Guinness Archive framework– digitisations, dissemination of information, types of users and their needs, accessibility to information, intellectual property, cataloguing prioritisation and copyright.

Background: was founded on New Year’s Eve 1759, by a young brewer signed a 9000 year lease. It is brewed in 50 countries worldwide and enjoyed in over 150 countries world wide. It uses its heritage to promote itself. Guinness has a well-resourced archive which is well used in marketing. Its the only corporate archive open to the public in Ireland. They have barley grains from Tutankhamen’s tomb.

The interior of the Storehouse is in the shape of a glass of Guinness and the facility attracts 1 million visitors each year. It is the fourth largest brand experience in the world. The Storehouse is a brand experience, not just a heritage experience.

Advertising digitisation project:

Involved materials back to 1929 and covered both print and multimedia materials. The items were digitised for mainly marketing, but a side benefit was archiving and preservation. The project can be queried and marketing teams have created new products from the resulting inspiration. $18 million pounds has been made from products created with inspiration from the archive – 30% of new products, began with an idea from the archive.

Genealogy digitisation project:

Guinness holds 20,000 employee records from the 1880s to 2000s. They are very rich in detail and help fill the gaps resulting from the loss of national records during the Irish Civil War. Often had generation of families working in the brewery. Due to the growth in interest in genealogy, they were receiving an increasing number of requests.”Brewery life – trace your Guinness roots”. In house terminals were made available to researchers to access and more recently the records have been made available online.

Data protection:

The records have some information that could have some personal information. They can not publish any records for people still living, or where they don’t know their time of death and they also do not publish rates of pay or medical information.

Archive:

The Storehouse is no longer the only place for this data. The aim however, is that a visit to the centre is the start of a brand experience, not just a one off visit. At the Storehouse, they have a digital project where they have terminals to Facebook or Tweet about their experience of it. Each user gets a unique token with an RFID tag, which helps to enhance the user experience. The visitor provides their contact details and in return they receive a much richer experience. Guinness gets visitor data and the user gets a Guinness visitor only wallpaper which they can use as social currency with their friends – a value exchange.

Website:

25% of visitors attend the website before they come to the Storehouse and 10% book online. To help increase this latter, they provide additional information to help the visitor make the best choices about their visit. They also have a booking form for genealogical research access.

Guinness Stories:

To mark the 250^th anniversary of Guinness and in conjunction with the Irish Government, they resourced residents who had lived on the doorstep of the brewery, to record their stories of their experiences with the brand. The users were able to record and edit it themselves, which considering their average age was in the 70s is quite remarkable.

Visitors to the website are encouraged to add their own stories which then complement the companies own records.

Audio guides are provided free of charge to visitors at the Storehouse, but with the growth of mobile technologies they have now launched a mobile app for iOS, Android and Blackberry in five languages. It provides users with pre-visit, during visit and post-visit content. It also allows them to share their own experiences. The likelihood that visitors will recommend the Storehouse to family and friends is high – making the app sticky helps that process, when visitors go home and share the app, particularly the 360 degree view of the Dublin skyline from the top floor gallery. In future, they will include an augmented reality layer on that view.

Smart Library:

Guinness has local marketing teams in regional areas besides the main team in Dublin. They have used a wide range of tools available for these marketing teams, regardless of their location. Smart Library is available to all marketers or those doing marketing projects on behalf of Guinness. They have uploaded key iconic marketing items and can download low resolution copies for reference. When a high resolution copy is required, they must request it from the archive – thereby ensuring branch protection. All records are well resource with metadata. All marketing campaigns are also uploaded to Smart Library, with metadata, copyright, permissions and more, to enable other marketing teams to reuse or remix the campaign for their own markets.

Guinness 250 Website:

The focus was year long and created a celebration of the past and of the future, built on the foundation of the past. It was aimed at supporting media requests for this important event. As there was no complete published history, the website became a default one, with a wide range of information on a great range of topics about the heritage and development of the organisation. As a result, they were able to digitise a great number of images for inclusion on it. It was password protected and media were given access on confirmation of their credentials. It included both low and high resolution images which could be re-used. Post analysis, they discovered that 2 billion requests had been fulfilled by the site.

Emarketing and Branding:

This form of marketing, is much more immediate and engaging and is requiring a shift in thinking by marketing teams. Dominoes streamed feedback from their customers on billboards in Times Square, both good and bad. They use Facebook to tell stories or did you know, and tell your stories, most often using imaging, to engage with fans of the page. Archive content is being used to spark these entries.

Have a clearly defined mission statement – you have a brand. What is your unique selling point and what are you doing to promote it?

With the decrease in available resources, you need to be project specific, outlining the items which add real value back to the organisation and/or to yours users, so that you can justify the required expenditure.

You need to show the value back to your organisation, using metrics.

Should not operate in silos, but seek collaboration with partners, especially in GLAM sector.

And most of all, have fun with it!

NLA has 3 main methodologies for web archiving.

Pandora Archive has developed a world class archive of Australian websites, using PANDA, their digital archiving system. PANDA is a distributed system, so their partners can also use it. Other international library archiving systems are based on or similar to PANDA. They have developed persistent naming scheme and have arrangements with archiving and indexing agencies. As of 1st July 2008, it contained 19307 titles over 53 million files adding up to 2.2 TB of data (now over 2.4TB). Files can be a single PDF page, or an entire website. Over 50% of their files are government publications, but they also archived academic journals, blogs, podcasts and more. It is selective, because of the restrictions on staff resources etc. They have chosen their titles carefully and try to choose sustainable sources.

