Earlier this year, we explained why we are strongly opposed to the proposed “Strengthening Measures to Advance Rights Technologies (SMART) Copyright Act of 2022”. A few weeks ago, we submitted a Comment to the U.S. Copyright Office in response to its Notice of Inquiry; in it, we continue to advocate that no internet services should be forced to adopt Standard Technical Measures (STMs), or any other mandatory filtering systems, imposed by the government.

Specifically, we stated in our Comment that we did not believe the law mandated STMs, and that the law must continue not to require them. While service providers should be free to choose to use filtering as a tool to aid in compliance for a first-level review, filters should never be the final say in what materials are shared with the public.

In June, Creative Commons was invited to present its position on mandatory filtering at a workshop organized by the Internet Archive entitled “Libraries and the Digital Information Ecosystem: Towards an Affirmative Policy Agenda for a Better Internet.” (The workshop is a continuation of the Better Internet initiative.)

Our lightning talk presentation centered on the damaging effects of mandatory copyright filtering for library communities; mainly, that such policy was at odds with providing the public with access to information. We reiterated that mandatory filtering, by design, does not respect limitations and exceptions to authors’ exclusive rights, but respects only the interests of the largest rightsholders. These simplistic technical tools unfortunately do not account for the context of uses such as education, research, preservation, or critical commentary; they see only matches for content, and many cannot even do that well. Even the most sophisticated systems available today give too many false positives to legally authorized material uploaded by users. (Examples include public domain recordings of classical music mistakenly flagged as major label recordings of those pieces, and an hour long loop of a cat purring being misidentified as a song.)

The mission of libraries is to connect people with the information they need, not to enforce the barriers that keep people away from it; the introduction of mandatory copyright filters stifles this mission. Creative Commons believes that no internet services, including libraries, should be forced to adopt filtering systems, nor bear the cost of implementing any mandatory filtering systems.

Fundamentally, Creative Commons does not believe that the effort to completely eliminate copyright infringements is worth the harm such schemes would cause. Our mission for Better Sharing respects both authors’ rights and the rights of the public who teach, learn, criticize, and reference, and we must oppose any mandatory filtering scheme that does not respect these rights.

The post CC still opposes mandatory filtering and so should you appeared first on Creative Commons.

Yesterday, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a motion for summary judgment calling to reject the lawsuit against the Internet Archive (IA) brought by four big publishers that threatens IA’s controlled digital lending (CDL) program. Creative Commons fully supports this motion. Here’s why. 

The Internet Archive is an American non-profit library preserving and giving access to millions of free books, movies, software, music, websites, and more, with the mission to provide “universal access to all knowledge.”

As we mention in our Open Culture Policy Paper, with CDL, libraries can lend one copy of digitized material from their collection to one borrower at a time, for two weeks or less, just like they would a physical book. Unlike eLending, CDL is about digitized works, not born-digital material. CDL maximizes a library’s ability to loan works, thereby making the entire lending system more efficient and equitable. 

At CC, we believe libraries — and cultural heritage institutions in general — should be empowered to serve as a meaningful access point for publicly funded collections. Free and open access to knowledge stimulates creativity, is essential for research and learning, and constitutes a bedrock principle of free and democratic societies. 

Copyright must encourage CDL and ensure that legal mechanisms are in place to allow this fair practice. As clearly articulated by EFF: “CDL helps ensure that the public can make full use of the books that libraries have bought and paid for. This activity is fundamentally the same as traditional library lending, and poses no new harm to authors or the publishing industry.” 

Books, in all their forms, are a public good. Libraries, whether brick-and-mortar or digital, pursue a public-interest mission. Guided by our strong belief in better sharing, CC will continue to support the IA’s crucial efforts to ensure the public can access knowledge and culture on a global level.

The post CC Supports Internet Archive’s Efforts to Ensure Public Access to Books appeared first on Creative Commons.

The Creative Commons Open Education Platform community will offer our next round of Lightning Talks, or seven-minute presentations on specific updates or stories in open education. Join the sessions on Tuesday 12 July at 6:00pm UTC. We can’t wait to learn with you!

