Unit 7

Copyright

My Understanding of Major Points about Copyright Law

It is hard to get a clear picture of copyright law, especially knowing that the laws can change and court decisions modify how the law is interpreted over time. Charts like those in Cohen and Rosenzweig’s Digital History (2006, pp. 205-206) are very helpful, but given that their chart was published in 2006, I am concerned I may be misunderstanding changes in copyright laws and decisions since then. I am comparing their chart to the U.S. Copyright Office’s Circular 15A (https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf), Duration of Copyright, among other sources.  

For example, Cohen and Rosenzweig’s table on pp. 205-206 indicates that works published between 1923 and 1977 without copyright notice are in the public domain. However, the Library of Congress site (http://www.loc.gov/teachers/usingprimarysources/copyright.html) says that “the absence of a copyright notice does not mean that there is no copyright. Copyright protection exists automatically from the moment of creation in a tangible fixed form, which is generally considered to include electronic form. A notice is not required to protect copyright.” These seem inconsistent. The U.S. Copyright Office helps clear this up for me (https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf)--consistent with Cohen and Rosenzweig, the Copyright Office’s circular says that for works already copyright protected by January 1, 1978, those published before January 1, 1923 are in the public domain. If a work was originally copyrighted between January 1, 1950 and December 31, 1963, but did not have copyright renewed for a second term, are also now in the public domain. The Library of Congress says that work created by federal government employees as part of their jobs is in the public domain. If there are restrictions on a work in the Library of Congress’ American Memory collection, the library provides contact information for obtaining permission. 

Works copyrighted after 1922 and renewed before 1978, were given an automatic extension so that their copyright lasts 95 years from the end of the year in which they were originally secured. So these are not yet available in the public domain. However, for those originally copyrighted between January 1, 1950, and December 31, 1963, the copyright renewal is automatic, so the copyright lasts 95 years. The earliest any of these works will be in the public domain is 2045. Apparently, works copyrighted from January 1, 1923 and December 31, 1949 will gradually become part of the public domain—I believe this means that published works copyrighted in 1923 will begin to be part of the public domain on December 31, 2018 (https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf). All of this seems consistent with Cohen and Rosenzweig’s table.

The above attempt to summarize the duration of copyright doesn’t even include unpublished works or works created after January 1, 1978. And to make it even more confusing, some organizations may claim that works in the public domain are restricted. For example, Cohen and Rosenzweig (2006, p. 198) note that Corbis puts copyright notices and digital watermarks on public domain images that are in the public domain and free through the Library of Congress.

I think the best policy is to use the tables and Circular 15A for each work one is considering using. Also, given the complexity of copyright law, it is very important for a student, professor, or historian to understand fair use guidelines. If (a) the purpose of a publication or site is not commercial; (b) the work is factual or data, rather than of a more creative nature; (c) one does not use a large amount of the work; and (d) the use of the work is not likely to affect its economic value for the copyright holder, than it is fair to use the work. For example, if a work is no longer in print and not accessible, then it is less likely to affect the economic value for the copyright holder. However, one must be sure to site and credit the use of others’ work, such as photos and text. In addition, attribution (i.e., citation) is not a substitute for the permission to use a copyrighted work. 

Local Museum Sites and Copyright

I did not see a copyright statement on all of the listed sites. Some said copyright 2017 or for a period of years through 2017. Even when they say their site is copyrighted, they often do not provide any other comment about the use of material on their site.

The Loudoun Museum says it is “committed to expanding the digital display of the collection, in a manner that makes it available as a teaching tool for students, teachers and historians around the globe (http://www.loudounmuseum.org/about/mission/). Yet, it also says that images are “available for purchase for private and commercial use” (http://www.loudounmuseum.org/exhibits/archives/). I’m not sure what private use might include. I would think that some older works would be in the public domain so that a user would not have to purchase them.

The City of Alexandria says the entire contents of its websites are copyrighted for 1996-2017 “unless otherwise noted,” but “you may freely reproduce and distribute, for personal or nonprofit use, any original content on a site produced by the City and not protected from you by password or other security method.” 

