Category: Mass Digitizaton

"Copyright Risk Management: Principles and Strategies for Large-Scale Digitization Projects in Special Collections"

The Association of Research Libraries has released a pre-publication version of "Copyright Risk Management: Principles and Strategies for Large-Scale Digitization Projects in Special Collections."

Here's an excerpt:

Copyright law often seems unmanageably complex, leading librarians to focus too much on a single aspect of a project and, when that aspect proves inapplicable, to give up the proposed digitization. But the multifaceted nature of the law, especially its variety of limitations and exceptions, should really be seen as an invitation to a holistic evaluation that focuses on risk and considers how each facet can contribute to a risk reduction strategy. If this is done consistently as digitization projects are undertaken, the risk of infringement litigation will usually be seen to be much more manageable, and a great deal of unnecessary self-censorship will be avoided.

See also the pre-publication version of "Digitization of Special Collections and Archives: Legal and Contractual Issues."

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

"’As We May Digitize’—Institutions and Documents Reconfigured"

Mats Dahlström, Joacim Hansson, and Ulrika Kjellman have published "'As We May Digitize'—Institutions and Documents Reconfigured" in the latest issue of LIBER Quarterly: The Journal of European Research Libraries.

Here's an excerpt:

This article frames digitization as a knowledge organization practice in libraries and museums. The primarily discriminatory practices of museums are compared with the non-discriminatory practices of libraries when managing their respective cultural heritage collections. . . . Two poles along a digitization strategy scale, mass digitization and critical digitization, are distinguished in the article. As memory institutions are redefined in their development of digitized document collections, e.g., by increasingly emphasizing a common trans-national rather than national cultural heritage, mass digitization and critical digitization represent alternative avenues. . . . The article re-contextualizes current digitization discourse: a) historically, by suggesting that digitization brings ancient practices back to life rather than invents entirely new ones from scratch; b) conceptually, by presenting a new label (critical digitization) for a digitization strategy that has hitherto been downplayed in digitization discourse; and c) theoretically, by exploring the relations between the values of different digitization strategies, the reconfiguration of collections as they are digitized, and the redefinition of MLA institutions through those processes.

| Digital Scholarship's Digital/Print Books | Digital Scholarship |

"Building the Ecology of Libraries—An Interview with Brewster Kahle"

The Open Knowlege Foundation Blog has published "Building the Ecology of Libraries—An Interview with Brewster Kahle."

Here's an excerpt:

What are the challenges faced by the Internet Archive regarding the digitization of books?

There are two big problems: there is going and building a digital collection, either by digitizing materials or buying electronic books. And the other is: how do you make this available, especially the in-copyright works? For digitizing books, it costs about 10 cents a page to do a beautiful rendition of a book. So, for approximately 30 dollars a book for 300 pages you can do a gorgeous job. Google does it much more quickly and it costs only about 5 dollars for each book. So it really is much less expensive in less quality, but they are able to do things at scale. We digitize about 1000 books every day in 23 scanning centers in six countries. We will set up scanning centers anywhere, or, if there are people that would like to staff the scanners themselves, we provide the scanners and all of the backend processing for free, until we run out of scanners and we've got a bunch of them. So we're looking either for people that want to scan their own collections by providing there own labour or they can employ us to do it and all told it is 10 cent a page to complete.

| Digital Scholarship's Digital Bibliographies | Digital Scholarship |

"Teaching with Google Books: Research, Copyright, and Data Mining"

Nathan Rinne has self-archived "Teaching with Google Books: Research, Copyright, and Data Mining" in E-LIS.

Here's an excerpt:

Google's Google Books site is a rich resource that is probably underutilized by most educators. It has all kinds of potential for a) getting students into the research process in a way that they will enjoy (for example, they can see how a famous quote has been used/quoted, find out which books cite the journal article they are interested in, or check to see if a specific book covers a topic that they want to explore, etc.); b) teaching them about the deeper civic purpose and the evolving state of copyright law; and, c) exploring, with the help of Google Book's Ngram viewer, the promise and ethics surrounding the issue of data-mining and "non-consumptive" research, or research that is accomplished by "mining" books for data, as opposed to reading them.

| Google Books Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Digital Copyright: Authors Guild Files Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings in Authors Guild et al. v. Hathitrust et al.