Location: Join us from wherever you are based! We’ll be using Zoom to host the event. If you haven’t installed Zoom, download it here.

Our Lightning Talks presentations include: 

“Open Syllabus: UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science” by Jennifer Miller 

• Summary: An open syllabus, assignments–including interactive multiple choice self-check questions–and rubrics for a semester-long course teaching open science through the lens of the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science. The syllabus and materials were created as part of the Open Education for a Better World (OE4BW) program. The course is suitable for PIs to teach as a special topics course to early career researchers in their lab or department, for a Maymester or summer session offering to prospective or incoming STEM graduate students, or in a lifelong learning context for practicing and retired STEM practitioners and educators. The syllabus has been presented and well received at OEGlobal, OE4BW Eduscope, OERcamp, and the First UNESCO Working Group Meeting on Capacity Building in Open Science. The openly-licensed materials are available on Wikiversity and Zenodo, and a train-the-trainer session is offered July 26-28 at FSCI2022.
• Presenter: Jennifer has 10+ years experience teaching and doing research in public policy and public management. She is a civic technologist and open knowledge advocate.

“More OER for Free!” by Jonathan Poritz

• Summary: In jurisdictions with a strong works-made-for-hire doctrine in their copyright laws, there is often a policy decision to be made about educational materials produced by employees (instructors and other staff) of educational institutions.  In the US, at least, the result tends to be that copyrights for such materials are owned by the employer, excepting only tenure-line faculty in higher ed who keep their individual copyrights.  A policy which automatically applied to those institutionally owned materials an OER-compatible CC license would instantly free enormous quantities of existing material, and open up future materials, for much wider use and public benefit. Jonathan will discuss some of the details of how versions of this policy might work, what obstacles there could be in their way, and how they are or are not consistent with other policies and efforts.
• Presenter: Jonathan is a former mathematics faculty member and OER Coordinator at a public university in Colorado, USA; former member of the Colorado State OER Council; volunteer in many open ed orgs; and ongoing facilitator for the CC Certificate course.  He currently lives in a Schroedinger’s Cat-like state somewhere between Colorado, USA, and Pietrasanta, Italy.

“Open Climate Campaign” by Dr. Cable Green and Dr. Monica Granados

• Summary: Climate change, and the resulting harm to our global biodiversity, is one of the world’s most pressing challenges. The complexity of the climate crisis requires global, national, and local actions informed by multidisciplinary research. The goal of this multi-year campaign is to promote open access to research to accelerate progress towards solving the climate crisis and preserving global biodiversity. If we are going to solve these global challenges, the knowledge (research, data, educational resources, software) about them must be open.
• Presenters: Dr. Cable Green works with open education, science and research communities to leverage open licensing, content, practices and policies to expand equitable access and contributions to open knowledge. His work is focused on identifying complex problems (e.g., UN SDGs) where open knowledge is a critical part of the solution, and then opening that knowledge to help solve the problem. Cable is also a leading advocate for open licensing and procurement policies that ensure publicly funded education, science and research resources are freely and openly available to the public.
• Dr. Monica Granados is the Open Climate Campaign Manager for a multi-year campaign to open knowledge about the climate crisis and preserving global biodiversity. Climate change, and the resulting harm to our global biodiversity, is one of the world’s most pressing challenges. If we are going to solve these global challenges, the knowledge (research, data, educational resources, software) about them must be open.

“Building OER into Capstone Courses” by Carolyn Stevenson

• Summary: Integrating OER into undergraduate and graduate capstone courses offers the opportunity to serve learners across disciplines. The Professional Studies degrees are competency-based, allow learners to craft their own individualized learning plan, and use OER as a cost-effective means for providing learning resources.
• Presenter: Carolyn has 20+ plus years experience in online learning and is currently University Faculty for Purdue University Global, USA.

