Italian cultural heritage on the Wikimedia projects

Contributing to the Wikimedia projects with images and content about the Italian cultural heritage is not simple - yet (last update June 2015). Let's try to do something about it, because it is relevant for the Wikimedia projects, for the Wikimedia projects contributors and for Italy and its cultural heritage.

Wikimania Esino Lario is a chance to communicate this issue and to involve stakeholders in taking a step further in facilitating the fruitful involvement of citizens and institutions in contributing to the Wikimedia projects with images and content about the Italian cultural heritage.

What are the issues in March 2015

Copyright	Issue	Related law
Public domain	In Italy without an authorization, you are not allowed to take photos of cultural heritage (monuments but also museum collections, archives, books in public domain) for commercial purpose. The Legge Urbani only allows photos for personal use, the owner manages the rights, and the national sites are managed by the Soprintendenza.	Legislation on cultural heritage (cultural heritage rights)^[1]. Italian Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape for the part related to the creation of reproductions of cultural heritage goods. Legislative Decree 42/2004, Art. 107^[2]
Not in public domain	Culture which is older than 50 years tends to be considered cultural heritage and to get trapped – beyond the intellectual property rights – also inside the cultural heritage rights^[3].	Legislation on cultural heritage (cultural heritage rights) Italian Code of Cultural Heritage and Landscape for the part related to the creation of reproductions of cultural heritage goods. Legislative Decree 42/2004, Art. 107
Public domain and not in public domain	In Italy there is no Freedom of panorama. Everywhere in the world, the public domain is under pressure.^[4]	Freedom of panorama is not included in the copyright law. The fact that in Italy there is not a specific discipline (if something is not prohibited, it is permitted), it has been argued that it is lawful and therefore possible to freely take photos of visible works older than 50 years for any purpose also commercial. This argument (below where it is presented) has NOT been validated by the Wikimedia community. 5 February 2008 answer of the government to the parliamentary interrogation n. 4-05031 by Franco Grillini about Freedom of Panorama states that since in Italy there is no specific discipline, it must be regarded as lawful and therefore possible to freely take photos of visible works for any purpose also commercial^[5]^[6] In Italia, non essendo prevista una disciplina specifica, deve ritenersi lecito e quindi possibile fotografare liberamente tutte le opere visibili [dalla pubblica via], dal nuovo edificio dell’Ara Pacis al Colosseo, per qualunque scopo anche commerciale^[7]. An article which presented in details the de facto freedom of taking photos of visibile works also for commercial purposes is G. Resta, Chi è proprietario delle piramidi? L’immagine dei beni tra property e commons, in Politica del diritto, 4, 2009, 567-604.

Please note that these issues refer to the Italian legislation. In case of uploads from other countries of images taken in Italy, the situation is rather blurred; in other countries other rights apply and there is no record of Italy persecuting people in other countries according to its legislation related to cultural heritage.

Why we want content about the Italian cultural heritage on the Wikimedia projects

Why the Wikimedia movement should be interested	Why Italy and people living in Italy should be interested
Contributors based in Italy. To allow the Italian community to contribute to the Wikimedia projects with content related to its country. Content. To enrich content about Italy (including relevant images). With the richness of monuments, historical sites and museums in Italy, content about the Italian cultural heritage is content about Italy (and every single region, province, territory, city and little village of this country). It is not a unique situation. Greece has a similar cultural heritage law (Law 3028/2002, Art. 46)^[8]. Turkey in the Law 2863/1983, Art. 34 states «Shooting of photographs and films [...] of the movable and fixed cultural assets existing in the ruins and museums reporting to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism for instruction, education, scientific research and promotion purposes is subject to the permission of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. Relevant principles are established through regulations»^[9]. Because quite frankly the situation is pretty absurd and it needs to be fixed.	Italy on Wikipedia. To allow the huge amount of Wikipedia readers to access great content about Italy. Cultural heritage of all Italian territories. To highlight online the richness and capillarity of the Italian cultural heritage (with positive fallouts on a more sustainable tourism not focussed only on the main touristic destinations – Venice, Florence and Rome – but on the broader cultural and heritage sites of Italy). Active citizenship/volunteers. To allow people based in Italy to contribute to online knowledge with their images and volunteer work. In general contributors focus their contributions on their interests the territory around them. Active citizenship/volunteers committed to cultural heritage. To support the involvement of people based in Italy in documenting their cultural heritage and feeling committed and linked to it (essential to guarantee the preservation and care of cultural heritage in Italy by its citizens). Allow people to help you. To get things done (uploads, images of remote heritage, lists of cultural heritage, documentation about collections and museums) which the Italian State and the cultural heritage owners are not doing or do not have the resources to do. Waste of public money. It's generally acknowledged by EU and USA institutions that selling images of heritage works costs more than the income is.^[10] In a time of tight state budget and decreasing public workforce, such expensive activities should be eliminated. Because quite frankly the situation is pretty absurd and it needs to be fixed.

