeas“analmostsolelyEuropeanphenomenon”.Whiletheyurgecautionaroundadatabaserelatedtoacollectionreceivedfromanotherinstitution,asitsstructurecouldbesubjecttotheserights,forarchaeologists,databasesareafundamentalscholarlyoutput.However,theguidancegivenfromDirective96/9/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentonthelegalprotectionofdatabasesisthatuseisonlyrestrictedfor15yearsafteradatabaseiscreated(orsubstantiallyupdated).Mostarchaeologistswouldlikelybesurprisedtodiscoverthattheirdatabecomespartofthepublicdomainafter15years.9ThereisapparentlynosuchrestrictionoutsideofEurope,whichmeansEuropegrantscopyrightfordatabases,buttherestoftheworlddoesnot.ImportantlyforEuropeana,asametadataaggregationplatform,thislegalprotectionisunderstoodtograntcopyrightformetadata,allowingforunambiguoususeandre-use10,butDirective96/9/ECusesthetermdatathroughout,anddoesnotdifferentiatebetweendata(thecontentofadatabasewhichmaybetheresultofscholarlyoutput)andmetadata(thedescriptiveandstructuralelementsofthedatabase)thewaythatarchaeologistswould.Thekeyissuehereisthatonlyoriginalexpressionsofideasareprotectedbycopyright,notfactsortheideasthemselves11,soifanarchaeologistwantstoholdcopyright,itisintheirinterestnottodifferentiate,andinvokeatleastthe15yearIPRprotectionfortheirdatabaseasawhole.

2.4 StackedIPR

IPRcanalsobestacked,andasingledigitalobjectcanbesubjecttomultiplelayersofIPRprotection.Asanexample,fora3Dobjectderivedfromlaserscanning,itistypicaltohavethree‘generations’ofIPRforasingleoutput.TheinitialIPRbelongstothecontentpartner(whoprovidesaccesstotheassettobescanned),the1stgenerationofIPRbelongstotheimagingpartner(whocarriesoutthescanning,photography,andcreatessupportingmaterials)andthe2ndgenerationofIPRbelongstothedevelopmentpartner(whoprocessesthe3Ddataandcreatestexturemapsandanydigitalorphysicaloutputs,etc.).Eachoftheselayerswilltypicallyrequireadifferentkindofagreementbetweenpartnerstoallowre-use.12

9EUR-Lexwebsite:http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31996L0009:EN:HTML(viewedonApril22nd,2016).103D-ICONSwebsite:http://3dicons-project.eu/eng/Resources/D7.2-Report-on-IPR-Scheme(viewedonApril22nd,2016).11Kennisland2016,Copyright&DigitisationofCulturalHeritage,PowerPointpresentation,Kennisland,Amsterdam.123D-ICONSwebsite:http://3dicons-project.eu/eng/Resources/D7.2-Report-on-IPR-Scheme(viewedonApril22nd,2016).

9

2.5 TheEuropeanaLicensingFramework

InordertoallowtheuseofculturalheritageresourcesinEuropeana,theEuropeanaLicensingFramework(ELF)wasestablishedin2011toallowtherelationshipsbetweendataproviders,Europeanaanddatauserstobeclearlydefined.TheELFconsistsoffourelements:13

1. TheEuropeanaDataExchangeAgreement:theagreementthatsetsouttherelationshipbetweenEuropeanaanditsdataprovidersandhowmetadatacanbeusedbyEuropeanaandthirdparties;

2. TheCreativeCommonsZeroUniversalPublicDomainDedication(CC0waiver)andEuropeanaDataUseGuidelines:TheCreativeCommonslicencestipulatingtherearenorestrictionsonre-useofdata.ThisisthelicenceusedbyEuropeanatopublishmetadatafromdataproviders(asagreedtointheELF).TheDataUseGuidelinesaccompanythemetadatawithbestpracticere-useguidance;

3. TheEuropeanatermsforusercontributions:ThesetermsaredesignedtomeettheneedsofCommunityCollectionprojects;toprovideintegrationwithexistingEuropeanacontent;

4. Theedm:rightsfieldoftheEuropeanDataModel:ThisfieldallowscontentproviderstospecifythetermsofuseoftheircontenttoEuropeana,andforEuropeanatospecifythesetermstoend-users.

2.6 ContentandMetadata

Useofthetermscontentandmetadatacanoftenbequiteconfusing,butitisimportanttounderstandthedifferencewithregardtoIPR,especiallywhendisseminatingcontentthroughanaggregatorlikeEuropeana.Metadataisoftendescribedsimplyas‘dataaboutdata’,butthiscanalsobeconfusing.Aneasierwaytothinkaboutitmightbe‘metadatadescribescontent’sothatuserscanfindandunderstandthedata.Forexample:youarepursuingresearchontheMesolithicperiod,andyouconsulttheStarCarrArchivesProjectarchive.14ThearchiveincludesavarietyofimagesofMesolithicartefacts,heldindifferentmuseumsintheUK.Whenbrowsingthedifferentimages,thereisdescriptivetexttotelltheuserwhattheimagesare(Figure1).Theimagesarethecontentandthedescriptivetextisthemetadata.Metadataiswhatallowsuserstofindcontentandknowwhatthatcontentis.Withoutmetadata,contenthasnocontext.WhenexploringIPR,itisimportanttounderstandthatmetadataandcontentforasingleresourceusuallyrequiresdifferentlicences.Contentisnearlyalwayssubjecttocopyright,butmetadatawilloftenbeplacedinthepublicdomain.ThisallowsaggregatorslikeEuropeanatofreelyholdmetadatasothatuserscanfindandunderstandtheirresources,butthecontentitselfcontinuestobeheldbyindividualsororganisationswhichretaincopyright.

13EuropeanaProwebsite:http://pro.europeana.eu/files/Europeana_Professional/Publications/Europeana%20Licensing%20Framework.pdf(viewedApril22nd,2016).14NickyMilner,HayleySaul,BenElliott(2013)StarCarrArchivesProject[data-set].York:ArchaeologyDataService[distributor](doi:10.5284/1019856).

10

Figure1:ScreenshotoftheStarCarrArchivesProjectarchive.Eachoftheimages(thecontent)hasinformationassociatedwithitthatgivesinformationabouttheimage(themetadata).WithinEuropeana,theseimageshaveadifferentrightstatementthantheirassociatedmetadata.

Organisationsholdingcontentwhichissubjecttocopyright,whowishtodisseminatethatcontent,mustdosowithalicence.Tomakelicencingeasiertounderstandandenablegreaterre-use,contentprovidersareincreasinglymovingtowardsusingstandardlicences,ratherthanbespoketermsofuseandaccessthatneedinterpretation.Themorerecognisableandstandardisedalicenceis,themorelikelycontentwillbere-used,andre-usedcorrectly.Withoutcleargovernancewithregardtolicencing,itwouldbeimpossibleforEuropeanatomakeresourcesavailableandimpossibleforuserstoknowwhetherresourcesmaybere-usedornot.Currently,thelicencingframeworkallowstheuseof13differentrightsstatements,sixofwhichareCreativeCommonslicencesandtwowhicharepublicdomaintools.

11

Figure2:ThesixCreativeCommonslicencesandtwopublicdomaintools.ReproducedfromLisetteKalshoven&MaartenZeinstra(Kennisland),IPRguidesforEuropeanaFoodandDrink(Amsterdam2015),https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/(CCBY4.0).

12

DataprovidersmaychooseanyoftheCreativeCommonslicencesorpublicdomaintools,oroneofthefiveotherEuropeanarightsstatements.Startinginlate2016,theseEuropeanarightsstatementsarebeingtransitionedtoRightsstatements.org,acollaborationbetweenCreativeCommons,KennislandandkeystakeholderswithinEuropeanaandtheDigitalPublicLibraryofAmerica(DPLA),whichprovidesasetofinternationallyinteroperablerightsstatements.

Currently,Rightsstatements.orgprovides11standardisedrightsstatements,specificallymeanttofosterthere-useofculturalheritageresources15.OnlysixoftheserightsstatementswillbeusedbyEuropeana.Theseincludereplacementsforfouroftheexistingrightsstatements,introductionoftwonewrightsstatementsanddeletionofonerightsstatement.Interestingly,therightsstatementforpaidaccesswillnolongerbesupported.

Figure3:ThesixnewRightsstatements.orglicences,relativetotheirEuropeanapredecessors.ReproducedfromtheRightsStatementsEuropeanaFactsheet:http://pro.europeana.eu/files/Europeana_Professional/IPR/rightsstatements-org-factsheet.pdf(viewedApril25th,2016).

15RightsStatementswebsite:http://rightsstatements.org/(viewedApril24nd,2016).