I would suggest adding www.history.org/foundation/terms.cfm, for Colonial Williamsburg. It has a lengthy Terms of Use page, which would provide a contrast to the less well-funded local museums. Colonial Williamsburg does clearly state that the content on its site can be used for personal and education use—not commercial uses.

Unit 5

Design Considerations and the Unit 4 Websites

The Avalon Project

• This site definitely fits KISS—very simple.
• I think the color used for the cells and words on the menu would be better in a darker color to provide greater contrast.
• The site’s purpose is to provide availability to an archive of documents. It seems that this website uses the right amount of technology given that its objective is apparently to provide access to selected documents. Nothing flashy here.
•  It isn’t that clear when it says “relevant to the fields of Law, History, Economics, Politics, Diplomacy and Government” in its Statement of Purpose and Document Inclusion Policy. Not sure how they decided on relevance and who is making the decisions about what to include.
• The Contact Us had a bad link—nothing there when I clicked on it.
• They do have the copyright symbol and year.
• One can get back to the Home Page from the other pages.
•  The structure of the site looks pretty straightforward—a hierarchy. It has a home page, menu across the top of major sections, list of documents within a section, and list of chapters or parts of a document. It doesn’t give a full “breadcrumb trail” that shows how one got to a particular page.
• I tried using wave.webaim.org on it—it says that (1) it doesn’t indicate what language the page is in, (2) alt text is insufficient in one area, (3) it lacks heading structure, (4) a layout table can cause reading and navigation problems, (5) unordered list can make it harder for users of assistive technologies.

Romantic Circles

• My initial reaction is that this site is too busy and the home page requires one to scroll down 3 times to get to the bottom. I wonder if the target audience (academic) feels overwhelmed, or if it appreciates the abundance of information.
• The font is small. 
• The home page does provide a lot of open space around the boxes in the middle.
•  I like that it says right at the top what the purpose of the site is, who publishes it, and who the editors are.
• It has the About link in top right corner of home page, which is good.

Amiens Cathedral Project

•  My first reaction is that everything is so small—I mentioned that in my previous blog. I saw that Cohen and Rosenzweig had the same reaction. Although it isn’t just the very small thumbnails that I find frustrating, but also that, after I click on a thumbnail, the selected photo is still very small. I tried a different browser, but it made no difference. I end up feeling that this site isn’t very useful. What’s the point of a site centered on providing visual information if you can’t see it?
• On the positive side, it is easy to navigate with the menu at the bottom and the thumbnail pictures and drawing, and there’s plenty of white space around the central artwork on the home page.
• This is one of those sites where one needs to figure out or intuit the site’s purpose on one’s own. I can’t find an About the Site page to explain the purpose, who created it, when it was created, or when/if it has been updated. 

Web Creation Tool Options

I think I’ll start by trying Weebly or something else that is very user friendly. I talked with someone who is a librarian and has developed several web sites. She said that Weebly is really easy to learn. She also said that even though WordPress is the “gold standard” for individuals and businesses, it can be harder to learn. I’ve never created a web site before, so I don’t want to spin wheels and get frustrated trying to figure out technology in the short amount of time we have to complete the project. I also don’t want to invest a lot of money in this since I am just beginning to learn this type of technology.

Possible Project and Web Presence I Might Need

I’ve been exploring the ideas I mentioned in my previous blog. I would like to do something that provides both text interpretation and visuals so I get experience handling both. Also, it seems to me that a text-only page is, to some degree, not using the advantages of the web.

If I go with a set of pages on how home appliances have evolved over several decades in the 20^th century, I would like to be able to present a page for each decade. Something like a kitchen-laundry room with various appliances available in that decade. Each page would be consistent in terms of the placement of appliances. I’d like to be able to allow a viewer to click on an appliance to get some text about its features, use, and related information.

Having said that, I am concerned about copyright on pictures, as well as getting access to what I need. NVCC has the Washington Post and New York Times, but not the Proquest women’s magazine database, which would be ideal. I don’t know if NVCC has agreements with other Virginia public university libraries so that I might be able to access that magazine database. I looked through some 1923 issues of the Washington Post, and I didn’t find ads for appliances (other than radios and Victrolas). Plus, the Washington Post database warns about not reproducing anything—I’m not sure if that prohibits use of ads for educational purposes like a class project.