More details on the situation

Regulations

Federico Morando, 2015-06-22

Italian cultural heritage is scattered across many institutions and is affected by many layers of practices and regulations. Lawyers ask us to look at the whole picture.^[11] From the law to the regulations of lower rank, we have to check at least four.^[12]

Legge 2002/137.
D.Lgs. 2004/42 "Codice Urbani", art. 108.
Decreto MIBAC 20 aprile 2005: Indirizzi, criteri e modalità per la riproduzione di beni culturali, ai sensi dell'articolo 107 del decreto legislativo 22 gennaio 2004, n. 42. (GU Serie Generale n. 152 del 2-7-2005.)
Circolare n. 50/1995 "Chiarimenti in merito all'applicazione della normativa in vigore sull'uso dei beni in consegna".^[13]

The last point is a department circular of the minister of culture which may still be in force and would be applied by all branches of the ministry (MIBACT), but not by other branches of the Republic (municipalities, regions etc.) nor by privates.

The ministry, on 2015-06-22, declared to be ready to intervene for required clarifications of the regulations, to simplify Wiki Loves Monuments.^[14]

What specific problems are related

Commercial use. Wikimedia projects require that all content is available also for commercial use.
Not an authorization for one institution/use only. Content on the Wikimedia projects is not content for the Wikimedia projects only; it is content released under an open license which allows anyone to use it.
Making money. The entire system in Italy is based on the assumption that the owner/State will make money by selling copyrights; there are no evidences of how much money the owner/State is making by selling copyrights and it is reasonable to expect that the selling of copyrights does not cover its costs (administration, contacts, management of the dossier). In any case the issues of money (related "Rendita di posizione" and "mancato introito") plays a role in how the system is set and how it can eventually changed.
The authorization is already given to someone else (commercial company). In certain cases the owner does not know how to provide the authorization, because the copyright management is already outsourced to a commercial company.
The list. In general anything is cultural heritage in Italy; there is no public and accessible list which tells anyone which sites and objects are protected or represent a specific interest for the state (and which are not); without the list anything is off limits and considered in the same way. The expression "minor assets" (beni minori) can identify cultural heritage which can be uploaded on the Wikimedia projects with an easier authorization but the definition applies case by case.
Who owns what, who can give the authorization for what. The lack of a list produces the further problem of identifying exactly and easily who can give the authorization for what.
Full resolution and degraded images. Authorizations can be granted for degraded images only.
Pre-digital legislation. The concept of difficulties, costs and risks in reproducing artworks, and the lack of considerations about the opportunities related to digital reproductions (active citizenship in cultural development and cultural participation) are elements of the legislation which is inherited from the pre-digital time^[15].
Control. The idea behind the legislation is also that cultural heritage (including its digital images) needs to controlled to be properly preserved and managed. This also explains watermarks, low resolutions, no images online and other procedure to limit the circulation of images^[16].

The "cultural heritage rights" limit in particular access and reproductions.

How authorizations in Italy are currently managed

The use for commercial purposes requires an authorization and the payment of a fee (pagamento di un canone). The Wikimedia projects want a larger use (beyond the Wikimedia projects) without a fee. Different stakeholders can provide the authorizations according to the kind of content. Cultural heritage is always managed by someone (amministrazione consegnataria).

Authorizations for what

Type of document:

Signed letter. stakeholders are more accustomed to sign a letter written on their letterhead rather than sending an email to our permission system. It is often more convenient to provide a model of letter and ask to use it on the institution' letterhead and sign it.
Partnership agreement. Public institutions and administration sometimes need to sign a partnership agreement or convention; this agreement can be based on a project (i.e. GLAM project) and it can be done with Wikimedia Italia.
Delibera. Public administration need to have an approved internal decision to delegate the mayor to sign a letter.

Please note that the document needs to include the period for the authorization or the fact that the authorization is forever.

Content	Authorization	Examples
Archeological, paleontological, numismatic collections	These collections are national. The regional Soprintendenza can approve the upload of images on the Wikimedia projects (which allow commercial use of the images) without a fee.	Example
Museum collections (not national such as archeological and paleontological collections)	The owner (private owner, city council, province, region, parish) can approve the upload of images on the Wikimedia projects (which allow commercial use of the images) without a fee.	Example
National monuments/public art in public view	The regional Soprintendenza can approve the upload of images on the Wikimedia projects (which allow commercial use of the images) without a fee.	Example
Monuments/public art in public view which are not national	The owner (private owner, city council, province, region, parish) can approve the upload of images on the Wikimedia projects (which allow commercial use of the images) without a fee.	Example
Rights of the author/architect/artist	If 70 years have not passed since the author/architect/artist died, the living author/architect/artist can provide his/her authorization. the owner (if it owns the rights) can provide the authorization.	Example
Photos/digitalizations/scan of a collection (in particular tridimensional works)	You need a series of authorizations (but if you are lucky from the same institution/owner) The authorization of the owner of the images. The authorization of the photographer of the images (if he/she did not provide full rights to the owner, the commercial use and the right to sublicense the work) The authorization of the owner or manager (amministrazione consegnataria) of the cultural heritage in the photo.	Example

Stakeholders

The process of contributing to the Wikimedia projects with images and content about the Italian cultural heritage requires the involvement of a series of stakeholders. Stakeholders can provide authorizations but they can also contribute to change and improve the system.

