rightsstatements.org for digital objects in ArchivesSpace?
Rimkus, Kyle R
Hello all,
Are there any good examples or community best practices people can point to in the ArchivesSpace world around assigning rightsstatements.org rights statements to content in ArchivesSpace, especially digital objects? The many options for assigning rights statements in the system can be overwhelming, and we’re wondering if any of you may have an approach that has worked for you that you’re willing to share with us.
Thank you,
Kyle
--
Kyle R. Rimkus
Librarian for Digital Programs and Partnerships
Associate Professor
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Wiedeman, Gregory
Hi Kyle,
We kind of discussed this during the DadoCM cohorts. This is a good example of why DadoCM recommends that ASpace digital objects are manifestations of archival objects/components, as then rights statements or licenses would be the same as a Conditions Governing Use notes. This way it could inherit down and we could mange this info at the collection level.
Similar to the DadoCM’s recommendation on Conditions Governing Access, it would be ideal if ASpace handled both machine-readable and human-focused versions of the same Use note, similar to how ASpace handles dates/date expressions. I believe this is what the Rights Statement field is supposed to do, but to me it’s really overdone and we don’t use it locally. I don’t know that anyone really maintains PREMIS-level rights info in practice or if that’s useful. We just need a place to put a URI with an unstructured note field that could not accidently be published.
Thus, our collection-level rights info lives in a spreadsheet and we maintain machine-readable rights information alongside our digital objects. This is generally a CC License if we own rights or a rightstatement.org statement if we do not or there are other complications. This gets included in IIIF manifests and then indexed into ArcLight as part of the archival object/component where it is displayed to a user. So, we kind of fix the level where the record applies I the frontend.
After writing this, I’m now considering making another attempt to move collection-level rights info to ASpace, as that’s ideally where it should be managed. Then we can read this rights info when building manifests. This way it could still display for every digital object but usually only be managed at the collection level. The people digitizing would only have to override that info if needed as archival description intends.
Hope this helps!
Greg
Gregory Wiedeman
University Archivist
M.E. Grenander Department of Special Collections & Archives
University at Albany, SUNY
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Archivesspace_Users_Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
Archivesspace_User...@lyrasislists.org.
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/a/lyrasislists.org/d/msgid/Archivesspace_Users_Group/CH3PR11MB7676261AE003D79225AF141DA07DA%40CH3PR11MB7676.namprd11.prod.outlook.com.
Rimkus, Kyle R
Thank you, Greg. It’s nice to know how you all have approached this issue. We would like to store our rightsstatements.org rights statements for certain digital objects in ArchivesSpace rather than outside of it, and in our case would envision this as being most useful on the digital object level. We’ve also been debating whether it makes most sense in a Rights Statement or a Conditions Governing Use note. It’s interesting to see that others are struggling with this too.
Kyle
--
Kyle R. Rimkus
Librarian for Digital Programs and Partnerships
Associate Professor
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign