{"schema_version":1,"experiment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp11_mechanism_context_external20_20260804","research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp11_external_scrutiny_20260804","cell_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics","opaque_id":"deadweight_loss_reduction__art_aesthetics__B","search_lanes":{"direct_problem":{"queries":["museum image licensing reproduction fees public domain deterrent reuse study","museum image licensing fees rights permissions transaction costs revenue digitization study","scholars abandon publication museum image reproduction fees survey","art historians reproduction fees unable publish images museum study permission costs"],"source_ids":["S1","S3","S8"],"no_result_note":null},"closest_prior_art":{"queries":["museum open access high resolution public domain images policy zero fee pilot evaluation","museum open content program pilot evaluation image reuse revenue workload open access","museum open access policy impact reuse downloads case study measurable","site:si.edu open access impact report museums Kapsalis"],"source_ids":["S2","S4","S5","S6"],"no_result_note":null},"historical_terminology":{"queries":["Simon Tanner 2004 reproduction charging models rights policy digital images American art museums PDF","museum picture library charges slide library image bank reproduction rights fees older terminology study","A Culture of Copyright scoping study open access digital cultural heritage collections UK PDF fees"],"source_ids":["S1","S3","S8"],"no_result_note":null},"products_practices_standards":{"queries":["public domain museum digital surrogates licensing fees open access GLAM Europeana rights statement standard","museum open access high resolution public domain images policy zero fee pilot evaluation","standardized international rights statements museum public domain metadata open access"],"source_ids":["S2","S4","S5","S6"],"no_result_note":null},"non_english_regional":{"queries":["site:rijksmuseum.nl/nl Rijksstudio afbeeldingen downloaden gratis rechten hergebruik hoge resolutie","site:louvre.fr/fr réutilisation images domaine public haute définition tarif autorisation","site:museodelprado.es reutilización imágenes dominio público alta resolución tarifas derechos"],"source_ids":["S3","S6"],"no_result_note":null},"composition_subproblems":{"queries":["museum open access tier public domain rights review privacy donor restrictions high resolution","museum open access policy cultural sensitivity indigenous collections safeguards","museum reproduction fee direct service cost standardized self service delivery","pilot sunset monitoring museum open access image reuse revenue workload"],"source_ids":["S1","S2","S4","S5","S7","S8"],"no_result_note":null}},"sources":[{"source_id":"S1","title":"Reproduction charging models & rights policy for digital images in American art museums: A Mellon Foundation study","url":"https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/104647946/Reproduction_charging_models_TANNER_Published_2004_GREEN_VoR.pdf","publisher":"King's College London / Andrew W. Mellon Foundation","date_or_year":"2004","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","language":"English","claims_supported":["A survey of 100 US art museums and interviews with 20 documented multi-step written-request, rights-check, licensing, invoicing, payment, and delivery workflows.","Eighty percent of surveyed services processed fewer than 1,000 annual transactions, and none of the interviewed museums reported significant surplus or profit after expenditure.","Rights and reproduction revenue was small relative to admissions, retail, membership, and fundraising; service costs and legitimate new-photography costs nevertheless existed.","The historical literature used terms such as imaging and rights services, reproduction charging, differential pricing, picture rights, and image sales."]},{"source_id":"S2","title":"The Impact of Open Access on Galleries, Libraries, Museums, & Archives","url":"https://siarchives.si.edu/sites/default/files/pdfs/2016_03_10_OpenCollections_Public.pdf","publisher":"Smithsonian Institution","date_or_year":"2016-04-27","source_type":"SECONDARY_RESEARCH","language":"English","claims_supported":["By 2016, more than 50 GLAM institutions had pursued open access to varying degrees, showing that unrestricted reuse of eligible digitized collections was already an established sector practice.","The report associates open access with increased collection use and awareness, lower rights-management overhead, staff realignment, fundraising opportunities, and possible limited losses of licensing revenue.","It summarizes an 11-museum study finding no significant surplus from enforced image restrictions and perceived gains exceeding losses after transition to open access."]},{"source_id":"S3","title":"A Culture of Copyright: A scoping study on open access to digital cultural heritage collections in the UK","url":"https://www.nationalcollection.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-03/A%20Culture%20of%20Copyright%20-%20A.%20Wallace_compressed.pdf","publisher":"Towards a National Collection","date_or_year":"2022-02","source_type":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","language":"English","claims_supported":["New empirical data covering 195 UK GLAM organizations found inconsistent copyright policies, reuse terms, technical restrictions, and levels of open publication.","Only 35 of 121 organizations with searchable digital collections published open assets, while 28 lacked a formal copyright policy, supporting continued regional barriers and uncertainty.","The report identifies restrictive copyright practice around public-domain collections as a barrier to access and reuse while also emphasizing that rights must be resolved at the outset."]},{"source_id":"S4","title":"Ordering and Reproducing Images","url":"https://www.getty.edu/museum/image-request/","publisher":"J. Paul Getty Museum","date_or_year":"Current policy accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"English","claims_supported":["Getty provides available digital images of public-domain artworks under CC0 for any purpose without permission or fee.","Other images remain subject to written requests, case-by-case consideration, approval, and fees, demonstrating a functioning rights-sensitive access tier.","The policy distinguishes no-fee reuse of existing eligible files from chargeable services and restricted or copyrighted material."]