13

2.7 DataOwnership

Forthosewhowishtopublishcontentonlinewhichtheydidnotproducethemselves,thereareadditionalIPRissuestoconsider.Theseincludeensuringownershipofthecontent,andthatagreementsareinplacesimilartotheEuropeanaDataExchangeAgreementortheArchaeologyDataService’sDepositLicence(seeAppendix1).16Thisusefulflowchartsetsouthowtodetermineownership,andwhetheranagreementneedstobeputinplace.

Figure4:Theworkflowfordeterminingownershipofcontent,andwhetheritcanbere-used.ReproducedfromLisetteKalshoven&MaartenZeinstra(Kennisland),IPRguidesforEuropeanaFoodandDrink(Amsterdam2015),https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/(CCBY4.0).

Whilethemajorityofdigitalarchaeologicalresourcesstillresidewiththeircreators,archivinganddisseminationbythirdpartiesisbecomingmorecommon,andshouldbeencouraged.Archaeologicalresourcesaresimilartomostculturalheritageresources.Theyareoftencreated

16ArchaeologyDataServicewebsite:http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/attach/guidelinesForDepositors/ads_licence_form.pdf(viewedApril22nd,2016).

14

usingfullorpartialpublicfunding(evenwhenthearchaeologyiscarriedoutbyacommercialcontractor),andshouldthereforebeaccessibletothepublic.

Kennislandreferstoorganisationsthatprofessionals(typicallyauthorsorperformers)joinsothattheycanexploittheirworksforthemasCollectiveManagementOrganisations(CMO)anddiscusstheiruseandlimitations.17Dataderivedfromarchaeologicalresearchhowever,evenwhendepositedwithacollectivearchiveordisseminationplatform,nearlyalwaysrequirespermissiontobeobtaineddirectlyfromtherightsholderforanydissemination.

17Kennisland2016,Copyright&DigitisationofCulturalHeritage,PowerPointpresentation,Kennisland,Amsterdam.

15

3 IPRPolicyCurrentlyinUseforArchaeologicalDataInordertoframethediscussionofIPRandarchaeologicaldata,theuseofIPRwillbedividedintotworelationshipcategories(thesecondofwhichhastwosub-categories).Thesecategoriesarenotuniquetoarchaeology,noraretheytheonlypossiblescenariosthatmightbeencountered,buttheyrepresentthemostcommonrelationshipswithinarchaeology.Thesecategoriesare:

1. therelationshipbetweentherightsholder(anindividual,oranorganisationwhichclaimsrightsoverthecontentcreatedbyitsemployees)andanarchive,repository,heritageagency,memoryinstitution,orotherorganisationchargedwithholdingand/ordisseminatingcontentonbehalfoftherightsholder/dataprovider

2. therelationshipbetweenanarchive,repository(etc.)and:a. datausersb. anaggregationplatformforresourcediscovery

WithinEurope,thereareavarietyoforganisationswhichholdarchaeologicaldata,buttherearethreeorganisationswithaspecialisminarchivinganddisseminatingarchaeologicaldata,allofwhomaremembersoftheCARAREnetwork,andhaveexperienceinmakingtheirresourcesdiscoverablewithinEuropeana.TheseorganisationsaretheArchaeologyDataService(ADS)intheUnitedKingdom,theKoninklijkeNederlandseAkademieVanWetenschappen-DataArchivingandNetworkedServices(KNAWDANS)intheNetherlands,andtheDeutschesArchaologischesInstitut(DAI)inGermany.Thesethreeorganisationshaveexperiencewiththefullrangeofdatatypicallygeneratedwithinarchaeology,andathoroughunderstandingoftheissuessurroundingit.Everycountryhasdifferencesincopyrightlaw,andthisdiscussionisnotmeanttobeacomprehensivesurveyofcopyrightimplementationacrossEurope,butratherafocussedunderstandingofIPRandarchaeology.Therefore,practicalscenarios,implementationsandchallengesaredescribed,thatshouldberecognisablebyanyonedealingwithIPRandarchaeologicaldata,regardlessofthespecificlawsinplacewithintheircountry.Whencomparingapproachesbetweenthethreeorganisationsandcountries,itwasfoundthatgoodpracticewasmoresimilarthanexpected.Assuch,thecategoriesabovewillbeexploredfromtheperspectiveoftheADS,followedbyadiscussionofhowtheapproachesandpoliciesofDAIandKNAWDANSwerefoundtodiffer,asappropriate.

3.1 ArchaeologyDataService(ADS),UnitedKingdom

TheADSisbasedwithintheUniversityofYork.Nowinits20thyear,ithasevolvedfrombeingoneoffivediscipline-basedserviceproviderswithintheUKresearchcouncilfundedArtsandHumanitiesDataService(AHDS),intoaself-sustainingorganisation.TheaimoftheADSistocollect,describe,catalogue,preserve,andprovideusersupportfordigitalresourcescreatedasaproductofarchaeologicalresearch.18TheADSseekstocollectanddisseminatehighqualitymaterialwhichwillfacilitatefuturearchaeologicalresearchorwhichpreservesaprimaryrecordofpastarchaeological

18ArchaeologyDataServicewebsite:http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/about/background(viewedApril28th,2016).

16

work.TheADSCollectionsPolicy19providestheframeworkwithinwhichtheADScollectionisdevelopedandsourced,inordertomeettherequirementsoftheprimaryusersoftheADScollections.TomeettheseneedsandbestfacilitatehighqualityarchaeologicalresearchtheADSmaintainsalayeredCollectionsPolicy,providingaccessto:

• datapreservedinthelongtermbytheADS;• resourcediscoverymetadatafordataheldbyanotherbody.

3.1.1 TherelationshipsbetweendataprovidersandtheADS

ThelayerednatureoftheADSCollectionsPolicymeansdatacanbeprovidedtotheADSinseveralwayswhichnecessitatedifferentrelationshipsbetweenADS,thedataprovidersandtherightsholders.Asaconditionofacquisition,theADSalwaysnegotiatesthebroadestpossibleassignmentofrightstoguaranteeaccessandenableredistributionofalldatatypes.However,inalldataacquisitionscenariostherightsholderalwaysretainscopyright,sotherelationshipbetweentheADSandthedataproviderisstrictlyforthelongtermpreservationand/ordisseminationoftheresource.AtnopointdoestheADSacceptanyliabilityfortheaccuracyorcontentofthedataitdisseminates,orforanydamageincurredowingtouseoftheinformationcontainedtherein.

Archiveddatasets

AlldataprovidedtotheADStopreserveinthelongtermenterstheADSCollectionbydepositundertheADSDepositLicence(seeAppendix1).Thisstrategyispreferableinthecaseoffixedorstaticdatasets.Thesedatasetscanbetheproductsofindividuals,projectsorinstitutions.TheADSDepositLicenceissignedbythedataprovideronbehalfofallrightsholderstodatawithinadataset.ThislicenceprovidesthelegalpermissionsandwarrantiesneededtoallowtheADStoenhance,validate,store,translate,copy,orre-arrangethedatasettoensureitsfuturepreservation,andtodistributethedataunderspecifiedtermsandconditionsofaccess.Thisisanon-exclusivelicence,whichensuresthatcopyrightofthedataisnottransferredbythisagreementandprovidesothersafeguardsfortherightsholders.Datasetswithseveredisseminationrestrictionswillbeacceptedonlyunderexceptionalcircumstances.

Servedandbrokereddatasets

Whereappropriate,theADSnegotiatesdataexchangeoraccessagreementswithorganisationstodisseminateresourcesnotpreservedormaintainedbytheADS.DataprovidersoftheseServedandBrokereddatasetssignanadaptedformoftheADSDepositLicencewhichprovidesthelegalpermissionsandwarrantiesneededtoallowtheADStosimplystoredataanddistributeitunderspecifiedtermsandconditionsofaccess.InordertoensuresimilarlevelsofdataaccessandconsistencyacrosstheADScollections,thedata

19ArchaeologyDataServicewebsite:http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/advice/collectionsPolicy(viewedApril29th,2016).

17

providermustagreethatthedatacanbedisseminatedunderthesametermsofuseandaccessasarchiveddatasets.Thisisalsoanon-exclusivelicence,whichensuresthatcopyrightofthedatacontinuestobeheldbytheoriginalrightsholder.

Catalogueddatasets

Wheresignificantresourcesareheldbyotheragencies,theADSmaypursueco-operativeagreementsfortheexchangeofresourcediscoverymetadata,inpreferencetodirectacquisitionoftheresourceitself.Itshouldbenotedhowever,thattheADSonlycataloguesandlinkstoresourcesofhighqualityandutilitytoitsusercommunity.DataprovidersofcatalogueddatasetsenterintoanagreementwhichprovidesthelegalpermissionsandwarrantiesneededtoallowtheADStostorethemetadataorfindingaids,anddistributethemunderspecifiedtermsandconditionsofaccess.Thisisanon-exclusivelicence,whichensuresthatcopyrightoftheresourcediscoverymetadataisretainedbytheoriginalrightsholderanddoesnotcoverthecontentdescribedbytheresourcediscoverymetadataandprovidedbytheotheragency.