I was thinking I might need to draw each page by hand to avoid copyright problems. I can draw, but am not sure how easily that would transfer to a web page. I might have less control over color once I uploaded a drawing. I also noted that there are quite a few web sites already out there that show the evolution of home appliances. A different possibility using the Washington Post might be to focus on health tips and guidance in prior decades, but I haven’t explored that yet. It would likely be less visual, although I might be able to use product ads.

It would probably be easier to take photos of the oldest existing Old Town buildings and provide some text on each one. I might need to go to the Alexandria library to look up some information in primary sources. I have a secondary source that contains photos that are about 30 years (?) old that would provide me with a starting point. It is organized by street address, whereas I’d be trying to organize by date or decade. One difficulty, though, is that the date when many old buildings were constructed is not clear. 

Unit 4

Unit 4

Attempt at chronologically ordering the web sites:

I'm not sure to what extent I can use the copyright dates to put these in order. There are sometimes dates within the sites, too, to give some clue. But I'm also making some judgements based on what's on the site--just text or text with photos vs. 3D tours and reconstructions of sites that are long gone.

1. Avalon - legal site just has text documents and a 2008 copyright; looks old because it is so simple, but maybe it only dates to 2008?
2. Valley of the Shadow - the copyright is from 1993-2007, but it has more complexity than Avalon, not sure if the copyright means anything was online at that point--maybe just that some information that is on the site now was copyrighted in 1993?
3. American Memory was launched in 1994 - it isn't as flashy as later sites, but I find the recorded interviews very interesting and ability to search through so much
4. Dickinson Electronic Archives was originally launched in 1994, but it has been updated over time. It has the scrolling banner of "headlines" and lots of text, pictures and photos.
5. Romantic Circles is an online refereed journal that goes back to at least 1996, but it has clearly been maintained and updated over time; it has the scrolling banner and is pretty complex with lots of drawings and paintings and various parts to the site. It is similar to the Dickinson site.
6. Lifeouttacontext - has dates of 1999-2015 - it's got text, photos, tweets, while Eye Level may be later (2005-2017?) and has a video
7. Hawthorne in Salem has photos and text and says it was made available in 2002
8. Persepolis has a copyright of 2003 and says the last update was 2008--lots of photos and 3D, but not as sophisticated as later 3D sites
9. Hurricane Digital Memory Bank looks like it's from 2005, based on notes on the site--2005 is when Hurricane Katrina occurred--there are images and a tagged map
10. April 16 Archive - Primarily photos and text, 2011 copyright but the mass shooting occurred in 2007
11. Digital Karnak has a copyright of 2008--it's very interactive with a sliding timeline, animations, videos, use of Google maps, and diagrams of models; there's a lot of detail on this site
12. Amiens Cathedral - I couldn't get all of this to work (e.g., Quicktime movies) or find any dates. I wondered why so many of the photos are so small.
13. Oyez - site on Supreme Court looks as if it has posts going back as far as 2010; there's quite a bit going on including 3D tours of the court building; high resolution photos; 
14. Shenandoah at War is pretty sophisticated with a sliding timeline, paintings, text, link to a Google map, copyright 2017 but an article dated at least as early as 2015
15. Lascaux - I didn't find a copyright date, but this is very impressive with its 3D simulations of the cave system and paintings.
16. Shenandoah at War has dates 2015-2017--has a timeline, paintings, text, link to Google map and is pretty interactive
17. Journey through Hallowed Ground has a copyright of 2017 and is pretty complex and polished looking

My suggestions for other sites are:

1. Northern Virginia--sophisticated, polished site--http://www.mountvernon.org/
2. Also Virginia--www.history.org for Colonial Williamsburg has a whole list of different multimedia and interactive games and puzzles
3. When I was looking at Lascaux, I ended up seeing that the French government has some very, very cool, sophisticated and informative sites-- for example on World War I,  http://archeologie1418.culture.fr/ and more at http://archeologie.culture.fr/

Unit 3

Unit 3

Of the many sites I viewed for this unit, I found sites with several different purposes. 