Stakeholder	What they can do	What they should be interested in
City councils or administrators	They can authorize Taking images of buildings and public art in public domain they own without a fee. Taking images of buildings and public art not in public domain they have rights on without a fee. Taking photos inside museums and buildings without a fee. Taking images of collections they own and they manage the rights (not archeological and paleontological) without a fee. The upload of their content (collections, texts, documentation). They can provide Dataset (with metadata) of collections they own. Dataset of geographic information they own. Content (publications, online information, texts, didactic material, images, videos, audio) of their collections and cultural heritage. Furthermore they can Prove the interest to allow content to be on the Wikimedia projects and the interest to allow people living in Italy to actively contribute to it.
Provinces	They can authorize Taking images of buildings and public art in public domain they own without a fee. Taking images of buildings and public art not in public domain they have rights on without a fee. Taking photos inside museums and buildings without a fee. Taking images of collections they own and they manage the rights (not archeological and paleontological) without a fee. The upload of their content (collections, texts, documentation). They can provide Dataset (with metadata) of collections they own. Dataset of geographic information they own. Content (publications, online information, texts, didactic material, images, videos, audio) of their collections and cultural heritage Furthermore they can Facilitate the communication to other public administrations. Prove the interest to allow content to be on the Wikimedia projects and the interest to allow people living in Italy to actively contribute to it.
Regions	They can authorize Taking images of buildings and public art in public domain they own without a fee. Taking images of buildings and public art not in public domain they have rights on without a fee. Taking photos inside museums and buildings without a fee. Taking images of collections they own and they manage the rights (not archeological and paleontological) without a fee. The upload of their content (collections, texts, documentation). They can provide Dataset (with metadata) of collections they own. Dataset of geographic information they own. Content (publications, online information, texts, didactic material, images, videos, audio) of their collections and cultural heritage Furthermore they can Facilitate the communication to other public administrations and sovrintendenze. Prove the interest to allow content to be on the Wikimedia projects and the interest to allow people living in Italy to actively contribute to it.
Private owners	They can authorize Taking images of buildings and public art in public domain they own without a fee. Taking images of buildings and public art not in public domain they have rights on without a fee. Taking photos inside museums and buildings without a fee. Taking images of collections they own and they manage the rights (not archeological and paleontological) without a fee. The upload of their content (collections, texts, documentation). They can provide (digital copies which are not accessible online) Content (publications, online information, texts, didactic material, images, videos, audio) of their collections and cultural heritage Dataset (with metadata) of collections. Furthermore they can Prove the interest to allow content to be on the Wikimedia projects and the interest to allow people living in Italy to actively contribute to it.
Sovrintendenze	They can authorize Taking images of national buildings and public art in public domain they manage without a fee. Taking photos inside museums and buildings without a fee. Taking images of collections they manage the rights (also archeological and paleontological) without a fee. The upload of their content (collections, texts, documentation). They can provide (digital copies which are not accessible online) Content (publications, online information, texts, didactic material, images, videos, audio) of their collections and cultural heritage Dataset (with metadata) of collections. Furthermore they can Prove the interest to allow content to be on the Wikimedia projects and the interest to allow people living in Italy to actively contribute to it. Please note that the Soprintendenze are regional.
Parishes	They can authorize Taking images of buildings and public art in public domain they own without a fee. Taking images of buildings and public art not in public domain they have rights on without a fee. Taking photos inside museums and buildings without a fee. Taking images of collections they own and they manage the rights (not archeological and paleontological) without a fee. The upload of their content (collections, texts, documentation). They can provide (digital copies which are not accessible online) Content (publications, online information, texts, didactic material, images, videos, audio) of their collections and cultural heritage Dataset (with metadata) of collections they own. Furthermore they can Prove the interest to allow content to be on the Wikimedia projects and the interest to allow people living in Italy to actively contribute to it.
Government	It can change the legislation. It can facilitate the communication to public administrations and sovrintendenze. Prove the interest to allow content to be on the Wikimedia projects and the interest to allow people living in Italy to actively contribute to it.	Cultural heritage of all Italian territories is a valuable assets. The availability of pictures at the best quality, facilitate the promotion of such assets thus increasing their value. Wikipedia is a crowdsourced picture container for Italian Cultural heritage assets that could be used by touristic operators, local and central administrations as an open and easy to use images repository to build promotional web services.
Museums and similar (GLAM)	Avoid copyfraud. Allow users to sponsor digitisation and reproduction and to take photos themselves, like e.g. NPG and Victoria museum.^[17] Avoid setting up systems to get fees.	Ensuring digital preservation and distribution of the items or works they preserve.^[17] Encouraging research and other educational or promotional activities of the items or works they preserve.^[17] Reduce administrative expenses and other unproductive costs.

In general it is recommend that the copyright owner communicates its/his/her authorization (on the website, in a newsletter, in a press communicate) to explain the value of this decision and the advantages of it for the public, the citizens and the online communities and readers.