The Authors Guild has filed a motion for partial judgment on the pleadings in the Authors Guild et al. v. Hathitrust et al. case.

Here's an excerpt from the associated "Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings":

Defendants are wildly exceeding the special privileges Congress granted to libraries under Section 108 by systematically digitizing, reproducing, distributing and putting at risk millions of works through their mass book digitization program. Defendants' so-called orphan works program is similarly inimical to the Copyright Act, as it violates Section 108(h)'s explicit limitation of libraries' use of orphan works to the twenty year period preceding the end of their copyright term. Neither fair use under Section 107, nor any other statutory exception under the Copyright Act, can justify Defendants' systematic and concerted digitization, reproduction, distribution and other unauthorized uses of millions of copyright-protected library books. Accordingly, Plaintiffs urge the Court to grant their motion for partial judgment on the pleadings.

Read more about it at "GBS: Authors Guild Goes for an Early Knockout," "Guild Motion Asks for Quick Ruling on HathiTrust's Fair Use Defense," and "A Masterpiece of Misdirection."

| Digital Bibliographies | Digital Scholarship |

Pamela Samuelson et al. Send Letter to US District Court Judge Denny Chin about Authors Guild v. Google Case

Pamela Samuelson, Richard M. Sherman Distinguished Professor of Law and Information at the UC Berkeley School of Law, and other scholars have sent a letter ("Academic Author Objections to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification") to US District Court Judge Denny Chin about class certification issues in the Authors Guild v. Google Case.

Here's an excerpt:

We believe that our works of scholarship are more typical of the contents of research library collections than works of the three named plaintiffs in this case. Betty Miles is the author of numerous children's books. Jim Bouton is a former baseball pitcher who has written both fiction and nonfiction books based on his experiences as a baseball player. Joseph Goulden is a professional writer who has written a number of nonfiction books on a variety of subjects, including a book about "superlawyers." None of these three are academic authors. Their books are aimed at a popular, rather than an academic, audience. As professional writers, their motivations and interests in having their books published would understandably be different, and likely more commercial, than those of academic scholars. Hence, our concern is that these three do not share the academic interests that are typical of authors of books in research library collections. As we explain further below, the clearest indication that the named plaintiffs do not share the same priorities typical of academic authors is their insistence on pursuing this litigation.

| Google Books Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"Putting 600,000 Books Online: the Large-Scale Digitisation Partnership between the Austrian National Library and Google"

Max Kaiser has published "Putting 600,000 Books Online: the Large-Scale Digitisation Partnership between the Austrian National Library and Google" in the latest issue of LIBER Quarterly.

Here's an excerpt:

In a public-private partnership with Google, the Austrian National Library is digitising its historical book holdings. Some 600,000 volumes from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries will be digitised and made available free of charge. The project demonstrates that public-private partnerships can be successful in enabling our heritage institutions to provide large-scale access to their holdings, provided that such partnerships are not exclusive and free access is ensured. The article outlines the preparatory phase and work flows established in the project.

| Google Books Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

"From Stacks to the Web: The Transformation of Academic Library Collecting"

College & Research Libraries has released a preprint of "From Stacks to the Web: The Transformation of Academic Library Collecting" by David W. Lewis.

Here's an excerpt:

The existence of a ubiquitous and cheap worldwide communication’s network that increasingly makes documents easily and freely available will require a transformation of academic library collecting practice. It will be driven by a number of specific developments including: the digitization of content; the development of print repositories; the development of e-readers and print-on-demand publishing; the growth of open access; challenges to establish academic publishing organizations; and the growth of new forms of scholarship based on openness and social productivity. If academic libraries are to be successful, they will need to: deconstruct legacy print collections; move from item-by-item book selection to purchase-on-demand and subscriptions; manage the transition to open access journals; focus on curating unique items; and develop new mechanisms for funding national infrastructure.

| E-science and Academic Libraries Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Legal Issues in Mass Digitization: A Preliminary Analysis and Discussion Document

The U.S. Office of the Register of Copyrights has released Legal Issues in Mass Digitization: A Preliminary Analysis and Discussion Document .

