As discussed in a recent New York Times article, museums around the world are reevaluating their approach to distributing images of their collections in an increasingly digital world.

For years, museums have considered high-quality images of their artworks to be an important asset in need of careful protection.  Some works may still be under copyright, and by controlling the availability of digital copies, museums can help prevent unauthorized reproductions and other copyright violations.  Even when a work has passed into the public domain and is no longer protected by copyright, museums often limit the availability of high-resolution digital copies of artworks (for example, charging fees and making them available only for educational or research purposes).  This allows museums to control the monetization of the images, and to profit from their use in merchandise from posters to tee shirts.  Other motivations for restricting copy availability include preventing forgeries, preserving the mystique and cachet of the images, and avoiding the “cheapening” of artwork by preventing images from being used in undesirable or commercialized ways.

Those considerations are evolving, however, given the increasing importance of wider public access in today’s digital culture.  For example, the Google Art Project aims to create a global archive of images of artworks, gleaned from the collections of museums around the world. Museums are also undertaking their own efforts to make their collections accessible online.  Each individual institution, however, must strike its own unique balance between competing considerations, both legal and strategic.

For example, the Smithsonian Institution in Washington has made thousands of images available online, but many of the images are low-resolution to discourage undesirable uses.  Other museums, such as the Prado Museum in Madrid and the National Gallery in London, have digitized some of their images, but do not generally provide them for free.  Some institutions charge different fees based on the intended use (less for educational uses, and more for commercial uses).  At the far end of the spectrum, the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam provides free downloads of high-resolution images, and even supplies online editing tools, thus encouraging people to engage with and make use of the images as they like, often in creative and novel ways.

Traditional considerations (such as preventing forgery, copyright infringement, and commercial use of images) still carry important weight. Many museums also depend on the revenues they generate from sales of images, and may struggle with the financial cost of the digitization process (including taking works out of exhibitions in order to digitize them).  On the other hand, museums also face practical difficulties in truly controlling digital copies.  Moreover, there is value in sharing collections openly—and not only for altruistic public service reasons.  Increased digital access is a way for museums to “meet people where they are,” to encourage increased interest in collections, and to find more ways to engage with potential patrons.  Museums should seek legal advice to help decide what approach is right for them, and how to implement that strategy in a way that protects the interests of artists and copyright holders, institutions, and the public.