3.1.2 TherelationshipbetweentheADSanddatausers

ItistheaimoftheADStoprovideintegratedaccesstoitscollectionatnocosttoendusers.Thisaimcanonlybeachievedifthedataproviderscanbeassuredthattheirownrightsareprotected.Consequently,theuseoftheADScollectioniscoveredbyavarietyoflegalinstrumentstoprotecttheADS,thedataprovidersandADSusers.ThisprotectionisprovidedbytheADSTermsofUseandAccess.20ByacceptingtheTermsofUseandAccessusersareenteringintoalegallybindingagreementwiththeADS.Ineachofthedataproviderrelationshipsdescribedabove,theagreementsmustallowre-usethatconformstotheADSTermsofUseandAccess,unlessdataprovidershaverequestedamorepermissiveaccesslicencesuchasaCreativeCommonslicencelikeCC-0orCC-BY.

TheADSTermsofUseandAccessaffirmtheADSwilllevynochargeforaccessingdata,requirenodocumentstobesignedbyusersorholdinformationongeneralusers.Inreturnusers,usingorreproducing,inwholeorinpart,anymaterialdisseminatedbytheADSaregrantedanon-exclusive,non-transferablelicencetousethematerialforteaching,learning,andresearchpurposes,providedthecopyrightownersareacknowledged.Researchincludesanyworkundertakenfortheadvancementofarchaeologicalknowledgeand/ortheunderstandingofthehistoricenvironment.Suchworkmaybecommerciallysponsored,oritmaybefundedbyacademicbodiesorlearnedsocieties,oritmaybeunsupported.Datacannotbesoldorsuppliedbyausertoathirdparty.

TheADS,asmaintainersofthedisseminateddata,explicitlydisclaimtotheextentpermittedbylawanyresponsibilityfortheaccuracy,content,oravailabilityofinformationlocatedthroughuseof

20ArchaeologyDataServicewebsite:http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/advice/termsOfUseAndAccess(viewedonApril29th,2016).

18

datadisseminatedbytheADS,orforanydamageincurredowingtouseoftheinformationcontainedtherein.

InformationobtainedthroughuseoftheADScataloguemaybesubjecttospecificuseconstraints,thedetailsofwhichareaccessible.Itistheresponsibilityofpotentialandactualuserstobeawareofsuchconstraintsandtoabidebythem.

Figure5:AgraphicsimplifyingtheADSTermsofUseandAccess.ArchaeologyDataServicewebsite:http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/advice/termsOfUseAndAccess(viewedonApril29th,2016).

3.1.3 RelationshipbetweentheADSandaggregationplatformsforresourcediscovery

Tofurthertheimpactandusefulnessofthedataitholds,theADShaspartneredwithavarietyofinitiativestomakeitscollectionsmorediscoverable.ThisincludesmetadataaggregationplatformslikeCARARE,EuropeanaandARIADNE.21TherelationshipbetweentheADSandtheseplatformsisfairlystraightforwardwhenitcomestoprovidingresourcediscoverymetadataforthearchiveddatasetsheldbytheADS,whereadepositorhassignedthestandarddepositlicence.Inthesecases,therelationshipissimplyanagreementbetweenthetwopartiestosharethemetadataunderasetofterms,wherethecopyrightisalwaysheldbytheoriginalrightsholder.Despiteonlyresourcediscoverymetadatabeingprovidedtoanaggregator,thisrelationshipcanbefarlesssimplewhenitcomestobespokeagreementsnegotiatedwithotherorganisations;inmanycasestheymaynotholdthecopyrighttotheresourcedirectlyeither.Themaincomplicationinthesecasesiswiththelicenceunderwhichtheaggregationportalintendstolicencetheresourcediscoverymetadata.

21ARIADNEportalwebsite:http://portal.ariadne-infrastructure.eu/(viewedonApril29th,2016).

19

AlthoughtheoriginaldataproviderwillhaveagreedthatADScandisseminatethemetadataunderspecifictermsofuseandaccess,thesetermsmaynotbeaspermissiveasaCC-BYlicence(forexample),whichmanyaggregatorsrequire.ThewayinwhichheavilylayeredIPRissueslikethisshouldbehandledisoftenunclearinpractice,andonoccasion,bespokesolutionsmustbefound.

3.1.4 Identifyingcopyrightownership

ArchaeologicaldatasetsdepositedattheADSoftencontaindatacollectedduringavarietyofactivitiesbymanydifferentindividualsonbehalfofmanydifferentprojectsandorganisations.Determiningwhoholdsthecopyrightforthedatawithinadatasetcanbecomplex.Themostcommonandstraightforwardsituationisthatthecreatorofthedataholdsthecopyrightforthedata.Incommercialarchaeologyorwithinanacademicenvironment,copyrightfordatacreatedduringthecourseofanindividual’semploymentisoftencommonlyownedbytheemployeraspartoftheiremploymentcontract.Complexitybeginstoenterintotheprocesswhendatacreatorsandorganisationsworkinpartnership,resultinginownershipofdatawithinadatasetbeingclaimedbydifferentpartiesorsharedbetweenparties.Furthercomplicationsareexperiencedwhenthirdpartiesareinvolved,suchasorganisationsorindividualsfundingdatacreation,whomayrequireanotherpartyholdthecopyright.IntheUK,theremaybeafurthercomplicationwhenCrownCopyrightisapplicable.CrownCopyright22existsonworksmadebytheUK’ssovereignorbyaservantoftheCrowninthecourseofduties,whichincludessomeofthekeyheritageorganisationswithwhichtheADSworksclosely,suchasHistoricEnglandorHistoricEnvironmentScotland.TheUKlegalframeworkforcopyrightisprovidedbythe1988Copyright,DesignsandPatentsAct.23

Inordertonavigatethesecomplexities,theADSrecommendsallcontractsexplicitlyaddresscopyrightissuesandmakeitclearinadvancewhatinformationwillbeconsideredconfidentialwhenaprojectiscomplete.TheADSplacestheresponsibilitytocorrectlyidentifywhoholdsthecopyrightfordataonthedatadepositor,whoisrequiredtoacknowledgethattheyarethe:

“ownerofthecopyrightandassociatedintellectualpropertyrightsinthewholeDataCollectionorisdulyauthorisedbytheowner,orowners,oftheserightsandiscapableofgrantingunderthisagreement,alicencetoholdanddisseminatecopiesofthematerial.”-ADSDepositLicence,Section5.3.1(Appendix1).

Inthe20yearhistoryoftheADS,whiledepositorshaveoftenneededtoberemindedoftheirrequirementtoobtainpermissionfromcopyrightholdersbeforedepositingdata,therehavebeenveryfewinstanceswheretherehasbeenarequesttoremovematerialduetocopyright.

Inadditiontocopyright,theownersorcreatorsofintellectualpropertyhavearelatedmoralrightpertainingtotheirwork.Inarchaeology,thisrightmightextendtoindividualsworkingonalargeexcavationteamorworkparty.Whileitmaynotbepossibletoidentifythesepeopleindividually,it

22http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/re-using-public-sector-information/copyright-and-re-use/crown-copyright/23http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/pdfs/ukpga_19880048_en.pdf

20

isconsistentwithethicalpracticethattheircontributionbeacknowledged.Inmostinstances,thisdoesnotcompromisecopyright.Wherepossible,theADSacknowledgesallcontributorsinasuitablemanner.

3.1.5 Licencedmaterials

Licencedandexternaldataprovideuniquechallengestodigitalarchiving,ascopyright,licences,orsoftwaremayprohibitsomearchivaltasks.Challengesmayincludetheabilitytocopy,reproduce,orconvertfilesfromtheirformatsintothosesuitableforarchiving,ortheabilitytocontributethosefilestothearchiveatall.Thelattermaybeparticularlychallenging,forexamplewhenaGISfileusesanunderlyingmaplayerforwhichthedepositordoesnotownthelicence,anditsremovalwillsignificantlydiminishtheabilitytointerpret,read,orre-usethefile.Certainmaterials,suchasbackgroundorcontextualgeospatialsurveydata,areoftenacquiredfromsourcesexternaltoaprojectandthereforeownedbythird-partieswhomayretainalicencetotheinformation.Inthemajorityofcasesanexternalorganisationcannotarchivesuchdatawithouttheexpresspermissionofthelicenceholderandwherecommercialvaluestillexistsforthelicenceddatasetsuchpermissionisrarelygranted.InsuchcasestheADSmayarchiveanddisseminatethederiveddata,butalsoholdmetadatawhichpointstorelevantdataatathird-partyorganisation.Particularlyinthecaseofso-calledBigData(e.g.sensoryscansandothercomplexdatasources),suchadistributedarrangementadditionallyhastheadvantagethataccesstothelargedatasetismaintainedbyaspecialistorganisationotherthanthearchive.Thereverseofthis,however,isthatuserswhorequireaccesstothefulldatasetmayberequiredtopurchasethedatafromthethird-party,orthethird-partymaychoosetocurtailaccessto/ceasetomaintainthedataatanytime.