“Improve It Challenge” by Jamison Miller

• Summary: Lumen Learning’s Improve It Challenge grant program invites anyone and everyone to engage in the continuous improvement of open educational resources. First, Jamison will share how Lumen uses data to identify learning outcomes in Lumen courses where students across the U.S. are struggling. Next, he will explain the Lumen grant program, beginning with how people can apply. Small grants are awarded to individuals with compelling proposals to revise / remix / create new learning activities aligned with these difficult outcomes. If A/B testing demonstrates that the updated learning activities significantly improve student learning, grantees receive a 10x bonus award!
• Presenter: Jamison is the Director, Research Communication at Lumen Learning.

Watch our last round of Open Education Lightning Talks here >>

The post Join us for our next round of CC Open Education Platform Lightning Talks! appeared first on Creative Commons.

While the Plan is welcome as an important step towards the digital transformation of cultural heritage institutions (CHIs), it risks nonetheless restricting, rather than increasing, access to and use of cultural heritage, and having a serious detrimental effect on the public domain, creators’ participation in generative creativity, and society as a whole. 

Together with CC’s Italian Chapter, we have prepared a statement to address crucial points of concerns raised in the Plan, namely: 

1. The public domain is being unduly encroached upon by an application of cultural heritage law that unduly limits reuse and creativity opportunities against the public interest. Rather, the public domain must be protected, because it enables essential access to knowledge and culture, and fosters creativity.
2. The creation of a bespoke license (MIC Standard) is inadvisable. CC tools are the established standard used by CHIs, and are important legal and communication tools between CHIs and their users. CC licenses and tools have many benefits over tailored licenses or other bespoke standards. 
3. The risks of undermining creativity and access to culture are not outweighed by the few revenue opportunities of paid licensing established through application of cultural heritage law. 

Read our full statement >> 

We take this opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to better sharing of cultural heritage and look forward to continuing to support CHIs across the world in fulfilling their public-interest mission of providing access to their collections as openly as possible, on site and online. 

Note: This statement was prepared by Brigitte Vézina, Director of Policy and Open Culture, Creative Commons, Deborah De Angelis, Chapter Lead, CC Italy, and Laura Sinigaglia, Contributor, CC Italy. 

The post CC Expresses Views on Italian National Cultural Heritage Digitization Plan appeared first on Creative Commons.

The

The CC Certificate program is an investment in the global community of open creators and advocates. It is a tool to support people as proactive participants in our shared digital commons, and strengthen the diversity of creative thought and expression to improve open access to open knowledge and culture. 

But how can we understand the potential impact of this effort on our global community? We explore the CC Certificate programs’ effects on community members through a series of focused measures, such as interviews with alumni who developed a master level courses related to open education, open policies, or openly published a digital collection of artwork, with cultural considerations. We also draw feedback from surveys and workshops.  

In this post, we highlight one evaluation effort analyzing how Certificate course participants’ knowledge changes over the 10 weeks of engagement. We administer baseline and endline surveys to participants on a voluntary basis, in order to: (1) understand if participants develop a greater understanding of our course content, and (2) understand differences between course communities, where participants have more challenges in course content, and what this data might mean for our teaching practices. 

CC works with Jonathan Poritz to track participants’ understanding of course content, and how it changes over time. Learn more about the baseline and endline survey background, methodology and findings in a detailed analysis on Jonathan Poritz’s website. [1]

Below are the top four takeaways from an evaluation of our baseline and endline surveys on copyright, open licensing, and reuse of CC-licensed content supported by our experience facilitating the course. 

Top takeaways: 

1. While our open culture course (the GLAM Certificate) has not been running long enough to gather meaningful data, we do find participants in the Educators and Academic Librarians courses make significant gains from taking their respective courses. We have statistically significant evidence that the post-test scores are more than 21.2% higher than the pre-test scores, at the 5% significance level. Both the Educator and Academic Librarian participants had fairly similar starting scores, ending scores, and (therefore) gains from taking the course as each other (and the whole group).[2]
2. The surveys confirm our experience that Unit 4, which covers reuse of CC licensed content, is the most challenging unit for participants. Most graduates score between 80 – 85 points on all units, except Unit 4, where they score around 65 points. What does this mean? We should spend more time and focus facilitating this unit for participants.[3]
3. On a side note: almost everyone realized they could not provide legal advice following the course. This will make course facilitators chuckle, because we make it a habit to remind participants that we cannot provide legal advice–that’s something shared between lawyers and the clients hiring them.
   