},{"source_id":"S5","title":"The Met Makes Its Images of Public-Domain Artworks Freely Available through New Open Access Policy","url":"https://www.metmuseum.org/ja/press-releases/open-access-2017-news","publisher":"The Metropolitan Museum of Art","date_or_year":"2017-02-07","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"English","claims_supported":["The Met adopted free, unrestricted CC0 reuse for more than 375,000 images of public-domain artworks for scholarly and commercial purposes.","The policy excludes works because of copyright or uncertain status, privacy or publicity, third-party ownership, artist/donor/lender restrictions, or inadequate digital-image quality.","The director and museum leadership publicly authorized the policy, demonstrating an identifiable institutional adopter and authorizer."]},{"source_id":"S6","title":"Rijksmuseum lanceert Collectie Online","url":"https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/pers/persberichten/rijksmuseum-lanceert-collectie-online","publisher":"Rijksmuseum","date_or_year":"2024-11-26","source_type":"FIRST_PARTY_PRODUCT","language":"Dutch","claims_supported":["The Rijksmuseum reports making 125,000 high-resolution images freely available through Rijksstudio in 2012 and subsequently expanding online access substantially.","Its current platform supports searching, collecting, downloading, and sharing collection images and information.","The long-running Dutch implementation shows that free high-resolution collection-image access is not confined to recent US practice."]},{"source_id":"S7","title":"Towards Better Sharing of Cultural Heritage: An Agenda for Copyright Reform","url":"https://creativecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Towards-Better-Sharing-of-Cultural-Heritage-%E2%80%94-An-Agenda-for-Copyright-Reform.pdf","publisher":"Creative Commons","date_or_year":"2022","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["Copyright public-domain status alone is insufficient for deciding whether culturally sensitive heritage should be opened.","Privacy, personality rights, Indigenous customary laws and protocols, traditional-cultural-expression interests, and community wishes can justify limits outside copyright.","The guidance recommends joint curation and consideration of source-community interests, supporting eligibility safeguards rather than indiscriminate opening."]},{"source_id":"S8","title":"Statement Regarding a National Policy on Granting of Reproduction Rights in Art-Historical Publishing","url":"https://www.collegeart.org/standards-and-guidelines/guidelines/educationsl-publishing-permissions","publisher":"College Art Association","date_or_year":"Based on 1995 questionnaire; current page accessed 2026-08-04","source_type":"OFFICIAL_GUIDANCE","language":"English","claims_supported":["A professional-association questionnaire found highly variable reproduction fees, ranging from zero to $300 or more, commonly borne by authors.","The guidance reports documented publication cancellations and inhibited visual support for scholarly arguments because of reproduction-rights costs.","It recommends waiving or reducing scholarly publication fees and approximating the direct production cost when an image-supply charge is necessary."]}],"problem_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"The problem exists: historical and current research documents fees, discretionary workflows, inconsistent reuse policies, and some publication cancellations, while current museum policies confirm that restricted and open tiers coexist. Evidence specifically quantifying applicant-level abandonment among artists, educators, and small publishers after encountering fees or delays is sparse, so the proposal's full observable-state claim is only partly established.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S8"],"uncertainty":"Available evidence is strongest for scholarly publishing and institutional policy. It does not provide a representative contemporary estimate of abandoned requests, causal effects by applicant type, or the share of restricted images that are genuinely low risk."},"adopter_evidence":{"status":"SUPPORTED","finding":"Museum directors, boards, or delegated collections and rights leadership are identifiable authorizers: the Met, Getty, and Rijksmuseum have each implemented collection-image access policies, and sector reports document many additional adopting institutions.","source_ids":["S2","S4","S5","S6"],"uncertainty":"The exact allocation of authority differs by institution and may be constrained by donor agreements, lenders, rightsholders, public law, or source-community governance."},"implementation_evidence":{"status":"PARTLY_SUPPORTED","finding":"The core intervention—free standardized self-service reuse for eligible public-domain images while retaining review or restrictions for other assets—is already implemented at multiple major museums and has operated for years. Evidence also suggests higher use and reduced rights-management overhead. The searched sources do not document the proposal's exact 90-day controlled design, preregistered distributional thresholds, complaint triggers, or rollback protocol.","source_ids":["S2","S4","S5","S6","S7"],"uncertainty":"Sector reports mainly use observational cases and retrospective comparisons. Site-specific effects on abandonment, workload, revenue continuity, attribution failures, and culturally sensitive exposure remain uncertain."},"prior_art":{"disposition":"ESTABLISHED_PRACTICE","closest_analogues":[{"name":"Getty public-domain Open Content tier","source_ids":["S4"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Existing public-domain digital images are offered under CC0 without permission or fee, while other images remain case-by-case and potentially fee-bearing.","remaining_difference":"The public page does not specify a time-limited randomized evaluation, preregistered outcome thresholds, distributional analysis, or rollback rules."