What Wiki Loves Monuments taught us

Simone Aliprandi's "postcard" of the Vitruvian Man

Wiki Loves Monuments has been a success in Italy: no other country had more photographers participating to the 2015 contest and the contributed photos are accessed millions of times each month on Wikimedia sites alone.

Success is the result of hard work, not of favourable conditions. It required over 3 FTE staff, dozens volunteers, the association of Italian photographers, over 40 local events ("wikigite") and no less than 320 official partners in local entities. Yet, much more is left to do: participants could only take photos of Pompei and some other 3000 items, a fraction of Italy's cultural heritage.

The main obstacle to the promotion of Italian culture is "Codice Urbani", a law which forces photographers to seek an authorisation for every single object contained in their photos, even less than 50 years old: enquire each local entity about protected status, then, ask authorisation, then pay fees if required. For objects created in the last 150 years, an additional obstacle is copyright, given the lack of freedom of panorama.

Citizens and well-meaning persons can't survive such bureaucracy, which we have to handle for them, working around many law exceptions. This uncovers three wrong assumptions of the law: 1) all reproductions are the same; 2) commercial use must be restricted; 3) profit is bad and must be shared with fees. In reality: 1) a photo is not a calque, downloading a photo is not shooting with flash; 2) copyleft protects culture better; 3) fees hamper citizens and institutions alike, but protect the publishers' monopolies.

What we want

Do you want the richness of the Italian cultural heritage to be documented and accessible in encyclopedic articles on Wikipedia (with texts, information, images, references to maps)?

Do you want people living in Italy to contribute to make the richness of the Italian cultural heritage visible, appreciated and accessible to the Wikipedia 500 million readers in 280 linguistic editions?

If your answers to these simple questions are yes, then something needs to change.

The richness of Italian cultural heritage in its full resolution and beauty

It should be noted that expressions like "minor assets" (beni minori) and "degraded images" (immagini degradate) are no good for anyone and they should not be the terms of a negotiation. They reduce the importance of content made accessible, they understate the relevance of this cultural heritage (which makes even questionable its reasonable presence on Wikipedia) and the concept of degraded rises the question of why people should accept on the Wikimedia projects content that is defined as degraded (made in purpose less relevant, useful, good - and by the way, how about if someone finds the same image in a better quality?). To trigger the improvement of Wikipedia and the engagement of people in contributing in doing it, let's change the expressions or let's ask full access to a selection of cultural heritage in specific territories, or let's ask full access to anything expect a limited list of cultural heritage^[18] (open by default). Full access means also full image resolution.

Possibilities

Proposal	Comments	Who proposed it
Abolishing the discipline related to reproductions of cultural heritage (Abolire la disciplina in materia di riproduzioni dei beni culturali)	Simple and straight to the point.	Federico Morando^[9]
Harmonizing the discipline related to reproductions of cultural heritage (Armonizzare la disciplina in materia di riproduzioni dei beni culturali)	This is the ongoing process with the wmit:Consultazione europea sul diritto d'autore. A risk to consider – according to Federico Morando – is that the tendency is to go toward the most restrictive legislation. On the other hand at the moment it seems that in Europe the proposal is to make all exceptions the norm; also the issue of respecting public domain is on the table.	Federico Morando^[9] wmit:Consultazione europea sul diritto d'autore
Producing a gradual transition towards minor and more rational restrictions (Operare una transizione graduale verso minori e più razionali restrizioni)	Where we currently are: maybe the next step can focus on the Wikimedia projects?	Federico Morando^[9]
Getting all the necessary authorizations by involving a large network of people.	To get them all, we are taking about something like 15'000 signed authorizations (or decisions with "delibera"). Maybe we can head for 6'000.	Possible collaboration also with the Italian digital champions.
Making a list of cultural heritage which requires the authorization; getting the authorizations only for the list and the rest is just fine.		Suggestion by Nemo

It can be taken into consideration the law about Freedom of information in Italy related to the law Legge 7 agosto 1990 n. 241.

Priority issues

Necessities	Comments	Who proposed it
Making the process of authorizations simple and economic (Rendere il processo di autorizzazione semplice ed economico)	Very relevant for the Wikimedia projects, but we need it without fee.	Federico Morando^[9]
Assuring a series of exceptions and the attribution with metadata (Assicurare che vi siano eccezioni in relazione a usi non-commerciali delle opere e quando l’attribuzione/indicazione dell’origine sia posta come una condizione questa sia supportata da strumenti tecnici)		Federico Morando^[9]
Soft law	Very relevant for the Wikimedia projects.	Federico Morando^[9]
Clarify the concept of personal use of digital reproduction (Chiarire il concetto di uso personale delle riproduzioni digitali)		Federico Morando^[9]
Not absolute rights (erga omnes) on reproductions of cultural heritage (I diritti sulle riproduzioni del patrimonio culturale non devono essere trattati come diritti assoluti (erga omnes))	Very relevant for the Wikimedia projects.	Federico Morando^[9]
Protect and reinforce the Public domain (Utilizzare la disciplina in materia di tutela del patrimonio culturale per rafforzare e proteggere il pubblico dominio)	Very relevant for the Wikimedia projects.	Federico Morando^[9]
Getting reproductions under open licenses (Utilizzare la disciplina in materia di tutela dei beni culturali per assicura- re l’uso di licenze libere per le relative riproduzioni digitali)	Very relevant for the Wikimedia projects.	Federico Morando^[9]
Distinguishing between images owned by institutions and new images produced by others (Distinguere tra il rilascio delle immagini di opere culturali (già in possesso delle istituzioni) e il permesso di creare nuove immagini (ad opera di terze parti))	Very relevant for the Wikimedia projects.	Federico Morando^[9]

History

Authorizations

At the moment (last update March 2015) to upload in Italy an image of Italian cultural heritage we ask for authorizations.

