The Virtual Museum

Of course ' and, unfortunately, it happens ' without visitors, the attraction may have to shut down, frustrating the preservation goals of its founders, and taking away from an interested public's need, and even right, to learn about its past and various heritages, from political to religious; indeed, an historical site's closing because of lack of funding or visitors (often so closely tied) will also deny many untold numbers of citizens and other visitors the opportunity to learn.

And, in fact, for many institutions, very few people are visiting. Recent studies show measurable declines in “live” museum attendance, which have persisted over a long time (see, www.nea.gov/news/news09/SPPA-highlights.html).

While the studies did not claim or document a cause-and-effect relationship between this trend and the growth of the educational and cultural opportunities available online, in reality, the report states: “The Internet and mass media are reaching substantial audiences for the arts. ' More Americans view or listen to broadcasts and recordings of arts events (online) than attend them live” (see, www.nea.gov/news/news09/SP PA-highlights.html). In other words, today's audience for art, history and culture has many alternatives to visiting the traditional museum ' and they are voting with their touchpads. A National Endowment for the Arts 2008 survey stated that “nearly 40% (of Americans) used the Internet to view, listen to, download, or post artworks or performances” (see, www.nea.gov/news/news09/SPPA-high lights.html).

An e-Volving e-Commerce Sector

And why not? As one online museum directory states: “The Virtual Tours of Museums and Exhibits never closes. Visit our Online Tours anytime, and stay as long as you like” (see, www.virtualfreesites.com/museums.museums.html). Similarly, the online-only Museum of Family History highlights the advantages of this new format. “Creating a virtual museum, i.e., a museum that exists only on the Internet, has its advantages and offers unique opportunities,” a page on its Web site states. “Such a museum does not require the raising of funds (though contributions are gratefully accepted) to erect an actual building or pay salaries, but can be created by a person with imagination, time, knowledge and the means to do so, not to mention the material to fill such a museum” (see, www.museumoffamilyhistory.com/help-us-grow.htm).

Fortunately, the Internet is full of more than enough online museums to satisfy the demand of those seeking what the National Endowment of the Arts identifies as “virtual culture.” (For more, see, www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/science/12MUSE.html?pagewanted=all and www.virtualfreesites.com/museums.html.) Some are digital versions of bricks-and-mortar institutions, but others exist only in cyberspace. Some are professionally built and curated, while others are truly homemade. One unverified and unsubstantiated site claims that the number of online museum Web pages is growing at the rate of one per day (you be the judge and jury, at http://icom.museum/vlmp/overview.html#countries#countries).

Moreover, the ease of creating a Web site, and the availability of inexpensive tools to make visually stunning images, allows many smaller organizations that would not be able to promote themselves to a wider world, or would not likely attract visitors from a distance, to become instantly available to devotees, regardless of the devotees' place of residence. Just as the specialty retailer that once relied on highly targeted catalog mailing lists can now serve a dedicated customer base more cheaply through online marketing, a museum serving a narrow interest is only as far as the chair in front of a fan's home computer, and promotion of the Web address among the cognoscenti. Some have even melded social-networking tools with online museums to create a world of highly personalized museums of their own making and to share with others of a like persuasion (see, http://cabinet-of-wonders.blogspot.com/2009/03/news-museums-as-social-network.html). The virtual museum has become so popular that there is even an annual conference on the latest trends and issues in the field (see, www.archimuse.com/conferences/mw.html).

It's e-Commerce,
And Standards Apply

Although a virtual museum certainly provides “culture,” its Web site is really just as much a form of e-commerce ' soliciting contributions, promoting the name of the institution and selling memorabilia from the gift shop ' as any traditional dot-com widget-seller. For that reason, the concept of the online museum was seen by Internet organizers as so compelling that they created a separate domain, .museum, managed by the Museum Domain Management Association (“MuseDoma”) (see, http://musedoma.museum). This domain is limited by its bylaws to “Museums, professional museum associations, and individual members of the museum profession.” According to MuseDoma, having an alternative to the widely used .com, .org and .edu domains “enables museums, museum associations and museum professionals to register .museum Web sites and e-mail addresses. This, in turn, makes it easy for users to recognize genuine museum activity on the Internet,” at the height of the dot-com era (http://about.museum, emphasis added). In a two-step registration process, MuseDoma must first “determine an applicant's eligibility to hold a name in the domain,” after which the applicant can register through an authorized .museum registrar (see, http://about.museum/registrars).

The explanatory material at the MuseDoma Web site clearly articulates a goal of using the separate domain to create an online museum culture and community, and to foster exclusivity in what is otherwise a very decentralized online world, in which caveat emptor rules the day (whether or not the viewer has the knowledge or skills to know to be cautious at a purported museum site). MuseDoma also says:

The purpose of this domain is to reserve a segment of the DNS name space reserved for the use of museums; a name space whose conventions are defined by the museum community. The museum [top-level domain ("TLD)"] grants users a quick and intuitive way to verify the authenticity of a museum site. Conversely, since it is a type of formal third-party certification, museums using this name space obtain a way to assure visitors of the site's validity. (See, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.museum.)

With such a strong vetting process, MuseDoma wants to assure visitors that anyone or any entity with a .museum domain name is a “true” museum. It states so this way:

In other [TLDs], anyone can register a domain name including the letters “museum”. This does not mean they are museums. You will only find genuine museums in .museum! Eligibility for .museum is based on the definition of museum provided by the International Council of Museums (“ICOM”). A name in .museum tells Internet users that its holder is a museum, museums association or individual member of the museum professional [sic] according to criteria established by the museum community, itself. By its restriction to genuine museums, the domain validates and verifies the legitimacy of museums around the world. (See, http://about.museum/benefits.html.)