4. While this analysis sincerely charms us, we need to contextualize it. These data points show increased knowledge over time, which is arguably the first building block in empowering our communities with the tools they need to take advantage of the “copyright meets digital” landscape. What participants then do with their increased knowledge is crucial.

Ideally, evaluation of Creative Commons training efforts will also feed into a broader conversation about how we can evaluate, learn and adapt in open education training efforts more broadly. Now we see a wonderful variety of professional development opportunities in this field. We expect each of our efforts to be like puzzle pieces, contributing to the larger impact of open education. Ideally, we can track how the CC Certificate can work with other efforts to best support the agency and learning of our global community members. 

We want to thank all of the anonymous CC Certificate participants who volunteered their time to help us with this analysis. 

[1] – Of note: Because the surveys were voluntary, we were concerned about the risk of volunteer sample bias. To rule out one element of this bias, which would show favorable endline survey results in favor of people who were “good students” or on the trajectory to graduate anyway, Jonathan analyzed just the results of participants who passed the course.  We did this to address the potential critique: “maybe the course doesn’t teach anything, but merely convinces the bad students not to take the post-test, so the distribution of post-test scores of course looks better than the distribution of pre-test scores.” We learned that by making a pair of histograms for over-all score before and after the course from only participants who were successful in the course, then they should look pretty much the same.

[2] – Per Jonathan Poritz, if you’re a little rusty in your statistical terminology, most of the graphs in the full analysis are histograms, meaning that the heights of the bars indicate how many scores lie in the range of percentages covered by the base of that bar on the horizontal, “Percent Correct,” axis. For example, the bar in the “Before Course” histogram whose left edge is at location 60 on the horizontal axis has a base going from 60 to 65 on that horizontal axis and height of 13. That means that 13 participants’ pre-test scores were in the range 60 to 65% correct.

The vertical blue line in these histograms is located at the median of the scores for that graph, meaning that half of the scores in that dataset are less than (to the left of) that score, and half are greater than (to the right of) that score: it is a good measure of the “middle value” of the dataset.

The x̄ in the key box in each graph indicates the mean (or average) of that dataset, which is another measure of the middle of data, but means are more sensitive than medians to outliers, meaning that atypical scores way off to one end will pull the mean in that direction but not the median.

The σ in the box is the standard deviation of that dataset, which is a measure of how much variation there is in the data.

The η in the box tells the size of that dataset.

[3] – The term “95% confidence interval” is a standard assumption in applied statistics. The 95% confidence interval is a range of values within which we would expect to see 95% of those sample means if we were to (1) repeatedly collect random samples and (2) recalculate the sample mean each time. If the subset of participants who took the test were a random sample of course participants (rather than a self-selected group of volunteers), then the sample mean would slightly vary every time a new random sample was chosen from among all participants.

The post Here are four key takeaways from evaluating the CC Certificate appeared first on Creative Commons.

Hi Creative Commoners! We are back with a brand new episode of CC’s Open Minds … from Creative Commons podcast. 

In this episode, we switch things up from our typical interview style and play back the recording of Creative Commons’ hybrid roundtable on the EU Data Act, which took place in Brussels on 14 June 2022. CC CEO Catherine Stihler kicks things off with welcome remarks, and then Brigitte Vézina, CC’s Director of Open Culture and Policy, moderates a conversation between our distinguished panel of experts on how this new piece of legislation could reshape the rules governing value creation around data and unlock the potential for better sharing of knowledge and culture in the digital space across the EU and globally.

• Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, SoundCloud, and more. You can also subscribe via the show’s RSS feed.

Our speakers in this episode include: 

INTRODUCTION
Catherine Stihler | CEO, Creative Commons

MODERATOR
Brigitte Vézina | Director of Policy, Open Culture and GLAM, Creative Commons

PANEL

1. Christel Schaldemose | Member, European Parliament
2. Anna Ludin | Policy Officer DG CNECT G.1, Data Policy and Innovation, European Commission
3. Amandine Le Pape | COO/co-founder, Element, Guardian/co-founder, Matrix.org Foundation
4. Paul Keller | President/founding member, COMMUNIA

Please subscribe to the show in whatever podcast app you use, so you don’t miss any of our conversations with people working to make the internet and our global culture more open and collaborative.