See commons:Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 in Italy/MiBAC for a legal explanation of the WLM matters.

Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy – promoted by Wikimedia Italia – has reached the astonishing result of obtaining the authorization from over 250 entrusted custodian entities ("enti consegnatari") between 2012 and 2014, which have allowed photos of over 4900 monuments. [Website of Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy]. Wiki Loves Monuments has also been a very important chance to talk about the problem in Italy to upload content about Italian cultural heritage (in the press and at presentations), to present the issue to cultural heritage owners and to involve stakeholders. More specifically Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy has opened the discussion with the Ministry of Culture (MiBAC) and with a series of Soprintendenza, Regional-provincial and urban administrations. In 2012 Wiki Loves Monuments receives from the Ministry of Culture an agreement which granted said permissions to thousands citizens through Wikimedia Italia for some monuments under direct control of the Ministry, and encouraged Wikimedia Italia to proceed with the bottom-up strategy:

the Ministry considers particularly useful, in order to promote awareness of such goods, the production of specific items about them on wikipedia.org, in all its languages, and the publication of images on Wikimedia Commons, at the site http://commons.wikimedia.org.

Wikimedia Italia has achieved in 2012-2013 also the great result of obtaining the authorization from the Soprintendenza ai beni culturali della Lombardia to upload on Wikimedia Commons archeological collections within the project Archeowiki. This result has been achieved with the the support of Raccolte extraeuropee del Castello Sforzesco. Website of Archeowiki, Archeowiki on the website of Wikimedia Italia.

Share Your Knowledge has initiated in 2011 the system of authorizations by involving institutions in signing their agreement to release content under the Creative Commons attribution share alike license (among the institutions there was the piloting involvement of the civic collection of Milan – Raccolte extraeuropee del Castello Sforzesco – which has also informed the Soprintendenza about the authorization).

This complex process of authorizations makes "Contributing to the Wikimedia projects with images and content about the Italian cultural heritage" possible but not simple.

Legal actions

5 February 2008 answer of the government to the parliamentary interrogation n. 4-05031 by Franco Grillini about Freedom of Panorama states that since in Italy there is no specific discipline, it must be regarded as lawful and therefore possible to freely take photos of visible works for any purpose also commercial^[19]. An article which presented in details the de fact freedom of taking photos of visibile works also for commercial purposes is G. Resta, Chi è proprietario delle piramidi? L’immagine dei beni tra property e commons, in Politica del diritto, 4, 2009, 567-604.
- In Italia, non essendo prevista una disciplina specifica, deve ritenersi lecito e quindi possibile fotografare liberamente tutte le opere visibili [dalla pubblica via], dal nuovo edificio dell’Ara Pacis al Colosseo, per qualunque scopo anche commerciale^[20].
December 2013 draft of an amendment to the Codice dei Beni Culturali e del Paesaggio Emendamenti al Codice dei Beni Culturali e del Paesaggio proposti da Open Knowledge Foundation Italia testo in italiano (proposal lead by Luca Corsato).
December 2013 Campaign #beniculturaliaperti (open cultural heritage).
March 2014 European consultation on copyright. The answer of Wikimedia Italia.
May 2014 The "Decreto ArtBonus e turismo" by the Minister Franceschini is accepted. The ordinance does not allow the use of images for commercial purpose: (commercial) social networks are fine but not the Wikimedia projects.
- la completa liberalizzazione – con esonero anche dall’obbligo di autorizzazione – di una serie di attività, a condizione che siano attuate senza scopo di lucro, neanche indiretto, per finalità di studio, ricerca, libera manifestazione del pensiero o espressione creativa, promozione della conoscenza del patrimonio culturale
- Con quest’ultima previsione si consente la libera pubblicazione, ad esempio su blog o social network, di fotografie che riproducano beni culturali, tutte le volte in cui ciò avvenga senza scopo di lucro, neanche indiretto
December 2014 Presentation of Wiki Loves Monuments and the issues with the Italian law, by Andrea Zanni, as President of Wikimedia Italia, in front of the Minister Franceschini at a national conference regarding the new Art Bonus law.
June 2015 the JURI committee of the European Parliament rejects paragraph 16 of the Reda Report asking expansion of freedom of panorama, by replacing it with a text (amendment 421) which is very unclear but asks more paperwork. See video of the vote (few seconds), Reda's summary.

Position of Wikimedia Italia

See wmit:Consultazione europea sul diritto d'autore for a detailed overview.