3.1.6 Commercialuseofdata

TheADSTermsofUseandAccessreflectsoneofthemoreuniqueandproblematicaspectsofworkingwitharchaeologicaldata.IntheUK,andincountriesaroundtheworld,archaeologymaybeacompetitive,commercialenterprise.Insomecountries,archaeologyiscarriedoutundertheauspicesofcentralorregionalgovernment,bynot-for-profitcontractorstiedtoacity,regionoruniversity,befullyfor-profit,oranycombinationthereof.ThisiscertainlythelandscapeintheUK,whichmakesnavigatingIPRparticularlydifficultwhenitcomestoprovidingresourcesforre-use.TheADSiscommittedtoworkingfortheentiretyofthearchaeologicaldomainintheUK,whichmeansservingboththenon-profitandfor-profitresearchsectorsequally.Thismeansresourcesmadeavailableforre-usebytheADSmaybefreelyusedbyfor-profitorganisations,thoughtheproductsofthatusemustthenbedistributedinthepublicdomain(andcannotbesoldtoathirdparty).

Assuch,standardCreativeCommonslicencesarenotappropriate,andastheADSwasanestablishedopendataarchivebeforetheadventofthecurrent‘OpenData’movementandthecreationofstandardlicencesbegantodevelopsignificantmomentum,usingbespoketermsofuseandaccesswasinitiallytheonlyfeasibleoption.Withtheriseofstandardlicencesandtheresulting

21

enthusiasticadvocacyaround‘OpenData’andtheiradoption,theADScameundercriticismfornotbeinganopendataarchive,fornotimmediatelyadoptingastandardlicence.Whilethisassessmentcanbeseenasironic,itdoeshighlightthefactthattherearedegreesofopenness.Whilelegally,theADSTermsofUseandAccessessentiallyallowthesamelevelofuseasCCBY-SA,byadoptingastandardlicence,theeaseofre-usewillalmostcertainlyresultinincreasedre-use.AdoptingastandardlicenceisunderinvestigationattheADS,butitwillrequireasubstantialinvestmentoftimetomakethetransition,somustbeweighedagainstotherorganisationalpriorities.

3.1.7 Sensitivepersonaldata

AnissuecloselyrelatedtoIPRisthearchivinganddisseminationofconfidentialorsensitivepersonaldata.Archaeologicalarchivesmaysometimesincludesensitiveorconfidentialdatawhichrelatestoidentifiableindividuals,butwhichmayalsoprovidevaluablehistoriographicalorcontextualinformationofimportancetounderstandingthecontextofdatacollectionand,morebroadly,forthehistoryofArchaeology.TheADSwishestopreservesuchdata,andtomakeitavailableforresearch,learningandteaching.Atthesametimeitrecognisesthismayraiseissuesofconfidentialityandprivacycoveredbyinstitutionalethicspolicies,andpossiblyfallswithinthescopeoftheUKDataProtectionAct1998andotherlegislation.TheADShasasetofguidanceontheDepositionofSensitiveData(SeeAppendix2).Strategiesfordealingwithconfidentialandsensitivepersonaldatadependuponthenatureoftheresearch,butareessentiallyinformedbyaresearcher'sethicalobligationstowardsparticipantsandsocietyandbylegislation.Sensitiveandconfidentialdatacanbesharedethicallyifresearcherspayattention,fromtheplanningstagesofresearch,tothreeimportantaspects:

1. whengaininginformedconsent,includeconsentfordatasharing;2. whereneeded,protectpeople'sidentitiesbyanonymisingdata;3. andconsideraccessrestrictionstodata.

TheADShashadtorefusetodisseminatedatawheretheseconsiderationshavenotbeentakenintoaccount.

3.1.8 Embargoperiods

Whendealingwiththearchivingofdigitaldata,itisimportantthatthedataisarchived(accessionedandingested)atthepointofdeposit.Thisistoensurethedataisinthecorrectformatandaccompaniedbytheappropriatedocumentationtoensurelongtermpreservationandsustainability.Thisdoesnotmeanthatthedatahastobeautomaticallyaccessibletothepublic.Itmaybedeemedappropriatetoestablishanembargoperiodduringwhichthedatawillbesecuredinanarchive,butnotaccessibletothepublic.Thelengthoftheagreedembargoperiodwilldependonthesensitivitiesinvolved.Thisiscommonlyusedtoprotectsensitivearchaeologicalsitesfrompotentiallydamagingattention,ortoholddatauntilcopyrighthasexpired.

22

3.1.9 BarrierstoRe-use

Archaeologyemploysawidevarietyofmethodsassociatedwiththesciences,butinmanyinstances,andparticularlyforexcavation,testingcannotberepeatedandtheprocessisinherentlydestructive.Whilethereisatraditionofreplicationfortestingascientifictheoryinthesciences,whichexpectsaccesstodataasamatterofcourse,thereisnosuchtraditioninarchaeology.Atthesametime,becausearchaeologicaldataisoftenaproductofthedestructionoftheprimaryresource,itisevenmoreimportantthatbarrierstore-usebeaddressed.Overthelast20years,ADSstaffhaveworkedtounderstandwhydatacreatorsinarchaeologychoosenottomaketheirdataopenforre-use.IPRconcernsfigurehighlyinthereasonsmostoftengiven.Thereasonsinclude:

• Incorrectbeliefthattheywillnolongerowntheirdataoncedeposited• Don’tholdthecopyrightandcan’tgetpermissions• Unsurewhoownsthecopyright• Incorrectbeliefthattheycannolongerpublishdataelsewhere• Don’thaveinformedconsenttomakedatapublicallyavailable• Havepublishedelsewhereandareunsureiftheycanalsodepositwithus• Unawaredatawouldbesharedsohavenotproperlyprepareditfordissemination• Fundamentalbeliefthatit’s‘theirdata’anddon’tneedtomakeitavailable• Don’twantotherpeopletobenefitfromtheirwork

Despitethesereasons,IPRissuesarerarelyatrueobstacleandmanyofthereasonsgivenareeasilyovercome.Archaeologistsshouldensurethatcontractsexplicitlyaddresscopyrightissuesandmakeitclearinadvancewhatinformationwillbeconsideredconfidentialwhenaprojectiscomplete.Atthetimewhentheinformationisdepositedinanarchive,itisimportanttoidentifyanycopyrightholder(s).Also,iftherearedata,documents,orpartsofdocumentsinthearchivethathaverestrictedaccess,itisimportanttoidentifywhichindividualsareallowedaccesstothedigitalarchiveandunderwhatconditions.ThekeytoremovingIPRasabarriertore-usewillhavetobebotheducationsurroundingIPR,andclear,simpleinformationaboutcopyright.Standardlicencesgreatlyhelpwiththis,butmoreneedstobedone.Positivelythereareindicationsthatperceptionsarestartingtoshiftinrecentyears.Theseinclude:

• Researcherswhothink‘It’smydata’arefewer(generationalshift)• BestpracticeandstandardprofessionalguidelinesforUKarchaeologistsarestartingto

includelong-termpreservationandpublicaccesstodata• Impactbenefitofopendatabeginningtoberecognizedbyresearchersandemployers• Fundersarenowrequiringlong-termpreservationanddissemination(butasyetthereis

noenforcementofthis,whichisacriticalproblem)• TheOpenAccessmovementisgainingmomentumanddepositorsaremoreawareof

standardisedlicencessuchasCreativeCommons• Increasedprofessionalismwithinarchaeologyhasledtoagreaterdesiretofollowbest

practice

23

3.2 DeutschesArchaologischesInstitut(DAI)/IANUS,Germany

ThevariousissuessurroundingIPRandlicensingwerefoundtobeverysimilarbetweentheADSandtheDAI.Thereweredifferencesfoundinthedefinitionsofthelegaltermsinuse(copyright,IPR,moralrights,exploitationrights,relatedrightsvs.Urheberrecht,Nutzungsrechte,verwandteSchutzrechte)betweentheUKandtheGermanlawsbuttheinformationassetoutthroughtheworkoftheKennislandpartnershipwasfoundtosufficientlydescribethesituationinGermany,sothiswasnotconsideredaproblem.ThemajordifferencewasthatthereisnosuchthingasCrownCopyrightinGermany.