• The expressions of an individual: The History Blog - An individual with interests in primarily European ancient and medieval history who posts what he has found interesting. You can contact him, but it wasn’t clear to me how one would comment otherwise.
• Another example, with what seems to be a more political point of view is War Historian.

• A site associated with a museum or institution:  Boundary Stones, WETA’s Local History Blog - Assorted articles or blogs about DC, Virginia, and Maryland history.

• Sites open for the exchange of information, discussion and photos – Facebook page on NorthernVirginia History - People on Facebook can post on the site, and others can see and react. They do not appear to be in any particular order.

•  Providing tools for teaching history – Learn NC - Now defunct, but the site was active from 1997-2013 and provided lesson plans, professional development, and resources to support K-12 education in North Carolina. The information remains and I will likely go back and take a longer look.

• For-profit sites – Ancestry - I have made quite a bit of use of this site. Although I have to pay for it, the company behind it appears to reinvest some of the money back into making more resources available. I’m not sure how easily one could use it to do broader research, beyond individual genealogies. Users can contact others to ask for permission to see family trees or ask for information.

As I was looking at the many suggested web sites, I decided to search for “virtual reality history” because I think it has a lot of potential for presenting historical information in an engaging way. I found several interesting sites and articles, although these were not blogs.

•   360 Degree Virtual Tours – Appears to be a site for displaying examples of a company’s 3-dimensional history-related videos. I believe it uses Vimeo. Although the video quality isn’t as good as film and there isn’t any verbal interpretation, the videos provide nice examples of the potential for virtual reality (VR). You can spin around horizontally or vertically. The musical background is a distraction. This reminded me of a concern I’ve had in the past when I taught business courses—the feeling that I was supposed to entertain students (i.e., with anecdotes) to keep their attention. New technologies may help attract and interest students and maintain their attention, but will it improve understanding and retention?

•  BBC News  had an article (4 August 2015) about how The British Museum was running a trial with VR technology for exploring its collection. The trial involved inviting visitors to navigate a VR Bronze Age roundhouse. Viewers could “interact with” 3D scans of such objects as gold bracelets to explore different interpretations for the objects’ use.  Only visitors aged 13 or over were allowed to use the headsets in the British Museum. Families with younger children could use a Samsung Galaxy tablet or enter a dome with an interactive screen. The article also indicated London’s Natural History Museum had begun using VR technology in June 2015 so viewers could “experience an underwater environment at the dawn of life on Earth.” Both museums were using Samsung Gear VR headsets.

• Another article Virtual reality takes public on historytour of shipwreck island (Belcher, T. 1 December 2016). briefly described some of the work that went into a “digital visualisation of Beacon island developed at the Curtin HIVE (Hub for Immersive Visualisation and eResearch) and The University of Western Australia (UWA) as part of an Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage project led by UWA and the Western Australian Museum.” Viewers could use a Google Cardboard 'App' using their smartphone as a head-mounted display, to view the island.

•  There is a webpage titled 20 Wonderful Online Museums and Sites for Virtual Field Trips to Use in Class  I looked at some of the "online museums": the Smithsonian’s Natural History Museum shows 3D views of current and past exhibits with no text or sound interpretation, while the National Women’s History Museum provides online exhibits that are like slide shows with text. Chicago’s Oriental Institute allows a viewer to spin around exhibit rooms. Each 3D photo has a small amount of interpretative text. I had to laugh when I saw that I could spin down to study the floor.

Unit 2

This is my post for Unit 2 in HIST 218.
May 26, 2017

My reactions to the introductory chapter of Daniel J. Cohen and Roy Rosenzweig's Digital History: A Guide to Gathering, Preserving, and Presenting the Past on the Web. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006).

I was pleased to find the chapter interesting, well-written, and easy to read. The discussion about some historians' and writers' very positive and negative predictions for the effects of technology and the web on history as a discipline seemed extreme (pp. 1-2). Perhaps their extreme stances were a way to get published and get attention.

