Live data from Hacker News

The Berlin Egyptian Museum’s scan of the Bust of Nefertiti (2017)

reason.com

11–20 of 41 posts

Re: The Berlin Egyptian Museum’s scan of the Bust of Nefertiti (2017)

#13
In the United States, there is case law[1] establishing that an exact replica of artwork that is itself in public domain is not eligible for copyright protection, because "originality" is a necessary element for copyright protection to exist. Works that lack any originality are therefore public domain even if they require effort or technical skill to produce, such as photographing a public domain painting, or presumably scanning a public domain bust.

Is there any similar law or regulation in Germany?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel....

Re: The Berlin Egyptian Museum’s scan of the Bust of Nefertiti (2017)

#14
I have some experience with bringing museum exhibits online, and unfortunately this experience is total standard.

Museums think they own their artefacts, and they want to control who gets to "publish" them. Typically museums have a few archaeologists that they have close ties with who get the privilege of publishing stuff. If some random person comes along, god forbid from abroad, they will try everything to stop you from getting access to their collection.

They often don't even have time to publish their stuff, so many museums have unpublished objects in storage that noone knows about and they more or less keep secret because they want to decide who gets to publish them.

This fiefdom affects big and small museums alike.

One tactic that occasionally works is to get some important institution or some well connected professor to contact the director of the museum and sweet-talk to them to give you access.

Re: The Berlin Egyptian Museum’s scan of the Bust of Nefertiti (2017)

#15

I have some experience with bringing museum exhibits online, and unfortunately this experience is total standard. Museums think they own their artefacts, and they want to control who gets to "publish" them. Typically museums have a few archaeologists that they have close ties with who get the privilege of publishing stuff. If some random person comes along, god forbid from abroad, they will try everything to stop you…

Interesting.

This jibes with stories my father told me about how he and his brothers found Indian burial sites and other Indian artifacts in upstate New York when he was a kid/teen. He must have found thousands of arrowheads over the years (tilled farmland brought them to the surface). I found a few walking the fields with him as a kid myself.

Anyhow he said the burial site was a major find and they knew it, and so they contacted the museum of Rochester or something, which came in much took ownership of everything, including all credit for the discovery, then hid the artifacts away, etc. He didn't have anything nice to say about his dealings with them, the experience majorly disappointed him, as he believed this stuff was meant for the public consumption but in the end was just hidden away.

Re: The Berlin Egyptian Museum’s scan of the Bust of Nefertiti (2017)

#16

I have some experience with bringing museum exhibits online, and unfortunately this experience is total standard. Museums think they own their artefacts, and they want to control who gets to "publish" them. Typically museums have a few archaeologists that they have close ties with who get the privilege of publishing stuff. If some random person comes along, god forbid from abroad, they will try everything to stop you…

aka nepotism

Re: The Berlin Egyptian Museum’s scan of the Bust of Nefertiti (2017)

#19

Is there any statement of the museum which explains *why* they were being this obnoxious?

Before it was already freely available, but only for research and non-commercial use.

"Freely available" in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard, I presume.

Re: The Berlin Egyptian Museum’s scan of the Bust of Nefertiti (2017)

#20

In the United States, there is case law[1] establishing that an exact replica of artwork that is itself in public domain is not eligible for copyright protection, because "originality" is a necessary element for copyright protection to exist. Works that lack any originality are therefore public domain even if they require effort or technical skill to produce, such as photographing a public domain painting, or presuma…

Ah but you see it’s not an exact replica they carved a copyright notice and their name on the bottom! Clearly that qualifies it for the copyright notice itself.
Post reply on HN