Here's the announcement:

The Copyright Office has published a Preliminary Analysis and Discussion Document that addresses the issues raised by the intersection between copyright law and the mass digitization of books. The purpose of the Analysis is to facilitate further discussions among the affected parties and the public discussions that may encompass a number of possible approaches, including voluntary initiatives, legislative options, or both. The Analysis also identifies questions to consider in determining an appropriate policy for the mass digitization of books.

Public discourse on mass digitization is particularly timely. On March 22, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York rejected a proposed settlement in the copyright infringement litigation regarding Google's mass book digitization project. The court found that the settlement would have redefined the relationship between copyright law and new technology, and it would have encroached upon Congress's ability to set copyright policy with respect to orphan works. Since then, a group of authors has filed a lawsuit against five university libraries that participated in Google's mass digitization project. These developments have sparked a public debate on the risks and opportunities that mass book digitization may create for authors, publishers, libraries, technology companies, and the general public. The Office's Analysis will serve as a basis for further policy discussions on this issue.

| Google Books Bibliography | Digital Scholarship |

Best Practices for TEI in Libraries: A Guide for Mass Digitization, Automated Workflows, and Promotion of Interoperability with XML Using the TEI

The TEI Special Interest Group on Libraries has released version three of the Best Practices for TEI in Libraries: A Guide for Mass Digitization, Automated Workflows, and Promotion of Interoperability with XML Using the TEI.

Here's an excerpt from:

There are many different library text digitization projects, serving a variety of purposes. With this in mind, these Best Practices are meant to be as inclusive as possible by specifying five encoding levels. These levels are meant to allow for a range of practice, from wholly automated text creation and encoding, to encoding that requires expert content knowledge, analysis, and editing. The encoding levels are not strictly cumulative: while higher levels tend to build upon lower levels by including more elements, higher levels are not supersets because some elements used at lower levels are not used at higher levels—often because more specific elements replace generic elements.

| Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 | Digital Scholarship |

Analysis of the Authors Guild et al. v. HathiTrust et al. Case

Below are a selection of posts and other documents analyzing the Authors Guild et al. v. HathiTrust et al. case.

Read more about it at "Authors Guild v. HathiTrust et al. Resources."

| New: Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 | Digital Scholarship |

"Access to the Agreement between Google Books and the British Library"

In "Access to the Agreement between Google Books and the British Library," Javier Ruiz of the Open Rights Group analyzes the Google Books contract between Google and the British Library (includes a link to contract).

Here's an excerpt:

The British Library recently announced to much fanfare a deal with Google to make available online a quarter of a million books no longer restricted by copyright, thus in the public domain.

The deal is presented as a win-win situation, where Google pays for the costs of scanning the books, which will be available on both Google and BL's websites. This sounds very philanthropic from Google, however the catch is in the detail:

"Once digitised, these unique items will be available for full text search, download and reading through Google Books, as well as being searchable through the Library's website and stored in perpetuity within the Library's digital archive."

In order to find out what this really means we asked the British Library for a copy of the agreement with Google, which was not uploaded to their transparency website with other similar contracts, as it didn't involve monetary exchange.

| Digital Scholarship |

Is the Google Book Settlement Still Possible?

In "Google Books Settlement, 2008-2011," James Grimmelmann analyzes the impact of recent rulings and case resolutions on the Google Book Settlement. The rulings and resolutions are the In re: Literary Works in Electronic Databases Copyright Litigation ruling, the National Music Publishers' Association's resolution of The Football Association Premier League Limited, et al. v. You Tube, Inc. lawsuit (consolidated into Viacom v. YouTube), and the Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes et al. ruling.

