←back to thread

771 points abetusk | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Symbiote ◴[] No.41878622[source]
> The court ruled that the museum’s revenue, business model, and supposed threats from competition and counterfeiting are irrelevant to the public’s right to access its scans, a dramatic rejection of the museum’s position

It would have helped the museum and government ministry if this had been clear before the government-funded scanning program was started. (Maybe it was, I don't know.)

I was initially sympathetic to the museum, as it's common for public funding to be tight, and revenue from the gift shop or commercial licencing of their objects can fill the gap. I don't know about France, but I expect the ministry has been heavily pushing public museums to increase their income in this way.

However, that doesn't justify the deception described by the article.

replies(8): >>41878710 #>>41878780 #>>41878801 #>>41878841 #>>41880177 #>>41884218 #>>41886229 #>>41886284 #
ACS_Solver ◴[] No.41878841[source]
This same person fought for years to get the Berlin Egyptian museum to release 3D scans of the famous Nefertiti bust. The museum also claimed it would undermine its revenue streams through the gift shop, but as the case progressed, that turned out to be very misleading - the museum had made less than 5000 EUR over ten years from 3D scans.

https://reason.com/2019/11/13/a-german-museum-tried-to-hide-...

replies(6): >>41879008 #>>41879453 #>>41879787 #>>41880239 #>>41881759 #>>41882771 #
trompetenaccoun ◴[] No.41879008[source]
Why would they lie about it then? These museums are subsidized by tax payers, not only just local money but often with additional EU funding as well. The scans were paid for by the public. This seems comically evil for no apparent reason.
replies(6): >>41879063 #>>41879127 #>>41879282 #>>41879326 #>>41879471 #>>41884704 #
astrange ◴[] No.41884704[source]
If you hire a lawyer, they're going to try to make the strongest argument for your case, even if it's not good.
replies(1): >>41884721 #
1. romwell ◴[] No.41884721[source]
And the meta-question of "why did the museum choose to waste money on lawyers that way" is "bureaucrat X decided that the scans belong to the museum, so no further logic or rational thinking will be applied unless absolutely forced to".

That's a common property of all large institutions: the reasons why a decision is made may as well be arbitrary, but by golly will they stick to it and die on the hill, if they can.