IANUS,asanationalarchivalinfrastructurebasedattheDAI,currentlyhasnoplanstoholdanyservedorbrokereddatasets,butratherisdevelopingservicesforarchivedandcatalogueddatasets.InthiscontextthedifferentiationbetweendataowneranddataproviderisalsotreatedsimilarlybetweentheUKandGermany,alongwiththecontentoftheirdepositlicenceandTermsofUseandAccess.TheIANUSpoliciesarecurrentlybeinglegallycheckedandthusonlyavailableinternally,andinGerman,butforthoseinterestedinlearningmore,theteamcanbecontactedviahttp://www.ianus-fdz.de/orbyemail:[email protected].

Withregardtore-usewithaggregatorslikeEuropeana,metadatawillbelicencedasCC-0asdefault.ThecontentmadediscoverablethroughEuropeanabytheDAI(throughtheCARAREandEAGLEprojects)wasalllicencedunderCC-BY-NC-ND3.0,astheIPRwasdirectlyownedbytheDAI.TheDAIprovidedaround180,000digitised,historicalbooksviatheCARAREproject,withmetadatalicencedasCC-BY-SAandaround125,000imagesviatheEAGLEproject,withmetadatalicencedasCC-BY.

InsomeinstancestheDAIhasphotographedmuseumcollections,andwhiletheDAIowntherightstothephotographs,agreementswiththeownersoftheobjectsbeingphotographedmaynotnecessarilyincludepublicdisseminationontheInternet.ThisisagoodillustrationofthechangingnatureofintellectualpropertywiththeriseoftheInternet.Useswhichmaynothavebeenenvisionedwhenthephotographswerecreatednowexistthatdidnotexistatthetime.Thereforeinmanycases,iflegacycontentistobedigitisedanddisseminatedonline,complicatedandtime-consumingre-negotiationswithholdersoftheoriginalIPRarenecessary.Thatsaid,theDAIonlycitesoneinstanceoverthelast20yearswheretheintellectualcontentownercomplainedabouttheonlinepublicationoftheirwork,whichthenhadtoberemoved.ThislikelyreflectsthefactthatmostcreatorsunderstandthatweareinatransitionaltimewithregardtoIPRandtheInternet.

WithregardtotheaccesspolicyofIANUS,thepolicyisverysimilartowhatisusedbyDANS,inthatdatacollectionsareusingopen,standardlicencesasmuchaspossible(primarilyCC-BYandCC-BY-SA)andthechoice(andresponsibility)islefttotheownerofthedatatochoosewhatisappropriate.

Fordatathatisnotmadeavailableusinganopenlicence,restrictedaccessisprovidedforregisteredusers.Theseusersmaybeageneral,predefinedgroup(e.g.membersofaninstitution),apersongrouppredefinedbythedataowner(e.g.membersofaresearchteam),oranindividualwhocanrequestaccessbyapprovalofthedataowner.Forallcollectionswithrestrictedaccessthereneedto

24

beclearreasonsfortherestrictionandatemporallimitation(whichfortheembargooptionshouldnotnormallyexceed24months).Thismeansthatdataownerswillbecontactedregularlytoenquireastowhetherthereasonsforrestrictionarestillvalidornot.

WithregardtotheKeyIPRandRelatedConcernssetoutintheADSsection,alongwiththeissuesaroundthevariousdatatypes,thesewerefoundtobejustthesamefortheGermansituation.

ForfurtherinformationinGerman,thefollowingreportsareavailable:Reportonthelegalaspectsoflong-termpreservationofdigitaldatafromarchaeologyhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13149/000.0nc98i-fReportonthelegalaspectsdisseminationandre-useofdigitaldatawithregardtolicensingofmaterialsanddatabaseshttp://dx.doi.org/10.13149/000.3h7mtr-dResearchintheDigitalWorld:LegalGuidelinesfortheHumanitieshttp://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/pub/mon/dariah-de/dwp-2015-12.pdf

3.3 KoninklijeNederlandseAkademieVanWetenschappen-DataArchivingandNetworkedServices(KNAWDANS),Netherlands

ThevariousissuessurroundingIPRandlicensingatKNAWDANSwerefoundtobeverysimilartothoseoftheADSandtheDAI.KNAWDANShascreatedafileuploadsystemcalledEASY,andfordatafilesdepositedwithEASYalicenceisagreeduponwithDANS(seeAppendix2).ThisagreementisbasedonthemostrelevantlawsandcodesofconductinplacefortheNetherlands,suchastheCopyrightAct,DatabasesAct,andPersonalDataProtectionAct.LiketheADSandtheDAI,thedataownerretainsownershipwhenthedataisdeposited,andthelicenceis‘non-exclusive’sotheownerofthedataretainsallfreedomtodepositand/ormakethedataavailableelsewhere.24

LiketheDAI,butunliketheADS,DANSoffersachoicewithinthelicenceagreementforfullyopenaccess,openaccesstoregisteredusers,orrestrictedaccess.Aswithallthreeproviders,datamaybesubjecttotemporaryembargoundercertainconditions.UniquetoDANSiswhenthefullyopenaccesslicence(CC0)ischosen,databaseandcopyrightrightsarewaivedatthetimeofdepositandallpossiblerightsarerenounced.

Whenlookingatre-use,obviouslytheopenaccessdatausingtheCC0waivercanbere-usedinanyway,butfordatawhereusersmustregister,re-useordistributionofthedatasetsasawholethateitherrequireregistrationorareunderrestrictionwillbesubjecttoapprovalbytherightsholder,

24DANSLicencewebsite:http://dans.knaw.nl/en/about/organisation-and-policy/legal-information(viewedonMay29th,2016).

25

commerciallyornot.Inallinstances,DANSrequestsattributiontobegiven,alongwithproperbibliographicalcitation,evenfordatalicencedusingCC0.

DANSalsomakesspecialprovisionswithregardtopersonaldatainordertocomplywiththePersonalDataProtectionAct.UsersofdatasetscontainingpersonaldataareobligedbyDANStofollowthecodeofconduct“Gedragscodevoorgebruikvanpersoonsgegevensinwetenschappelijkonderzoek”(Codeofconductforusingpersonaldatainscientificresearch).ThiscodeisanelaborationofthePersonalDataProtectionAct.Archaeologicaldatararelycontainspersonaldata,butthismaysometimesoccur.25

Concerningre-usewithinaggregatorslikeEuropeana,HeikoTjalsmahascreatedthefollowingcomparisonbetweenEuropeanaandDANSwithregardtoIPRthatmaybeuseful.

EUROPEANA DANS

PublicationofMetadata Allmetadataavailableoneuropeana.euarepublishedfreeofrestrictions,underthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsCC01.0UniversalPublicDomainDedication.Howeverifyoure-usedatapublishedbyEuropeana,youareencouragedtofollowtheEuropeanaUsageGuidelinesforMetadataandtoprovideattributiontothedatasourceswheneverpossible.

DANShasdefactothesamepolicy;allmetadataavailableinEASYareopenandfreeofrestrictions.Thisishowevernotexplicitlystated;inparticularforusersthisisnowherementioned.ConsequentlyinnowayistheCreativeCommonsCC01.0UniversalPublicDomainDedicationformallyappliedtothemetadataofEASY.

Rightsstatementsondata

PublicDomain

Wherecopyrightdoesnotexist,hasexpiredorhasbeenwaivedandbestpracticeguidelinesforuseapply.

CCZeroWaiverPublicDomainlicencesareinplace.

25DANSLicenceagreement:http://www.dans.knaw.nl/en/about/organisation-and-policy/legal-information/DANSlicenceagreementUK5.3DEF.pdf(viewedonMay29th,2016).

26


CreativeCommonslicences

WheretherightsholdergrantspermissiontoapplyoneofthesixCreativeCommonslicences.

DANSdoesnothaveother(thanCCzeroWaiver)CreativeCommonslicencesinplace.Thelicence‘OpenAccessforRegisteredUsers’isveryclosetoCC-BYandtolesserdegreetoCC-NC.Theonlydifferenceisthatuserregistrationisrequired.


RightsReserved

Whereaccesstotheobjectsisprovided,andadditionalpermissionsarerequiredforre-use.

ThisisclosetoRestrictedAccessinEASY:accessisonlyallowedafterpermissionisgivenbytherightsholder.Additionalconditionscanbeimposed.


UnknownStatus

WheretherightsareunknownortheobjectisalegallyrecognisedOrphanWork.

Thiscategoryformallydoesnotexist.DANShoweverhas“OrphanedDatasets”initsarchive:therightsholdersareeitherdeceasedoruntraceable.

27

4 IPRwithRegardtoDataTypeDatatypecanmakeanimpactupontheIPRissuesandconcernsexperienced.ThefollowingisabriefanalysisofIPRissuesrelatingtospecificdatatypes.