I think it is true that the Internet does not do a good job of distinguishing "between the true and the false, the important and the trivial" as Gertrude Himmelfarb stated ("A Neo-Luddite Reflects on the Internet," Chronicle of Higher Education, 1 November 1996). It does provide greater democratization of information because more individuals can produce information available to the public at large without gatekeepers like journal editors and book publishers deciding what is to be made available. Who should decide what is important versus trivial? I like the fact that more information is available, and that I may be able to find the detailed information that I am looking for without having to travel to libraries or wait to borrow sources through inter-library loan. However, it requires more work on the part of the person receiving the information to determine its credibility.

I think accessibility is one of the greatest advantages of "The History Web," as Cohen and Rosenzweig label it. That accessibility may allow professional and amateur historians to be more efficient and productive in the amount of work they can do and reach a broader audience. It may allow historians to access a broader array of sources than in the past. In addition, it may make it easier to do quantitative and statistical studies that require searching a high volume of documents and sources. Perhaps more historical research can be based on more broadly representative samples (e.g., of individuals, locations) than were possible before the Internet age and digitization of historical resources.

The accessibility and democratization of data can also lead to a downside--an overwhelming volume of information. As I navigate through a web page, I am often required to make a choice about whether to continue reading a block of text on a current page or click on links to other pages. At times, I am concerned about whether I am missing something important or if I have viewed everything I needed to see. I think that creates a degree of stress for those reading online.

In addition, there is the frustration that a lot of historical information is only available for a fee. I have often decided that I am unwilling to pay the fee to access a journal publication or book chapter. As a social science researcher who works for a small non-profit organization that is not affiliated with a university library, I may skip some sources or rely only on what is in the publicly available abstracts. I think the fees (e.g., $25) are much too high. So this gatekeeping has a counteracting effect on the democratization of data I mentioned above.

One of my biggest interests and curiosities about history is what it was like to live in another period of time. As an undergraduate over 35 years ago, the history courses I took seemed very focused on political and military history and it was more difficult to find courses on social and cultural history. The study of history appeared to be focused on the elites. Although I think it is important to understand the large political, economic, and military trends and events, I also want to know what it was like to live when those events were occurring. Was most of the population even aware of the political and military events?

Based on my personal experience, it seems that historians, particularly those in public history, are making greater use of what I consider to be a major advantage of technology for increasing individuals' understanding of history--the ability to involve additional senses and a third dimension. For some time, it has been possible for the public to go to sites like Colonial Williamsburg to get a more experiential and immersive view of history. I would like to see even more of this kind of approach to educating students and the public about history, and I think new technologies add tools for doing so. For example, I recently read that Historic Royal Palaces now provide visitors to Banqueting House, Whitehall Palace, with headphones and something resembling a block of wood that allows you to "activate memories, images and voices" and "become immersed in a world you personally create." Using binaural sound, a visitor listens in on conversations and hears voices that seem to surround one, and at the end of the tour the block begins to throb to represent the heart of King Charles I as he walks to his execution (Sandra Lawrence. "History and Fun Haunt the Royal Palaces," British Heritage Travel, 37 (6), November/December 2016, pp. 24-25). There have also been researchers experimenting with the use of virtual reality to try to build understanding and empathy (Building Empathy Through Virtual Reality. Rutgers Office of Instructional and Research Technology. Retrieved from: https://oirt.rutgers.edu/building-empathy-through-virtual-reality/ on May 26, 2017.)

POSSIBLE TOPIC FOR PROJECT: One possibility is to use my Dad's photos, my photos from a visit to two former airbases in England, and memorabilia to study his experience as a sheet metal mechanic stationed in southeast England during World War II. (He's no longer living, so I can't ask him anything about his experiences.) Most of the history of the Army Air Corps is either about its leadership or about flight crews. The experience of ground crews has gotten far less attention.  Another alternative is to use photos I took from a recent trip to Venice and Florence to pick a historic location and describe its history.

LOCAL HISTORY SITES: In viewing the various web sites, I appreciated the fact that more information is online. I used to drive out to Fairfax County Library's The Virginia Room to do genealogical research 15 years or so ago. Online information would have saved me a lot of gas and time. However, the ability to walk through the stacks in a library has allowed me an opportunity to find other sources with useful information that I might not have found through a card catalog or online search.