The post Open Minds Podcast: *Special Episode* CC Roundtable on EU DATA ACT appeared first on Creative Commons.

The post Open Culture VOICES Vlog Series: Wrap-Up appeared first on Creative Commons.

In this interview, we were delighted to speak with Revekka Kefalea, a graduate of the CC Certificate for GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums). 

Revekka works as project manager at the civic, non-profit organization Inter Alia (Athens, Greece), conceptualizing, managing and monitoring the implementation of projects in relation to arts, (digital) cultural heritage, open access and civic engagement. She holds a BSc in Social Policy and Social Anthropology (Panteion University), a MSc in Urban and Regional Planning (National Technical University of Athens), and a MSc in Political Science and Sociology (National and Kapodistrian University of Athens). She is also certified in cultural management and social entrepreneurship, and closely follows the GLAM sector and its transformations, since her research interests focus on nationalism, material culture, cultural heritage, identity and memory politics. Here is the Q&A: 

What inspired you to take the CC Certificate for GLAM?

I decided to take the CC Certificate for GLAM almost two years ago, when it was first announced on the CC website — that is when I started saving money for it. At that time, I was writing my Master’s thesis on the history of access to national museums, in light of the mass digitization projects of cultural heritage and the Open GLAM movement. But the story about my sources of inspiration and motivation goes way back in time. 

It was around 2008-9 when I discovered the term “open access”, while involved in a research project (at a public university in Athens, Greece), and while mass digitization projects of cultural heritage were gaining momentum. Of course, I benefited from this development, because I was able to find materials necessary for my research in digital libraries and collections easily and for free. Everything was just one click away! At this time, Greece was facing a debt crisis in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2007–2008; and there were major funding cuts to the public sector, including the funding of public universities and libraries. This situation got me thinking: Would I be able to continue my research without the existence of these mass digitization projects and open access, digital collections and libraries? Would I be able to afford it? And what about other people with lower income than mine? How could they equally get access to education and knowledge resources to overcome the inequalities and obstacles posed by the crisis? 

Being in this situation and triggered by these questions, I started exploring the open culture / open GLAM movement more closely.  In December 2018, I decided to launch a non-formal, self-funded initiative (GLAM Hack) to spread the word about the research, educational and creative possibilities of open access via workshops and other events. You can read more about the work on the blog post.

In this effort, I reached out to the founders of Inter Alia for support and feedback, and they proposed to hire me, providing me the opportunity, on the one hand, to go on with my initiative autonomously, and on the other, to advocate for open access within the context of Inter Alia’s projects. This development was very rewarding, but also very challenging for me, because advocating for open access requires knowledge about copyright law and CC licenses, as well as considering various economical, ethical, and social-political issues that arise when digitizing and opening access to cultural heritage materials online. I had to read a lot about these topics on my own; and, at some point, I realized that I need to systematize my knowledge to articulate stronger arguments (and especially, arguments beyond the legal aspects of digital access). This is when the CC Certificate came to my attention. The timing was just perfect! 

“Would I be able to continue my research without the existence of these mass digitization projects and open access, digital collections and libraries? Would I be able to afford it? And what about other people with lower income than mine? How could they equally get access to education and knowledge resources to overcome the inequalities and obstacles posed by the crisis?”

Tell us more about your current project and any challenges or early successes you’ve experienced: 

Currently, I am involved in the Creative Europe project ECHO II: Traditions in Transition, advocating for its open access policy. Within its context, we invited artists to participate in five art residencies, and create original artworks inspired by selected local traditions from Greece, Bulgaria, North Macedonia, and Hungary. After each art residency, we digitized the artworks, and published the digital copies on the website under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license. Of course, we went through all the legal formalities to do so; and given the complexities of copyright laws and the (mis)understandings around CC licenses, that was a very demanding task for us. But we managed to go through this, because opening access to the project outcomes was our clear goal from the very beginning, and we were transparent about it along the way – we even included a specific section about it in all our open calls for artists. 

Apart from publishing the digital collection of artworks openly, we went a step further, and included a section on the website (“Locations | Traditions” webpages) with information about the selected traditions, and illustrations from open access repositories and cultural heritage aggregation platforms. We did so, because we didn’t want to create just another project website that would showcase only its progress and outcomes, but a knowledge base that would be useful for and used by wider communities for any purpose. However, if you explore this section, you will find out that the “Locations | Traditions” webpages are unequally developed and illustrated. Due to language barriers — and also due to the restrictions resulting from COVID-19 — we had to rely heavily on open access digital platforms, and especially on resources and content with rich metadata in English. Of course, we consider this unequal representation of the selected traditions a problem. Personally, I think it is an indicator of the unequal development of mass digitization and open access to cultural heritage in European countries. But it is also something that highlights, on the one hand, the importance of rich, multilingual metadata, and on the other, the importance of open access to GLAMs, not only for research and education, but also for the creative and civil society sectors.

“Advocating for open access requires knowledge about copyright law and CC licenses, as well as considering various economical, ethical, and social-political issues that arise when digitizing and opening access to cultural heritage materials online.”

What do you aim to do next? 

Inspired by the CC Certificate resources, the CC Toolkit for Business, and the publications Made with Creative Commons and The Power of Open, I prepared and just offered (in the context of the ECHO II project) a pilot workshop on (a) the history of copyright and CC licenses, and (b) open business models for artists, heritage professionals, cultural managers, and open culture / open GLAM activists. I would like to enrich the content of this workshop and offer it again in the near future, taking into consideration the developments in the so-called platform economy. 

More broadly: if you had to guess, what is next for the open culture / open GLAM movement? What should we be looking for in the future? 

Hm… This question is really difficult to answer, because we (need to) work simultaneously on many levels and towards various directions… Every aspect is equally important… In any case, based on my educational background, work experiences and research interests, I can suggest the following two issues:    

1. The current discussions around digitizing and opening access to cultural heritage collections online stress the economic costs and risks that GLAMs (need to) take into consideration before adopting their own approaches and policies. Of course, economic resources play a fundamental role in these processes, and hence, GLAMs need to have funding for them. However, public and private funding varies greatly across institutions, national states, and even fiscal years (since it is tied to the general state of the economy, and usually is least available when it is most needed). But maybe, we can look at the situation from the reverse point of view, and -from the existence or lack of financial resources- we can draw conclusions about the role, status and importance of GLAM institutions in national cultural policies, histories and identities. I think that such an approach would help us, on the one hand, to explore the power relations and dynamics existing in the GLAM sector, along with the ideological, and socio-historical factors that (re)produce them; and on the other, to draw a more complete picture of the various influences in GLAMs’ processes and practices. In this light, present-day challenges might appear less puzzling and easier to overcome. 
2. In the open culture / open GLAM movement, we usually highlight the benefits of open access for societies in general and GLAM audiences in particular (e.g. production of new knowledge, enhancement of creativity, generation of new business ideas, etc.), but we rarely discuss the premises for the audiences to be able to reuse and remix open content for their own purposes (research, education, entertainment, entrepreneurship, etc.). If the ultimate goal of open access is to encourage and ensure everyone’s active and equal participation in the transformation of knowledge and culture, then every reuser -apart from internet/web access- needs to have advanced digital skills and to be knowledgeable in many fields (e.g. research methodologies, classification systems, copyright laws, codes of ethics, social and cultural norms, programming etc.) to be able to do so. From the standpoint of a reuser, it seems to me that digital cultural heritage collections and aggregation platforms (including their creative functionalities) tend to be designed with an ideal internet user in mind, who is supposed to already have all the necessary knowledge and skills. However, this is rarely the case; and hence, along with building the capacities of GLAM institutions and professionals, we also need to respond to the audiences’ needs. And in this effort, apart from offering educational activities and helping GLAMs open their collections, we also need to encourage them to explain and open their internal processes and practices.   