See the letter to the Wikimedia Foundation from Wikimedia Italia

Despite all the complexity explained, Wikimedia Italia promotes Wiki Loves Monuments in Italy (and it gets it done).

Wikimedia Italia is supporting the Coalizione Nazionale per le Competenze Digitali and it is part of its scientific committee

Notes

↑ Federico Morando calls it an "almost-copyright on cultural heritage" (un quasi-diritto-di-proprietà-intellettuale sul patrimonio culturale), even if cultural heritage – per excellence – should be under Public Domain. In Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 1.
↑ From Federico Morando, Il codice è stato emanato dal Governo nell’esercizio della delega prevista dall’art. 10 della legge n. 137 del 6 luglio 2002 e successive modifiche sono state operate dal D. lgs. 24 marzo 2006, n. 156, dal D. lgs. 24 marzo 2006, n. 157, dal D. lgs. 26 marzo 2008, n. 62 e dal D. lgs. 26 marzo 2008, n. 63.. Decreti attuativi: Decreto 20 aprile 2005 del Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali (“Indirizzi, criteri e modalità per la riproduzione di beni culturali, ai sensi dell’articolo 107 del decreto legislativo 22 gennaio 2004, n. 42”), GU, n. 152 del 2 luglio 2005. In Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 4.
↑ Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 2.
↑ «The relative stability of the copyright/public domain regime is under tremendous pressure from large corporate entities, and their allies in governments around the world, who have the most to gain from expanded authorial rights and a weakened public domain. There is nothing natural about these shifts in the law; they are simply the newest episode in a long running debate within Western society.» Christopher M. Toula & Gregory C. Lisby (2014) Towards an affirmative public domain, Cultural Studies, 28:5-6, 997-1021, DOI: 10.1080/09502386.2014.886490.
↑ Il Governo: il diritto di panorama c'è. Il ministero dei Beni culturali risponde all'interrogazione di Grillini: lecito fotografare e riprodurre liberamente i beni culturali. Per le opere protette libertà limitate ai soli fini scientifici e didattici in "Punto Informatico", 14 febbraio 2008.
↑ Luca Spinelli, Libertà di panorama: c’è ma non c’è, 1º aprile 2008.
↑ The full text can be found here (in Italian).
↑ Law 3028/2002, On the protection of antiquities and cultural heritage in general, translated from Greek
↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011.
↑ Reproduction charging models & rights policy for digital images in American art museums. «One hundred US art museums were surveyed and in-depth interviews were carried out with 20 museums. [...] Everyone interviewed wants to recoup costs but almost none claimed to actually achieve or expected to achieve this.»
↑ Massimo Stefanutti, Note sulla riproduzione fotografica dei beni immobili, 2012?
↑ Few court cases, if any, are known. Cf. Cassazione 2013, Cassazione 2004.
↑ Which references DM 31 gennaio 1994, n. 171, artt. 17-21; DL 14 novembre 1992, n. 433, art. 4.5-ter; DM 8 aprile 1994.
↑ https://archive.org/details/barcamp-montecitorio-2015-06-22?start=11640
↑ Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 3.
↑ The importance of control emerges specifically in the article Enrico Bertacchini and Federico Morando, The Future of Museums in the Digital Age: New Models of Access and Use of Digital Collections in International Journal of Arts Management (2013) Vol. 15(2), 60-72.
↑ ^a ^b ^c Petri Grischka. The Public Domain vs. the Museum: The Limits of Copyright and Reproductions of Two-dimensional Works of Art. «Journal of Conservation and Museum Studies», 12(1):8, 2014. <http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/jcms.1021217>
↑ For example Portugal has identified 5 buildings of cultural and artistic relevance which can not be freely photographed. In Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 3.
↑ Il Governo: il diritto di panorama c'è. Il ministero dei Beni culturali risponde all'interrogazione di Grillini: lecito fotografare e riprodurre liberamente i beni culturali. Per le opere protette libertà limitate ai soli fini scientifici e didattici in "Punto Informatico", 14 febbraio 2008.
↑ The full text can be found here (in Italian).

Bibliography

Books

Daniele Manacorda, L'Italia agli italiani: istruzioni e ostruzioni per il patrimonio culturale , 2014. ISBN 9788872287552

Papers (structured information)