},{"name":"The Met Open Access policy","source_ids":["S5"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Free unrestricted CC0 reuse is applied to eligible public-domain images, with explicit exclusions for copyright uncertainty, privacy, third-party ownership, donor/lender restrictions, and unavailable-quality files.","remaining_difference":"The documented policy is a standing rollout rather than the proposal's bounded experimental pilot with abandonment, workload, revenue, complaint, and incidence measurement."},{"name":"Rijksmuseum Rijksstudio and Collection Online","source_ids":["S6"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"The museum has provided large numbers of high-resolution collection images free of charge since 2012 and supports downloading and sharing at scale.","remaining_difference":"The retained source does not document request-level controls, preregistered safeguards, or causal evaluation against the former permission-and-fee process."},{"name":"Sector-wide GLAM open-access programs","source_ids":["S2","S3"],"same_problem":true,"same_causal_lever":true,"overlap":"Many institutions have removed technical, copyright, permission, and fee barriers from eligible digitized collections, with tiering and rights resolution widely discussed.","remaining_difference":"Adoption remains uneven, especially in the UK sample, and rigorous evidence about which local users are deterred and which safeguards bind is incomplete."}],"contrastive_claim_remaining":"At a particular still-restrictive museum, phased or randomized zero-fee standardized access for a pre-audited low-risk collection will materially increase completed reuse and reduce abandonment among budget-constrained creators and educators, without exceeding preregistered workload, revenue-continuity, attribution, complaint, cultural-sensitivity, or distributional thresholds. This is an incremental local effectiveness-and-safeguards claim, not a new intervention category.","contrastive_claim_falsifier":"A representative pre-audit finds few genuinely eligible restricted assets; or, among eligible assets, the controlled rollout fails to increase completed reuse or reduce abandonment relative to baseline; or benefits occur only by exceeding any preregistered rights, privacy, cultural-stewardship, staff-workload, revenue, attribution, complaint, or equity threshold.","confidence":"HIGH","search_limitations":"The bounded search used eight retained sources spanning US, UK, and Dutch evidence, historical terminology, professional guidance, sector research, and first-party implementations. It did not exhaust every museum, language, jurisdiction, unpublished evaluation, or contractual arrangement. Public sources rarely report request-level abandonment or negative incidents, and this search cannot establish world novelty, patentability, freedom to operate, market size, or realized impact."},"researchability_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Independent research and professional guidance document restrictive workflows, variable fees, inhibited scholarship, and some cancelled publications; a large UK audit documents continuing inconsistency and limited open publication.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S8"]},"identifiable_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Museum leadership and delegated collections/rights functions are identifiable policy authorities, as demonstrated by first-party policy adoption at Getty, the Met, and Rijksmuseum.","source_ids":["S4","S5","S6"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Although the intervention package is established practice, a museum-specific controlled estimate of its effect on abandonment and completed reuse, jointly constrained by preregistered safety, workload, revenue, and equity thresholds, remains distinct and falsifiable.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S7"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"A pre-audit followed by a collection-level stepped-wedge or time-limited pilot is bounded, reversible, measurable, and technically plausible because comparable eligibility-tiered access systems already operate.","source_ids":["S4","S5","S6"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"Cultural, privacy, copyright, donor, lender, ownership, and provenance constraints are real but can be screened before release; the pilot explicitly excludes unresolved assets and includes suspension and rollback. Source-community consultation remains mandatory where customary interests may attach.","source_ids":["S5","S7"]},"adequate_search_evidence":{"status":"PASS","rationale":"All six required lanes were searched adversarially. Exactly eight retained sources were opened, representing seven publishers and including primary research, official guidance, and multiple first-party implementations in more than one region and language.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S4","S5","S6","S7","S8"]}},"strict_success":false,"screen_survival":false,"remaining_research_value":"MODERATE","recommended_next_step":"Treat generic rights-sensitive museum open access as established practice, not as the research contribution. At one still-restrictive institution, first audit a bounded collection and record the legal, privacy, provenance, donor/lender, and source-community basis for every exclusion. Then preregister a 90-day collection-level stepped-wedge comparison of eligible assets against the ordinary process, measuring request initiation, completion, abandonment, user type, staff time, incremental service cost, licensing revenue, attribution/context failures, complaints, sensitive-use incidents, and group incidence. Stop or reverse automatically at the specified thresholds.","world_novelty_boundary":"This bounded public-web review establishes neither world novelty nor absence of unindexed, unpublished, patented, or proprietary implementations. It shows that the central problem–intervention package—eligibility-gated, no-fee, standardized reuse of public-domain museum images with restrictions retained for protected assets—was already implemented by multiple institutions and described sector-wide. The remaining research boundary is limited to rigorous local causal measurement, distributional effects, and operational safeguard thresholds."}