Here's an excerpt:

The road to class-wide settlement—even to a much more modest settlement that covers only scanning and searching—now appears to be barred. What is more, in light of the freelancers' case and the Supreme Court's recent Wal-Mart case, the road to class-wide litigation also looks to be extraordinarily difficult. Google will raise many of the same adequacy of representation arguments in its opposition to class certification. It might still be more feasible for a few copyright owners holding large number of copyrights to litigate on an individual basis—but the major publishers, who best fit that bill, have all more or less made their peace with Google through its Partner Program. The odds of the authors being able to see this one through to the end have just dropped precipitously. Google is holding all the cards now, and they're all full houses.

| New: Google Books Bibliography, Version 7 | Digital Scholarship |

Google Books Bibliography, Version 7

Digital Scholarship has released version 7 of the Google Books Bibliography, which presents over 325 selected English-language articles and other works that are useful in understanding Google Books. It primarily focuses on the evolution of Google Books and the legal, library, and social issues associated with it, especially the Google Book Settlement. To better show the development Google Books, it is now organized by year of publication. It primarily includes journal articles, e-prints, magazine articles, and newspaper articles. This version expands coverage of law review articles and legal e-prints. Where possible, links are provided to works that are freely available on the Internet.

The following recent Digital Scholarship publications may also be of interest:

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Opt-In Settlement for Google Books Case?

James Grimmelmann reports that Michael Boni told US District Court Judge Denny Chin at the 7/19/11 status conference that the parties involved in the Google Books lawsuit "have been aiming for an opt-in settlement." The next status conference will occur on 9/15/11.

Here's an excerpt from Grimmelmann's "GBS Status Conference: Opt-in Settlement in the Works?" post:

What that might mean is not obvious. It could mean an actual opt-in settlement, one that binds only class members who send in claim forms. It could mean a settlement in which Google commits to an open-ended offer to all class members. It could mean a narrower, scanning-and-searching-only settlement, so that copyright owners can "opt in" to book sales by striking their own individual deals with Google.

Read more about it at "Judge Concerned with Lack of Progress in Revised Google Settlement Talks."

| Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

"After Google Book Search: Rebooting the Digital Library"

Randal C. Picker has self-archived "After Google Book Search: Rebooting the Digital Library" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

The rejection of the Google Book Search settlement means that we are at a point of rebooting how we design our digital library future. There were many criticisms of GBS and the settlement but perhaps chief among those was the risk that approval of the settlement would have locked in a single approach to digital libraries. Google would have received unique access to the so-called orphan works and that would have provided it what may have been a decisive advantage against digital library competitors, both private and public. As we move forward on the orphan works, we need to do so with two principles in mind. First, we need to enable broad competing uses of the orphan works while, to the greatest extent possible, respecting the rights of the orphan works holders. Second, we should not repeat the mistake of the GBS settlement by somehow tilting the table in favor of digital library monopoly, either public or private.

| Digital Scholarship Publications OverviewGoogle Books Bibliography |

Podcast: Pamela Samuelson on Codifying the Google Books Settlement

In this podcast, Pamela Samuelson discusses her 2011 paper "Legislative Alternatives to the Google Book Settlement" with Jerry Brito, Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

| Digital Curation and Preservation Bibliography 2010 | Institutional Repository Bibliography | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

"Just Google It!—The Google Book Search Settlement: A Law and Economics Analysis"

Frank Müller-Langer and Marc Scheufen have self-archived "Just Google It!—The Google Book Search Settlement: A Law and Economics Analysis" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

Our law and economics analysis of the Book Search Project suggests that—from a copyright perspective—the proposed settlement may be beneficial to right holders, consumers, and Google. For instance, it may provide a solution to the still unsolved dilemma of orphan works. From a competition policy perspective, we stress the important aspect that Google’s pricing algorithm for orphan and unclaimed works effectively replicates a competitive Nash-Bertrand market outcome under post-settlement, third-party oversight.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Reviews of Digital Scholarship Publications |Google Books Bibliography |

Pamela Samuelson: "Legislative Alternatives to the Google Book Settlement"

Pamela Samuelson has self-archived "Legislative Alternatives to the Google Book Settlement" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

In the aftermath of Judge Chin's rejection of the proposed Google Book settlement, it is time to consider legislative alternatives. This article explores a number of component parts of a legislative package that might accomplish many of the good things that the proposed settlement promised without the downsides that would have attended judicial approval of it. It gives particular attention to the idea of an extended collective licensing regime as a way to make out-of-print but in-copyright books more widely available to the public. But it also considers several other measures, such as one aimed at allowing orphan works to be made available and some new privileges that would allow digitization for preservation purposes and nonconsumptive research uses of a digital library of books from the collections of major research libraries.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Google Books Bibliography |

"Google Book Search in the Gridlock Economy"

Douglas Lichtman has self-archived "Google Book Search in the Gridlock Economy" in SSRN.

Here's an excerpt:

Michael Heller's The Gridlock Economy popularizes a concept that Heller has developed over nearly two decades of influential academic writing: the notion that, when it comes to property rights, too many rights-endowed cooks really can spoil the broth. I was asked in this conference to apply Heller's insight to the Google Book Search project, and the request at first seemed natural. Heller himself suggested that Google Book Search might be an apt poster child for the gridlock phenomenon; Google likewise can often be heard to complain, in Heller-esque tones, that the only way to build a comprehensive search engine for books is to take the books without asking. This Essay, however, questions the example and offers a refinement on Heller's theory. Gridlock, I argue, is not simply a catch-all for situations where a large number of permissions are in play. It is more narrowly a reference to situations where a large number of permissions are in play, and those permissions intertwine.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

A Guide For the Perplexed Part IV: The Rejection of the Google Books Settlement

The Library Copyright Alliance has released A Guide For the Perplexed Part IV: The Rejection of the Google Books Settlement.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

This guide is the latest in a series prepared by LCA legal counsel Jonathan Band to help inform the library community about this landmark legal dispute.

In the Guide Part IV, Band explains why the Court rejected the proposed class action settlement, which would have allowed Google to engage in a wide variety of activities using scanned books.

As stated in the Guide, "The court concluded that the settlement was unfair because a substantial number of class members [i.e., authors and publishers] voiced significant concerns with the settlement.… However, the validity of the objections seemed less important to the court than the fact that many class members raised them."

As for the impact of the decision on libraries, Band writes that while it is too early to say what the parties will do next, "it appears that both the challenges and the opportunities presented to libraries by the settlement when it was announced in the fall of 2008 are growing narrower and more distant."

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

Author’s Guild et al. v. Google Inc. Ruling: Amended Settlement Agreement Denied

Judge Denny Chin of the U.S. District Court Southern District of New York has denied the Amended Settlement Agreement for the Author's Guild et al. v. Google Inc. case.

Here's an excerpt from the ruling:

Before the Court is plaintiffs' motion pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for final approval of the proposed settlement of this class action on the terms set forth in the Amended Settlement Agreement (the "ASA"). The question presented is whether the ASA is fair, adequate, and reasonable. I conclude that it is not.

While the digitization of books and the creation of a universal digital library would benefit many, the ASA would simply go too far. It would permit this class action—which was brought against defendant Google Inc. ("Google") to challenge its scanning of books and display of "snippets" for on-line searching—to implement a forward-looking business arrangement that would grant Google significant rights to exploit entire books, without permission of the copyright owners. Indeed, the ASA would give Google a significant advantage over competitors, rewarding it for engaging in wholesale copying of copyrighted works without permission, while releasing claims well beyond those presented in the case.

Accordingly, and for the reasons more fully discussed below, the motion for final approval of the ASA is denied. The accompanying motion for attorneys' fees and costs is denied, without prejudice.

Read more about it at "After Rejection, a Rocky Road for Google Settlement"; "GBS March Madness: Paths Forward for the Google Books Settlement"; "Google Books Settlement: Copyright, Congress, and Information Monopolies"; "Google Settlement Is Rejected"; "Inside Judge Chin's Opinion"; "Please Refine Your Search Terms"; and "Publishers Remain Committed to Expanding Online Access to Books and Upholding Copyright Despite Court Decision."

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

Europeana Libraries Project Will Add 5 Million Digital Objects to Europeana

Europeana has launched the Europeana Libraries Project.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Work begins this week to add over 5 million digital objects, ranging from Spanish civil war photographs and handwritten letters from philosopher Immanuel Kant, to Europeana from 19 of Europe's leading research and university libraries.

The project is called Europeana Libraries and it will put many of these treasures online for the first time. It will also add extensive collections from Google Books, theses, dissertations and open-access journal articles to the 15 million items amassed in Europeana to date. Providers include some of Europe's most prestigious universities and research institutes, including the University of Oxford's Bodleian Library, Trinity College Dublin and Lund University.

The assembled objects span centuries of European history. Manuscripts from Serbia date back as far as 1206 and relate to the Ottoman Empire's European territories. Written in Arabic, Ottoman Turkish and Persian, they are being digitised by the University Library of Belgrade. There will also be significant film additions. Footage of talks from 10 Nobel prize winners will be contributed by the University of Vienna and the Wellcome Trust Library in London will add 900 clips from medical science films produced over the past 100 years.

Europeana Libraries is notable not only for the content it will make available online but also because this project brings together national, research and university libraries under one umbrella, to make their materials available via Europeana.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Prototype WorldCat Local User interface for HathiTrust Digital Library

OCLC and the HathiTrust have created a prototype WorldCat Local user interface for HathiTrust Digital Library.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

The WorldCat Local prototype (http://hathitrust.worldcat.org) for the HathiTrust Digital Library was designed and implemented by both organizations in close cooperation as a means to further develop a shared digital library infrastructure. The WorldCat Local interface for the HathiTrust Digital Library is based on the WorldCat database, and will run along with the current HathiTrust catalog during the prototype testing period.

As a digital repository for the nation's great research libraries, the HathiTrust Digital Library brings together the massive digitized collections of partner institutions. HathiTrust offers libraries a means to archive and provide access to their digital content, whether scanned volumes, special collections, or born-digital materials. The representation of these resources in digital form offers expanded opportunities for innovative use in research, teaching and learning.

OCLC and HathiTrust have been working together to increase online visibility and accessibility of the digital collections by creating WorldCat records describing the content and linking to the collections via WorldCat.org and WorldCat Local. The creation of the unique public interface through WorldCat Local is the next step to offer enhanced access to this vital collection.

"HathiTrust benefits greatly from this partnership in that the collaborative development has enabled the creation of a new means of discovering HathiTrust holdings while simultaneously integrating these holdings into the larger world of library holdings made discoverable by OCLC," said John Wilkin, Executive Director of the HathiTrust.

HathiTrust Digital Library records are discoverable through the separate WorldCat Local interface, as well as through WorldCat.org.

"OCLC and the HathiTrust have been working together closely in this shared development project to facilitate access to these valuable digital materials," said Chip Nilges, OCLC Vice President, Business Development. "This collaboration leverages OCLC's extensive work in the area of resource discovery with the HathiTrust's considerable expertise and infrastructure with respect to the preservation of scholarly resources."

| Digital Scholarship |

Digital Libraries: Europeana Strategic Plan 2011-2015

The Europeana project has released the Europeana Strategic Plan 2011-2015.

Here's an excerpt:

Launched as a proof of concept in 2008, with 2 million objects from 27 EU countries, Europeana spent 2009 and 2010 creating an operational service and ingesting a critical mass of data from some 1500 providers across Europe. Together with content partners and aided by Europe’s leading research universities, we now have a strong and vibrant network of museums, archives and libraries.

We are achieving our objective as an aggregator, and aim to give access to all of Europe’s digitised cultural heritage by 2025. However, to remain successful in the future we need now to move from a centralised role to a more distributed model. Europeana will take its place in a wider European information space, collaborating with other aggregators of content. From the users’ perspective, Europeana’s content will be readily accessible in the places they frequent online—social networks, educational sites and cultural spaces. Our ambition is to provide new forms of access to culture, to inspire creativity and stimulate social and economic growth. To achieve this, Europeana and its stakeholders grapple with major challenges. Primary among these are the intellectual property barriers to digitisation. Europeana will become outmoded if it is not renewed through access to 20th and 21st century material. To ensure such access, more concerted efforts are needed at a European level to deal with orphan works and rights harmonisation. Secondly, it is vital that the digitisation of Europe’s cultural and intellectual record is accelerated. Thirdly, long-term funding needs to be secured for both Europeana and the ecosystem of content providers and aggregators that supplies its lifeblood.

In this strategic plan we outline our approach to these challenges and to creating value for the stakeholders and users. Over the next five years, Europeana will focus on four strategic tracks:

  • aggregate content to build the open trusted source of European heritage
  • facilitate knowledge transfer, innovation and advocacy in the cultural heritage sector
  • distribute their heritage to users wherever they are, whenever they want it
  • engage users in new ways of participating in their cultural heritage

| Digital Scholarship |