Domain name harvests – once a year, for between 3 and 6 weeks and in conjunction with the Internet Archive. In 2008, they are looking at crawling a billion files. Copyright is a major drawback. The websites are crawled by the Internet Archive and the files are then sent to the NLA. There are gaps where the website publisher bans bots, and the crawler also cant follow embedded links, so there are gaps in the domain harvests. There is also issues with Australian websites without the .au in their name. Data is not publicly available at this time, although it is being use by researchers.

Archive It – is an Internet Archive product, where you can pay money to have your website archived. Sites archived using this process include the PNG governmental and research institute websites the 2007 general election – including content from YouTube an MySpace, Cambodian election 2008, Burmese monk uprising 2007 and more. There are restrictions in that you cant recapture missed files and cant present it the way you want.
Still working on arrangements with other Web 2.0 content, ie. Bebo, Flickr, Facebook etc.

Librarians should think to tell Pandora about resources they should be archiving. Take responsibility for your web presence, make sure it remains or is archived elsewhere.

Will not be making PANDAs version 4, but in future will be working with international partners to develop a new backbone to the system.

Idea of a national indigenous knowledge centre was flagged at the 20/20 summit, with the idea of regional centres in support was favourably supported.

Inspiration has come from Mexico and other countries. Suspicion has been aroused by these centres as they seem to appear in countries where indigenous culture has been exploited or neglected.

In Central Australia alone there are 5 regions, with up to 20 languages in each region. Such a centre has to cater to them all.

NTL started testing this idea out nine years ago. Three remote communities were chosen to trial the knowledge centre concept. Had a vision of a physical space which would be interpretive, keeping, a museum, a library etc, the aim to improve access relevant to local communities and with the ability to assist in creating and hosting new content.

Several pilot services were launched but have not been sustained. In 2004, the Our Story database was launched and this has been successful. Research showed that the Our Story database had stimulated communities to conduct further research, including through the use ditigal resources.

Tea Tree Gully has had quite a successful result, with stories, place names, oral histories and much more. Internet access, books and information are available in a centre open 5 days a week. The community has taken ownership of their centre.

Indigenous knowledge had not been acknowledge as a legitimate structure until the 1980s. Indigenous peoples persisted in its maintenance and creation regardless. The need is now for improved access to information in its many and varied formats.

(session ran over time, so had to leave to get to next session)

Shauna Hicks from the Public Records Office of Victoria (PROV) spoke on “Archives in the 2st century”. In the new PROV reading room, each desk has power and computer outlets, enabling researchers to research online, take and upload photos of archival items and more. Their help desk uses a 1800 phone number, which users can call to preplan their trip or even to avoid their trip altogether. Records can be located through the website and copies ordered for mailout. Alternatively they can find out exactly what they need first and only have to make one trip instead of several.

Derek Whitehead from Swinburne, presented “Publish and perish – the meaning of publication in the online world” and what a can of worms that is?

Can something be “accessed, read and used” and not be published? Yes! Copyright, defamation, legal deposit and online content laws all have different definitions of published. Book publishing is different again and includes editing control, review, acceptance as a publication and commercial distribution.

Web publishing is putting information or transactions online – accessible on a web server. Published to the web (not “on”). Can we be online and published? Much debate about this. Theses are available through online depositories, but they are still not published. These are now running into copyright issues, with regard to cleared content, but the only thing that has changed is the delivery mechanism.
Archives and scholarly communication also fall into these grey areas? Is YouTube a publisher?

There is confusion over the broad and specialised meanings of copyright. Is everything now published because of the web? Online is more than a publishing medium. Think conversation, dialogue……

Questions/Thoughts:
- Do we need a word for online but unpublished?
- How will we determine ownership? (mashups, sharing etc)
- Online is not a digital version of analog. What rules apply?
- Copyright applies fully to online as a default. There is no Copyright 2.0.
- Metaphors are dangerous.
- Web helps capture an fix activities for commercial purposes – need to watch this.

What to do?
- Paper days laws threatens the online world.
- 3 actions – law reform
– need a new word for online but unpublished
– sue the appropriate copyright licensing (ie. creative commons, all rights etc).

The final paper this session was Jim Alexander from CAL on “Copyright and the Online Library”. Accessing content is changing by: changes to the traditional supply chain, entry of new intermediaries (search engines), culture of free use and rise of free content repositories.

Digital Rights management comes in 2 forms: technological including passwords, encryption, hardware/software controls. Rights Management Information: copyright, watermarks, digital signatures, metadata and now Digital Object Indentifiers (DOI0, which are growing in the publishing industry. 3 key principles of DRM are:
- identification of works and copyright of owners
- monitoring of access to and use of works
- facilitating payment
DRM must be of minimal burder to rights owners and users.

CAL is working on DRM, offering new services such as Digital Course Material (DCM), an online custom publication system for course support. Provides licensed content from over 40 publishers and can also incorporate institutions own licensed content.
Also Document Delivery Service – aimed at health/medical industry, giving access to content with rights cleared, quickly and conveniently.

Future: interoperable DRM for international online content access
- common rights management infrastructure
- choice for creators and quality for consumers