File:HEC-NYU Wikimedia Freedom of Panoram Report.pdf, 2015.
Antonella De Robbio, "Fotografie di opere d’arte: tra titolarità, pubblico dominio, diritti di riproduzione, privacy", «DigItalia», anno 2014, vol. 1 ISSN: 1972-621X
Antonella De Robbio, Accesso aperto e diritti: un difficile equilibrio tra tutele e libertà, «Bibliotime», anno XVI, numero 3 (novembre 2013).
Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011.
G. Resta, Chi è proprietario delle piramidi? L’immagine dei beni tra property e commons, in Politica del diritto, 4, 2009, 567-604.
D. De Angelis, Brevi note in tema di applicabilità delle licenze Creative Commons ai beni pubblici culturali (prima parte), in DigItalia, Rivista del digitale nei beni culturali, 4, 2009, 9-23.
D. De Angelis, Brevi note in tema di applicabilità delle licenze Creative Commons ai beni pubblici culturali (seconda parte), in DigItalia, Rivista del digitale nei beni culturali, 4, 2009, 61-73.
Thomas Margoni, The digitisation of cultural heritage: originality, derivative works and (non) original photographs, 2015.
M. Modolo, Il sogno infranto delle libere riproduzioni. Il Giornale dell’Arte, 345, 2014.
M. Serlorenzi, V. Boi, I. Jovine, M. Stacca (in press). Open Data in archeologia. Una questione giuridica o culturale? In Grossi, P. (ed.). Atti del IX Workshop ArcheoFOSS. Archeologia e Calcolatori, Supplemento 7.
M. Trabucco, Pubblico ma non pubblico: prospettive normative sulla proprietà intellettuale dei dati archeologici. In Cignoni P., Palombini A. & Pescarin S. (eds.), Atti del IV Workshop ArcheoFOSS. Archeologia e Calcolatori 2009, Supplemento 2. pp. 65-70.
V. Boi, A.M.Marras, C. Santagati, Open Access and archaeology in Italy: an overview and a proposal. Archäologische Informationen, Early View, published online 14 June 2015.
Mélanie Dulong de Rosnay, Pierre-Carl Langlais, Public artworks and the freedom of panorama controversy: a case of Wikimedia influence, Internet Policy Review, 2017. doi:10.14763/2017.1.447

Digital collections (also on Wikimedia Commons)

Enrico Bertacchini and Federico Morando, The Future of Museums in the Digital Age: New Models of Access and Use of Digital Collections in International Journal of Arts Management (2013) Vol. 15(2), 60-72.

Advocating for the public domain

Works explaining why the public domain must be defended and expanded, though not always dealing explicitly with "cultural heritage" laws (which don't exist everywhere).

Severine Dusollier. Scoping Study on Copyright and Related Rights and the Public Domain. World Intellectual Property Organisation Publication, March 2011. <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2135208>.
Paul J. Heald. The Public Domain. 2013-12-03. In: The Law and Economics of Copyright, a cura di Richard Watt. Routledge, 2014. <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2362983>.
Leonhard Dobusch. The Digital Public Domain: Relevance and Regulation. 2011-11-15. «HIIG Discussion Paper Series», No. 2012-02. <http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2011815>.
Melanie Dulong De Rosnay – Juan Carlos De Martin (a cura di). The Digital Public Domain: Foundations for an Open Culture. 2012. <http://porto.polito.it/2504638/>.
Randal C. Picker. Access and the Public Domain. 2013-02-08. «University of Chicago Institute for Law & Economics Olin Research Papers», No. 631. <http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2214176>.
Alex Clark – Brenda Chawner. Enclosing the public domain: The restriction of public domain books in a digital environment. «First Monday», [S.l.], may. 2014. ISSN 13960466. <http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4975>. doi:10.5210/fm.v19i6.4975.
Jennifer Jenkins. In Ambiguous Battle: The Promise (And Pathos) Of Public Domain Day. «Duke Law & Technology Review», 1-24 (2013). <http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dltr/vol12/iss1/1>.
Lawrence Lessig (2006). Re-crafting a Public Domain. «Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities», Vol. 18, Iss. 3, Article 4. <http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjlh/vol18/iss3/4>.

Articles (dissemination of the problem and issues)

Press release about Freedom of Panorama (Italy, 2015) Commons:Freedom of Panorama 2015/it.

Andrea Zanni, Con #BeniCulturaliAperti è ora di liberare i monumenti d'Italia e aiutare Wiki Loves Monuments in "Che Futuro!", 6 December 2014.
Iolanda Pensa, I beni visibili grazie a Wikipedia: Il concorso Wiki Loves Monument promuove il patrimonio pubblico raccogliendo fotografie e dati. Ma l’Italia sconta vincoli di copyright in “Il Sole 24 Ore”, Domenica, Sezione Cultura e sviluppo, n. 77, p. 38. Italian, français (merci Otourly).
Gilberto Cavagna di Gualdana, Freedom of panorama in Italy: does it exist?, July 2017 (referencing Resta 2010 and Mazzonis 2008).
Eleonora Rosati, Freedom of panorama: would it hurt architects? Survey among Italian-based architects says NO, October 2017
Carlo Piana, Ponti, torri, vele e lo strano caso della libertà di panorama, October 2017

Presentations, conferences and slides

M. Ciurcina and P. Grossi, Legge 4 agosto 2017, n. 124. Le modifiche al Codice dei Beni Culturali e del Paesaggio e le novitÃ in materia di riproduzione, ArcheoFOSS 2018.
December 2014 Presentation of Wiki Loves Monuments and the issues with the Italian law, by Andrea Zanni, as President of Wikimedia Italia, in front of the Minister Franceschini at a national conference regarding the new Art Bonus law.
Italian Semester of Presidency of the European Union. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE. The reuse of digital cultural content in education, tourism and leisure: an opportunity for cultural institutions and creative industries, an investment for the future, Biblioteca nazionale centrale, Roma, 2 October 2014.
Italian Semester of Presidency of the European Union. Heritage Commons: Towards a participative heritage governance in the third millennium, Venaria Reale, Turin, 23 – 24 September 2014. Presentation of Iolanda Pensa, The role of Wikipedia and its community in cultural production and in supporting the heritage sector, session “Digital technology as an enabler, for new narratives of heritage, new ways of supporting heritage as a collective resource, and new means of increasing access to heritage and developing new audiences”, slides.

External links

FOTOGRAFIE LIBERE PER I BENI CULTURALI. Movimento a favore della riproduzione libera e gratuita delle fonti documentarie in archivi e biblioteche per finalità di ricerca https://fotoliberebbcc.wordpress.com
Coalizione Nazionale per le Competenze Digitali http://www.agid.gov.it/agenda-digitale/competenze-digitali/coalizione-nazionale-competenze-digitali
Reusing images of Italian cultural heritage from Wikimedia Commons will become more difficult (5 July 2022) by Wikimedia Italia and Paolo Casagrande WMIT https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/07/05/reusing-images-of-italian-cultural-heritage-from-wikimedia-commons-will-be-harder/

[1] Federico Morando calls it an "almost-copyright on cultural heritage" (un quasi-diritto-di-proprietà-intellettuale sul patrimonio culturale), even if cultural heritage – per excellence – should be under Public Domain. In Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 1.

[2] From Federico Morando, Il codice è stato emanato dal Governo nell’esercizio della delega prevista dall’art. 10 della legge n. 137 del 6 luglio 2002 e successive modifiche sono state operate dal D. lgs. 24 marzo 2006, n. 156, dal D. lgs. 24 marzo 2006, n. 157, dal D. lgs. 26 marzo 2008, n. 62 e dal D. lgs. 26 marzo 2008, n. 63.. Decreti attuativi: Decreto 20 aprile 2005 del Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali (“Indirizzi, criteri e modalità per la riproduzione di beni culturali, ai sensi dell’articolo 107 del decreto legislativo 22 gennaio 2004, n. 42”), GU, n. 152 del 2 luglio 2005. In Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 4.

[3] Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 2.

[4] «The relative stability of the copyright/public domain regime is under tremendous pressure from large corporate entities, and their allies in governments around the world, who have the most to gain from expanded authorial rights and a weakened public domain. There is nothing natural about these shifts in the law; they are simply the newest episode in a long running debate within Western society.» Christopher M. Toula & Gregory C. Lisby (2014) Towards an affirmative public domain, Cultural Studies, 28:5-6, 997-1021, DOI: 10.1080/09502386.2014.886490.

[5] Il Governo: il diritto di panorama c'è. Il ministero dei Beni culturali risponde all'interrogazione di Grillini: lecito fotografare e riprodurre liberamente i beni culturali. Per le opere protette libertà limitate ai soli fini scientifici e didattici in "Punto Informatico", 14 febbraio 2008.

[6] Luca Spinelli, Libertà di panorama: c’è ma non c’è, 1º aprile 2008.

[7] The full text can be found here (in Italian).

[8] Law 3028/2002, On the protection of antiquities and cultural heritage in general, translated from Greek

[Morando-9] ↑ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011.

[10] Reproduction charging models & rights policy for digital images in American art museums. «One hundred US art museums were surveyed and in-depth interviews were carried out with 20 museums. [...] Everyone interviewed wants to recoup costs but almost none claimed to actually achieve or expected to achieve this.»

[11] Massimo Stefanutti, Note sulla riproduzione fotografica dei beni immobili, 2012?

[12] Few court cases, if any, are known. Cf. Cassazione 2013, Cassazione 2004.

[13] Which references DM 31 gennaio 1994, n. 171, artt. 17-21; DL 14 novembre 1992, n. 433, art. 4.5-ter; DM 8 aprile 1994.

[14] ttps://archive.org/details/barcamp-montecitorio-2015-06-22?start=11640

[15] Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 3.

[16] The importance of control emerges specifically in the article Enrico Bertacchini and Federico Morando, The Future of Museums in the Digital Age: New Models of Access and Use of Digital Collections in International Journal of Arts Management (2013) Vol. 15(2), 60-72.

[Grischka-17] Petri Grischka. The Public Domain vs. the Museum: The Limits of Copyright and Reproductions of Two-dimensional Works of Art. «Journal of Conservation and Museum Studies», 12(1):8, 2014. <http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/jcms.1021217>

[18] For example Portugal has identified 5 buildings of cultural and artistic relevance which can not be freely photographed. In Federico Morando, Cultural Heritage Rights and Open Licenses (i.e. How a Ministerial Decree Can Obliterate the Public Domain in a Country, «Quaderni del Centro Studi Magna Grecia, Università degli Studi di Napoli, Federico II», 2011, p. 3.

[19] Il Governo: il diritto di panorama c'è. Il ministero dei Beni culturali risponde all'interrogazione di Grillini: lecito fotografare e riprodurre liberamente i beni culturali. Per le opere protette libertà limitate ai soli fini scientifici e didattici in "Punto Informatico", 14 febbraio 2008.

[20] The full text can be found here (in Italian).

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]