4.1 DocumentsandTexts

BeyondstandardIPRconsiderations,themainIPRconcernswithdocumentsandtextarethatanemployermayholdcopyrightforanymaterialproducedaspartofemployment,andthereispotentialforapublishertoclaimIPR.DatadepositorsmustbeawarethatanydocumentortextwheretheybelievetheyholdtheoriginalIPRmayhavebeentransferredtoanemployerorpublisherunderthetermsofemploymentorpublication,orsomelevelofrestrictionmaybeplacedonhowthedatacanbeused,whichmayaffectlong-termpreservationanddisseminationbyanarchive.

4.2 DatabasesandSpreadsheets

TheguidancegivenfromDirective96/9/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentonthelegalprotectionofdatabasesisthatuseisonlyrestrictedfor15yearsafteradatabaseiscreated(orsubstantiallyupdated),butmostarchaeologistswouldlikelybesurprisedtodiscovertheirrawdatabecomespartofthepublicdomainafter15years.Databasesareoftentheresultoftheamalgamationofexistingdataandcanbecompiledbyseveralpeople.Archaeologistsneedtobeawarethatcopyrightofthedatabasestructureandthecontentofthedatabasecanbeheldbydifferentcopyrightholders.ForexamplethecopyrightfortheBritishandIrishArchaeologicalBibliography’sdatabasestructureiscurrentlyheldbytheCouncilforBritishArchaeology,butmuchofthecontentwithinthebibliographicdatabaseisresourcediscoverymetadataprovidedbypublisherswhomayholdthecopyrightforthismetadata.Thedatabasealsocontainsabstractswherethecopyrightisheldbytheindividualwhowrotetheabstract,andthedatabasecanlinktotextfileswherethecopyrightbelongstotheauthorofthedocument,orpotentiallyathirdparty,suchastheauthor’semployer.

LargescaledatabasescreatedbylocalorgovernmentalbodiesoftenalsohavecomplexIPRissues.Asaresultevenmetadatacanbeconsideredunsuitableforfreelyavailableaccessandcanaffectthedepositionforlong-termpreservation,disseminationandre-use.

4.3 RasterImages

Themainconcernwithrasterimagesinrelationtoarchaeologicalprojectsisthelikelihoodthatmanyindividualscanberesponsibleforcreatingtheimages.Unlessanagreementisinplacethatpassesallcopyrighttoanemployerorprojectleaditcanbeextremelydifficulttomanagethecopyrightofalargerrasterimagecollectioncreatedinthefield.

Alsoofnotearethedataprotectionissuesregardingimagesofpeoplewhoareoftenpresentatcommunityarchaeologyprojectsorsiteopendays.Ifthephotoswillbepublished,informedconsent

28

mustbegivenbyadultsubjects,andforchildren,informedconsentmustbeobtainedbytheparentorguardian.IntheUKthisageis16,butmostcountrieshavesimilarlegislation.

4.4 VectorImagesincludingCAD

Vectorimagesareoftenusedinarchaeologytodigitisethehand-drawnplansandsectionsfromlargearchaeologicalexcavationprojects.Thismeansthepersonwhodrewtheimageandthepersonwhodigitisedtheimagemayconsidertheyholdthecopyrightforthematerial.Tosupportfutureusesofprojectdatacapturedbydesk-toptechniques,itisimportanttorecordinformationbothabouttheoriginalsourceandthedigitisationprocess.Somedatasourcesusedinpreparingvectorimages(e.g.maps,drawingsandphotographs)arealsolikelytobeheldincopyrightbyothers.Datadepositorsmustnotonlyhavepermissiontousethesesources,butmustbecertainallnecessarypermissionstousederivedversionsofthedatahavebeengranted.Forexample,dataoriginatingfromthenationalUKmappingagency(OrdnanceSurvey)maybeusedbytheNorthYorkshireCountyCounciltoderiveanewdataset'owned'bytheCountyCouncil.ThesedatamayinturnbeusedbyYorkArchaeologicalTrusttoderiveafurthernewdataset.Althoughlittleoftheoriginalresourcemaystillbepresent,theOrdnanceSurveycontinuestoholdintellectualpropertyrightswhichmustberecognised,andwhichmaywellaffectlaterusesofthedata,e.g.disseminationtothepublic.

4.5 Audio-visualData

Audio-visualandmultimediaitemshavecomplexcopyrightprotection.Thisisespeciallytrueoffilms,whichmayinclude(forexample)avideoofanexcavationoralecture,andinsuchcasestheremaybeseparatecopyrightprotectionforthemovingimages,soundtrack,orscreenplayandsoon.Todisseminatethismaterial,informedconsentforthedatatobedisseminatedmayalsobeneededfromtheparticipants.Aswithrasterimagesthisisparticularlyrelevanttoimageryofchildren.Ifathirdpartyhasbeencontractedtocreatetheaudio-visualmaterialitisimportanttounderstandwhowillretaincopyrightforparticularareasofmaterial(seeSection2.2onRelatedRights).Archaeologistsalsodealwithamateuraudio-visualmaterial,whichmayinadvertentlycontainmaterialsuchasclipsfrompopularfilmsormusicthatisundercopyright.

4.6 AerialSurvey

Themajorityofarchaeologicalresearchprojectsusingaerialphotographsorsatelliteimagesgenerallywon'tneedtomountflightsorlaunchasatelliteintospace.Instead,mostprojectswillhaveacquiredsuchdataviaanorganisationorcommercialenterprisethatcollectsanddistributesthesetypesofimages.Inaddition,suchentitiescanalsosupplyspecialistadvicerequiredtointerpretthesetypesofimages.Assuch,therecanbemultiplelevelsofIPRthathavetobeconsideredduringthepurchaseofservicesordatatoensurethedatacanbemadepublicallyaccessible.Datalicencesmayalsoplacelimitationsonderiveddata.Restrictionscanrangefromsimplyplacinganacknowledgementandlicencenumberonanyderiveddatasets,throughtostrict

29

restrictionsonhowmuchofanoriginaldatasetcanbereproduced,andthemethodsofreproduction.WhenpurchasingdataorcontractinganorganisationtoundertakeaerialsurveyitisimportantthatIPRaroundtherawdataisclearlyunderstoodbyallparties.ContractscanbewrittenfortheIPRtobepassedontothepersoncontractingand/orpurchasingthedata,oritcanstaywiththedatacreator.Someservicesorproductsareavailabletousefreeofchargeforeducationalornon-commercialpurposes,butpassingthisdataontoanarchivetoprovidecontextforinterpretationisnotpossibleunlessexpresspermissionhasbeensoughtforthearchivetopreservethatmaterialandmakeitpublicallyavailableunderagivensetoftermsandconditionsofaccess.

4.7 UnmannedAerialVehicle(UAV)Survey

Aswithaerialsurvey,mostprojectswillacquireUAVviaacommercialorganisation,resultinginthepossibilityofmultiplelevelsofIPRthathavetobeconsideredduringthepurchaseofservicesordata,toensurethedatacanbemadepublicallyaccessible.WhenpurchasingdataorcontractinganorganisationtoundertakeaUAVsurvey,itisimportantthattheIPRfortherawdataisclearlyunderstoodbyallparties.ContractscanbewrittenfortheIPRtobepassedontothepersoncontracting/purchasingthedata,oritcanstaywiththedatacreatorwherepermissionwillberequiredtoarchiveanddisseminatethematerial.

4.8 Geophysics

GeophysicaldataintheUKisoftencompiledbyaspecialistgeophysicalsurveyorganisationonbehalfofanarchaeologicalprojectorcontractor.Geophysicaldata,likemanyotherdatatypescanhaveseverallayersofIPR,therawdata,theprocesseddata,andtheinterpretationsmadefromthedata.InthesecasestherecanbemultiplelevelsofIPRthathavetobeconsideredduringthepurchaseofservicesordatatoensurethedatacanbemadepublicallyaccessible.Thereissignificantconcerninthegeophysicalcommunityinmakingrawdatapublicallyavailable,asthisremovesitscommercialvalue.

4.9 MarineSurvey

Aswithotherformsofspecialistsurvey,marinesurveyisusuallyundertakenbyaspecialistcompany,resultinginthepossibilityofmultiplelevelsofIPRtobeconsideredduringthepurchaseofservicesordata,toensurethedatacanbemadepublicallyaccessible.IntheUK,marinesurveyCrownCopyrightisoftenasignificantconsideration.Inadditiontotheoriginaldatasets,datalicencesmayalsoplacelimitationsonderiveddata.Restrictionscanrangefromsimplyplacinganacknowledgementandlicencenumberonanyderiveddatasets,throughtostrictrestrictionsonhowmuchofanoriginaldatasetcanbereproduced,andthemethodsofreproduction26.

26MarineSurvey:AGuidetoGoodPractice:http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2gp/RSMarine_3-5(viewedonMay20th,2016).