“From the standpoint of a reuser, it seems to me that digital cultural heritage collections and aggregation platforms (including their creative functionalities) tend to be designed with an ideal internet user in mind, who is supposed to already have all the necessary knowledge and skills. However, this is rarely the case.”

Thank you so much for your time with us, Revekka! Before we go, do you have any advice for open culture advocates? 

Well, I can say what I repeatedly say to myself: 

1. Opening access to knowledge and culture is a never-ending process for various reasons — first and foremost, because collecting and preserving knowledge and heritage materials for the present and future generations is a never-ending process itself. So, don’t get discouraged and don’t give up; be persistent and patient at the same time.
2. No one can be fully aware of all the issues that need to be considered when advocating for open access. Fortunately, though, the members of the open community are experts in a wide variety of topics, and, due to their mentality and values, they are always willing to share their knowledge and expertise. So, don’t be shy; just reach out and ask for help.

We celebrate Revekka’s excellent work, and we want to celebrate more of our CC Certificate alumni’s work! If you have a story about something you’ve tried or an open project you’ve accomplished at your institution, please let us know (email certificates@creativecommons.org). 

The post CC Certificate: Alumni interview with Revekka Kefalea appeared first on Creative Commons.

Welcome to episode 35 of Open Culture VOICES! VOICES is a vlog series of short interviews with open GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums) experts from around the world. The Open Culture Program at Creative Commons aims to promote better sharing of cultural heritage in GLAMs collections. With Open Culture VOICES, we’re thrilled to bring you various perspectives from dozens of experts speaking in many different languages on what it’s like to open up heritage content online. In this episode, we hear from librarian and digital information consultant, Josée Plamondon, from Québec, Canada. As a digital information consultant, Josée conducts diagnoses and proposes methods to improve the organization of information for digital environments, such as search engines, relational databases and semantic web.

Josée responds to the following questions: 

1. What are the main benefits of open GLAM?
2. What are the barriers?
3. Could you share something someone else told you that opened up your eyes and mind about open GLAM?
4. Do you have a personal message to those hesitating to open up collections?

Closed captions are available for this video, you can turn them on by clicking the CC icon at the bottom of the video. A red line will appear under the icon when closed captions have been enabled. Closed captions may be affected by Internet connectivity — if you experience a lag, we recommend watching the videos directly on YouTube.

Want to hear more insights from Open Culture experts from around the world? Watch more episodes of Open Culture VOICES here >>

The post Episode 35: Open Culture VOICES – Josée Plamondon appeared first on Creative Commons.

Welcome to episode 34 of Open Culture VOICES! VOICES is a vlog series of short interviews with open GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums) experts from around the world. The Open Culture Program at Creative Commons aims to promote better sharing of cultural heritage in GLAMs collections. With Open Culture VOICES, we’re thrilled to bring you various perspectives from dozens of experts speaking in many different languages on what it’s like to open up heritage content online. In this episode, we hear from Kristina Petrasova, Project Lead Digital Heritage & Public Media at the Netherlands Institute for Sound & Vision, a cultural archive and museum in Hilversum. Kristina has a deep passion for international art and culture, and has worked in the cultural heritage sectors for several years. After working as conservator of the National Numismatic Collection (NNC) in the Netherlands, she is now focusing on research and production of cultural and artistic projects, exhibitions and documentary films.

Kristina responds to the following questions: 

1. What are the main benefits of open GLAM?
2. What are the barriers?
3. Could you share something someone else told you that opened up your eyes and mind about open GLAM?
4. Do you have a personal message to those hesitating to open up collections?

Closed captions are available for this video, you can turn them on by clicking the CC icon at the bottom of the video. A red line will appear under the icon when closed captions have been enabled. Closed captions may be affected by Internet connectivity — if you experience a lag, we recommend watching the videos directly on YouTube.

Want to hear more insights from Open Culture experts from around the world? Watch more episodes of Open Culture VOICES here >> 

The post Episode 34: Open Culture VOICES – Kristina Petrasova appeared first on Creative Commons.