Why Does Wikimedia Commons Fail to Accommodate Met Museum’s 400k Image Uploads?

Good news came a few years ago when my friend, part of the staff at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (The Met), uploaded over 300,000 images to Wikimedia Commons. The Met’s management supported this, believing it to be a crucial part of the institution’s mission. But what happened to the remaining 100,000 images? Let’s delve into the reasons behind this decision.

The Licensing Issue

The first problem lies in the licensing. The images were only made available under a Non-Commercial (NC) license. While this might seem beneficial for sharing the museum’s rich collection, Wikimedia Commons does not support media with such restricted usage.

This non-compliance with Wikimedia Commons’ standards leads us to our next issue: backlog in file uploading. There is a growing backlog of files waiting to be uploaded, but the available slots are increasing at a rapid pace.

Why Wikimedia Commons Rejects NC Licenses?

The decision to not support NC licenses predates my involvement, but let’s explore the reasons behind this:

Non-Commercial Licensing: A Double-Edged Sword

Non-Commercial licensing was initially seen as a boon for not-for-profits and altruists. It allows them to share their licensed material without the fear of commercial exploitation. This is a brilliant way to gain widespread recognition and exposure for your media, giving your legal department ample opportunities to address any unethical use.

Commercial Exploitation

However, the reality is more complex. Non-Commercial licensing serves as a magnet for those who might exploit it unethically. For instance, non-profit organizations using licensed material under NC terms can inadvertently support unethical practices. This becomes an ethical issue when the legal department has to intervene, deploying their resources to catch out these organizations.

Altruistic Misunderstanding

Many individuals and organizations operating under an altruistic mindset might misunderstand the nuances of Non-Commercial licensing. They believe that by sharing their content under NC terms, they are contributing to the public good. However, this false impression can lead to misuse and exploitation, undermining the very principles of ethical sharing.

Looking for Solutions and Future Outlook

Given the current situation, how can we bridge the gap between the Met Museum’s goal and Wikimedia Commons’ policies? One potential solution could be to find a compromise where NC restrictions are more clearly defined and monitored. For example, the museum could offer different categories of licenses based on usage, catering to both non-commercial and commercial interests.

Future outlook for Wikimedia Commons could involve negotiations and partnerships with cultural institutions like the Met. By working together, they could find common ground and possibly implement a licensing model that balances the needs of both parties.

In conclusion, while the Met’s initial decision to share its vast collection through NC licensing was admirable, the constraints imposed by Wikimedia Commons highlight the complexities of balancing non-commercial and commercial interests. As technology evolves, we hope to see more nuanced and collaborative solutions that benefit everyone involved.