30

4.10 LaserScanning

IPRissuesaroundlaserscanningdataareverysimilartoaerialphotography,inthatmostprojectsacquiredataviaanorganisationorcompanythatcollectsanddistributesthesetypesofdatasets,andcanalsosupplyspecialistadvicerequiredtointerpretcommercialphotographsorsatelliteimages.TherecanbemultiplelevelsofIPRtobeconsideredduringthepurchaseofservicesordata,toensurethedatacanbemadepublicallyaccessible.Whenpurchasingdataorcontractinganorganisationtoundertakelaserscanning,theIPRassociatedwiththerawdatamustbeclearlyunderstoodbyallparties.ContractscanbewrittenfortheIPRtobepassedtothepersoncontracting/purchasingthedata,oritcanstaywiththedatacreator.Ifadditionalproductsaremadefromtheoriginalregisteredpointcloud,itisstronglyadvisedtoarchivethefinalproductaswellastheinterimdatasetusedinitscreation.However,datalicencesmayalsoplacelimitationsonderiveddata.AspartoftheIPRassessmentforthe3D-ICONSproject,IPRwastracedthroughcomplex‘activitychains’concludingthattheImagingPartner,responsibleforcarryingoutthelaserscanning:

…mustarrangeaccesstotheobjects,sitesandrelatedmaterialsforthepurposeofcapturingdataandthemakingofdigitalmodels.Underthesimplestaccessagreement,ownershipoftheresultingdigitaldataandinitialmodelswillrestwiththeImagingPartnerwhowillreleasethisprimarydataandmodelsundertheCC-BY-NC-NDtermsto3D-ICONS.AnySharedIPRorliabilitiesbetweentheHeritageInstitution(HI)andtheImagingPartnerneedtobedefinedundertheiraccessagreement.OnekeypurposeoftheAccessAgreementistoestablishIPRownershipandassignappropriatesharevaluesoftheIPRforanylaterroyaltypayments.27

Forwhat3D-ICONStermsDevelopmentPartners,thesituationbecomesevenmorecomplex:

DevelopmentPartnersmayofcoursebethesameorganisationsasundertooktheoriginalimagingbuttheiroutputsarecriticallydifferent.Itistheywhowillproducethevisualisationmodelsthatwillbeseenbythepublicas3D-EntitiesandDetails.Inordertoproducethese3D-EntitiesandDetails,DevelopmentPartnersneedtohaveaDerivativeAgreementwiththeoriginalImagingPartner.Thismaybeaninternalagreement,aCreativeCommonsAgreement,oraB2Bagreement.Butbestpracticewithin3D-ICONSmeansthatwearelikelytorequirethiscriticalsteptobefullyauthorised.ItmakessensethatalteringtheearlierdatasetswillrequireawaivertotheoriginaluserlicenceasitwillacknowledgethegenerationofnewIPR.Anycommercialworkwillnecessitatereprocessingofthedataandthereforeitislikelythatthetwowaiverswillbeissuedtogether.ThederivativewaiverwouldalsoallowthepartnertogeneratenewIPRofthereprocesseddatathatissubstantiallydifferentfromtheoriginal,andnotbelimitedbythepre-existingCClicence.Thesenewitemscanbewhollycommercial.28

273D-ICONSwebsite:http://3dicons-project.eu/eng/Resources/D7.2-Report-on-IPR-Scheme(viewedonApril29th,2016).283D-ICONSwebsite:http://3dicons-project.eu/eng/Resources/D7.2-Report-on-IPR-Scheme(viewedonApril29th,2016).

31

4.11 Close-RangePhotogrammetry

Ataminimum,anyclose-rangephotogrammetryprojectsubmittedforarchivewillconsistofagroupofrasterimagesandassociatedmetadata(projectleveldetailsandcamerainformation).IPRissuesassociatedwithnormalrasterimagesapply,withadditionalconcernsiftheprojectiscarryingoutprocessingusingphotogrammetricsoftwareandcreatingvectorproductsofthisfurtherprocessing(including2Dvectorgraphics,pointclouds,and3Dsurfacemodels)whicharetobearchived,separatecopyrightmayapply29.

4.12 Dendrochronology

Dendrochronologicalanalysesarequiteunusualintheirrelianceonexistingreferencedatasets.Withouttheopensharingofdatasets,eachresearcherwouldneedtoundertakethepainstakingtaskofbuildinghighly-replicatedchronologiesfromthepresentdaybacktothetimeperiodofinterestforeachnewregiontheyworkin.CareshouldbetakentoinvestigatethecopyrightandIPRagreementsfortheexistingdata30.

4.13 GIS

GISoftencontaindataacquiredfromsourcesexternaltoaprojectandthereforeownedbythirdpartieswhomayretainalicencetotheinformation.Inthemajorityofcasesanexternalorganisationcannotarchiveanddisseminatesuchdatawithouttheexpresspermissionofthelicenceholder,andwherecommercialvaluestillexistsforthelicenceddataset,suchpermissionisoftenunlikelytobegranted.Whenderivingdatafromanothersource,orwhenmakinguseofderiveddata,itistheresponsibilityofthedatausertoensurethatanyintellectualpropertyrightsbelongingtotheinitialdatacreator(s)arerespected.Insomecasesthismaysimplybearequirementtoacknowledgetheoriginatingsource,whileinothercasesaroyaltypaymentmaybedueforsomepartofthedatatobeused.AcommondatasetusedinGISinUKarchaeologycomesfromtheOrdnanceSurvey(OS).OSrequeststhatusersoftheirinformationaskpermissionbeforeanyprocedurerequiringcopyrightclearanceisundertaken.AsOSdataisunderCrownCopyright,especiallyrigorousregulationsareapplicable.IntheUK,thenationalgridisevencoveredbyCrownCopyrightonOrdnanceSurveymaps.It'snotthenationalgrid, perse,thatissubjecttocopyright.ThenationalgridisastandardTransverseMercatormapprojection,usingtheAireySpheroidandafalseorigintothesouthwestoftheIslesofScilly.Sinceitisamathematicaltransformation,determinedbypeoplelongsincedead,itisnotofitselfcopyrightable.However,theOS usage ofthenationalgrid--displayinggridco-ordinateswithtwolettercodesforthe100kmsquares-- is CrownCopyright.UsingOSdata(maps,digitaldata)tospecifypositionofotherdata(maps,images,etc.)alsogivestheOSIPRintheresultantdata,map,etc.Indeed,theOSclaimthatthey own thepositionalcontentofthenewdata.29Close-RangePhotogrammetry:AGuidetoGoodPractice:http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2gp/Photogram_4-1(viewedonMay20th,2016).30DendrochronologicalDatainArchaeology:AGuidetoGoodPractice:http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2gp/Dendro_Section4(viewedonMay20th,2016).

32

Itisthusanoffencetopassthisinformationontoathirdpartywithouttheexplicit,andprior,permissionoftheOS31.

4.14 VirtualReality

IPRconcernswithvirtualrealitydataaresimilartootherdatatypessuchaslaserscanning,withlayeredIPRbeingpossibleandwiththevirtualrealitymodelsubjecttocopyrightforthedatauponwhichthevirtualrealitymodelisderived.CollaborativeVirtualEnvironmentscanalsoaddtothecomplexityofidentifyingcopyrightholders.

31GISGuidetoGoodPractice:http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2gp/Gis_2-7(viewedonMay20th,2016).

33

5 KeyIssuesandRecommendationsTakingintoconsiderationthescenariosandchallengesoutlinedpreviously,thisreportwillconcludewithseveralkeyissuesforthoseworkingwitharchaeologicaldata,andrecommendationsforbestpractice.

IPRstakeholdersforarchaeology

Thearchaeologicaldomainisverycomplexwithregardtointellectualpropertyrights(IPR).Thiscomplexitystemsfromthediversityofcontentassociatedwitharchaeologicalresearch,andtheoverlapbetweenthecommercialandnon-commercialsectors.Digitalarchaeologicalresourcestakealmostanyformatincurrentuse,andcanbetransformedfromonedigitalformattoanotherforreasonsofanalysis,preservationordissemination,andthesetransformationscanhaveimplicationsforownershipandre-use.Insomecountries,themajorityofarchaeologicalfieldworkisnowcarriedoutbycommercialcompaniesororganisationswhichbidcompetitivelytodothearchaeologicalwork.Thisisdrivenbydevelopment,ratherthanaparticularresearchagenda,andoftenhaslocalandnationalgovernmentalcriteriatosatisfy,inadditiontotheirownintellectualpropertyneeds.Withintheacademicsector,projectsmaynothavetoconsidergovernmentalintellectualpropertyneeds,butexpectationsoftencomefromfunders,publishers,andtheirownresearchinstitutions.

KeyIssue:UnderstandingIPRforthearchaeologicaldomainfirstrequiresanunderstandingofthecurrentresearchlandscapewithineachcountry,includingwhethercopyrightholdersareworkingwithinacommercialorresearch-basedenvironment.Eachwillhaveitsownrequirementsinorderforthatdatatobere-used.

Recommendation:DeterminewhothedifferentstakeholdersarewhomayinfluenceIPRforthearchaeologicaldatawithwhichyouareworking.Wasthedatacreatedaspartofacommercialprojectoracademicresearch?WhomightinfluencetheIPRrequirementsforthedata?

Establishingcopyrightownershipandmoralrights

Archaeologicaldatasetsoftencontaindatacollectedduringavarietyofactivitiesbymanydifferentindividualsonbehalfofmanydifferentprojectsandorganisations.Determiningwhoholdsthecopyrightforthedatawithinadatasetcanbecomplex.Incommercialarchaeologyorwithinanacademicenvironment,copyrightfordatacreatedduringthecourseofanindividual’semploymentisoftencommonlyownedbytheemployeraspartoftheiremploymentcontract.Complexitybeginstoenterintotheprocesswhendatacreatorsandorganisationsworkinpartnership,resultinginownershipofdatawithinadatasetbeingclaimedbydifferentpartiesorsharedbetweenparties.Furthercomplicationsareexperiencedwhenthirdpartiesareinvolved,suchasorganisationsorindividualsfundingdatacreation,whomayrequireanotherpartyholdthecopyright.Inadditiontocopyright,theownersorcreatorsofintellectualpropertyhavearelatedmoralrightpertainingtotheirwork.Inarchaeology,thisrightmightextendtoindividualsworkingonalargeexcavationteam

34

orworkparty.Whileitmaynotbepossibletoidentifythesepeopleindividually,itisconsistentwithethicalpracticethattheircontributionbeacknowledged.Inmostinstances,thisdoesnotcompromisecopyright.Typicallyitistheresponsibilityofthedataholdertocorrectlyidentifywhothecopyrightholderis,notthedisseminatorofthedata.

KeyIssue:Copyrightownershipmustbedeterminedbeforedatacanbere-used.Asarchaeologistsoftenworkaspartoflargeandcomplexteams,thiscanbedifficulttoestablishunlesssetoutatthestartofaproject.Whenworkiscarriedoutaspartofateam,itisimportanttoacknowledgethecontributionofthosewhoarenotcopyrightholders(moralrights).

Recommendation:Clarifywhothecopyrightholderisbeforemakingplansforre-use.Iftheprojectincludescontributionsfromarchaeologistswhoarenotcopyrightholders,makesuretheirmoralrightsarerespectedthroughacknowledgement.

DeterminingthetypeofIPRrelationship

UseofIPRinarchaeologytypicallyfocussesontwotypesofrelationship:

1. therelationshipbetweentherightsholder(anindividual,oranorganisationwhichclaimsrightsoverthecontentcreatedbyitsemployees)andanarchive,repository,heritageagency,memoryinstitution,orotherorganisationchargedwithholdingand/ordisseminatingcontentonbehalfoftherightsholder/dataprovider

2. therelationshipbetweenanarchive,repository(etc.)and:a. datausersb. anaggregationplatformforresourcediscovery

KeyIssue:Makingdataavailableforre-useinarchaeologyofteninvolvesacomplexsetofrelationships.Theserelationshipneedtobecarefullyunderstoodanddefinedbetweenparties,usuallywithaformalagreement.

Recommendation:Considertherangeofrelationshipsthatmightbenecessaryinorderforarchaeologicaldatatobeasopenandavailableforre-useaspossible.Buildthepotentialforre-useintorelationshipsevenwhenre-useisn’tcurrentlypossible.

Licencingforre-use

Organisationsholdingcontentwhichissubjecttocopyright,whowishtodisseminatethatcontent,mustdosowithalicence.Tomakelicencingeasiertounderstandandenablegreaterre-use,contentprovidersareincreasinglymovingtowardsusingstandardlicences,ratherthanbespoketermsofuseandaccessthatneedinterpretation.Themorerecognisableandstandardisedalicenceis,themorelikelycontentwillbere-used,andre-usedcorrectly.ExamplesofstandardlicencesarethoseprovidedthroughCreativeCommonsandRightstatements.org.

35

KeyIssue:Tobetterenablere-use,archaeologistsshouldconsiderusingstandardlicencesforbothcontentandmetadatawhenpossible.Whilecontentmaybealreadybeopen,standardlicencingenableseaseofre-use.

Recommendation:Archaeologistsshouldbecomefamiliarwithstandardrightsstatements,andconsiderusingthemwhenpossible.

UnderstandingthedifferencebetweencontentandmetadatawithregardtoIPR

Useofthetermscontentandmetadatacanoftenbequiteconfusing,butitisimportanttounderstandthedifferencewithregardtoIPR,especiallywhendisseminatingcontentthroughanaggregatorlikeEuropeana.Metadataisoftendescribedsimplyas‘dataaboutdata’,butthiscanalsobeconfusing.Aneasierwaytothinkaboutitmightbe‘metadatadescribescontent’sothatuserscanfindandunderstandthedata.WhenexploringIPR,itisimportanttounderstandthatmetadataandcontentforasingleresourceusuallyrequiresdifferentlicences.Contentisnearlyalwayssubjecttocopyright,butmetadatawilloftenbeplacedinthepublicdomain.ThisallowsaggregatorslikeEuropeanatofreelyholdmetadatasothatuserscanfindandunderstandtheirresources,butthecontentitselfcontinuestobeheldbyindividualsororganisationswhichretaincopyright.

KeyIssue:Althoughoftenreferredtointerchangeably(andconfusingly)as‘data’,thedatathatisactualcontent,andthemetadatathatdescribesitoftenrequiresdifferentlicencinginarchaeology.Itisimportanttounderstandhowdatawillbere-used.Ifcontentisbeingdisseminated,itwillrequirealicencethatallowsittobere-used.Ifmetadataisbeingusedbyanaggregationplatform,itwilloftenrequireaseparatelicence,usuallyinthepublicdomain.

Recommendation:Determinewhetherarchaeologicalcontentisbeingdisseminateddirectly,orifonlymetadataisbeingprovidedtoanaggregationplatformtomakethecontentmorediscoverable.LicencingofmetadataisoftenforgottenwhencreatingIPRrelationships,butshouldbeincludedwhenmakingformalagreements.

BarrierstoRe-Use

Archaeologyemploysawidevarietyofmethodsassociatedwiththesciences,butinmanyinstances,andparticularlyforexcavation,testingcannotberepeatedandtheprocessisinherentlydestructive.Whilethereisatraditionofreplicationfortestingascientifictheoryinthesciences,whichexpectsaccesstodataasamatterofcourse,thereisnosuchtraditioninarchaeology.Atthesametime,becausearchaeologicaldataisoftenaproductofthedestructionoftheprimaryresource,itisevenmoreimportantthatbarrierstore-usebeaddressed.IPRissuesarerarelyatrueobstacleandmanyofthereasongivenareeasilyovercome(seeSection3.1.9).

KeyIssue:Barrierstore-useneedtobeaddressedinarchaeologyandovercome.ThekeytoremovingIPRasabarriertore-usewillhavetobebotheducationsurroundingIPR,andclear,simpleinformationaboutcopyright.Standardlicencesgreatlyhelpwiththis,butmoreneedstobedone.

36

Recommendation:Archaeologistsshouldensurethatcontractsexplicitlyaddresscopyrightissuesandmakeitclearinadvancewhatinformationwillbeconsideredconfidentialwhenaprojectiscomplete.Also,iftherearedata,documents,orpartsofdocumentsinthearchivethathaverestrictedaccess,itisimportanttoidentifywhichindividualsareallowedaccesstothedigitalarchiveandunderwhatconditions.

IPRwithregardtodatatype

AssetoutoverandoverinSection4,archaeologymakesuseofaverybroadrangeofdatatypes,andwithinthesedatatypes,mosthavecomplexissueswith‘layered’or‘stacked’IPR.ThismeansasingledigitalobjectcanbesubjecttomultiplelayersofIPRprotectionandeachoftheselayerswilltypicallyrequireadifferentkindofagreementbetweenpartnerstoallowre-use.Thismeansestablishingcopyrightownershipatmanypointsmaybenecessary.

KeyIssue:IPRissueswillvarygreatlyinarchaeology,dependingonthedatatypesinuse.Inordertoallowre-use,thedifferent,oftenlayeredcopyrightownershipmustbeunderstoodandtakenintoaccount.

Recommendation:Whendealingwithacomplex,layereddatatypes,datacreatorsneedtoplanforre-use.ThisrequiresthinkingaboutIPRasaworkflowalongsidethedataworkflow,ensuringre-useispossible,evenifthedisseminationplanisunknownatthestartofaproject.

37

6 Appendix1ADSSampleDepositLicence

42

7 Appendix2DANSLicenceAgreement