Indeed, a searchable list of sites registered in that domain appears at http://about.museum/find. (It's interesting, though, that my firm's widely used spam filter blocks the site, despite the site's benign purpose.) The size classifications in the museum bylaws governing the .museum domain seem tilted toward the larger institutions like the one named for one of the domain's founders, the J. Paul Getty Trust (see, http://musedoma.museum/corporate_bylaws.html).

Rewarding or Redundant?
The Sector Responds

Notwithstanding this effort to facilitate finding genuine culture online, many major cultural institutions have opted for the more traditional domains. The Web sites of the “top museums” named in online lists, such as those at www.toptenlinks.com/cat.php/Reference%3AMuseums%3AUS+Museums and www.americasbestonline.net/index.php/pages/museumsbestunitedstate.html, reveal almost complete .gov, .org and .edu registrations. Perhaps this reflects only that significant institutions followed the herd to those domains at the dawn of e-commerce in the 1990s, long before the .museum domain was established, which occurred in 2001. MuseDoma tries to counter these challenges in the FAQ section of its Web site, with answers to such questions as: “Why shouldn't we wait until more people have heard about .museum before going to the trouble and expense of registering?” and “We've invested a huge amount in branding our current domain name. Why would we want to change?” (see, http://about.museum/register/faq.html).

To survive against such widespread use of alternative domains by well-regarded institutions, MuseDoma tries to persuade potential registrants to “double pay.” It recommends that they maintain a .museum domain, and their existing one, in the name of building the .museum domain as a place for culture-lovers to find sites easily. “If a museum has a well-established and otherwise satisfactory domain identity, the most appropriate short-term action is probably to supplement, rather than replace, it with a newly-acquired name in .museum,” the organization says at http://about.museum/register/faq.html. The person seeking culture online, then, could go to a directory of the .museum domain, and flip through the list of all “authentic” museums found there ' the .museum domain becomes an online “signpost” to find Web sites and museums that the person searching had not known previously.

But in the age of Google and Bing, does anyone use the Internet that way, which, really, adds multiple steps, in favor of search engines that will take one directly to the site one wants? The concept that a person would go to a particular domain to find a particular type of Web site echoes e-commerce and the Web as it existed several e-generations ago, when “portals” were all the rage, before the existence of powerful search engines. Why should I pick through listings at a .museum directory, when Google or Bing or Yahoo can take me to exactly the place I want to be (or to a listing that is just as good)?

Also, today, a crucial skill for using the Internet for any information ' whether the data sought is news, culture or another type ' is assessment of a Web site's credibility. Many other Web sites, such as the well known www.snopes.com, www.quatloos.com, www.millersmiles.co.uk, www.truthorfiction.com and www.hoaxbusters.org, try to fill the need identified by the well intended folks behind the .museum domain. In other words, do most Web surfers today need the service that a specialized domain such as .museum provides? In an electronic version of the chicken-and-egg conundrum, until some museums use the domain, none will.

MuseDoma, however, believes it knows the answer. “Adopting a wait-and-see stance toward actively supporting .museum will ' certainly slow the rate at which the domain becomes known. In the worst of cases, it might be taken to indicate that something as specialized as a top-level domain dedicated to the museum community is not sustainable,” the organization's Web site states at http://about.museum/register/faq.html. Unfortunately for its organizers, perhaps this has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Regardless of one's philosophical position over the need for an online museum domain, the .museum organizers' advice also faces a hard financial challenge. While MuseDoma's noble goals may work well for a cultural elite unconstrained by such mundane commercial matters as budgets and staffing, they are less appealing when the cost of building the concept is borne by individual institutions, often themselves non-profits, rather than by donors.

Also, while the .museum selection criteria described by MuseDoma may try to ensure the integrity of the concept of a museum, that self-selection flies in the face of another, much stronger, Internet ethos, the so-called “information wants to be free” culture (see, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_wants_to_be_free). The democratization of information online allows anyone with access to a Web browser and an online account to find, publish or critique information. The Internet has enabled anyone to create an online museum to make information available to others, bypassing the cultural elite at traditional museums, at relatively little cost.

This is the educational and cultural do-it-yourself analog to the growth of e-commerce sites that created the disintermediation that has changed the role of the travel agent, bookstore and other well compensated middlemen, and the way that content is distributed in the 21st century in general. For example, a science journal reported the story of a self-labeled master collator who created a site linking to remote-camera videos of animals (see, www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55975 and www.sameasterson.com/map). Without the scrutiny of an organization such as MuseDoma, anyone can create a museum online, and the only protection against misinformation that the casual Internet user can rely on are his or her own skepticism, and the proclivity of Internet posters to expose shams and frauds by publishing corrective information on sites such as those listed above.

The Nitty e-Gritty

The concern for integrity of the .museum domain is also well taken, in light of the prevalence of quasi-charitable institutions that sometimes seem to exist more to pay the salaries of their officers and solicitors than to raise funds for a public purpose ' especially when the name is similar to a well known and trusted charity, but not close enough to trigger prosecutorial enforcement. There have been so many frauds that play on the gullibility of the well intentioned (e.g., http://abcnews.go.com/Business/PersonalBest/story?id=4228271&page=1) that many organizations now have lists and guidance available online to help people spot frauds (such as the Wise Giving initiative that is now a part of the Better Business Bureau's site at www.bbb.org/us/charity), or the American Institute of Philanthropy's Charity Watch (www.charitywatch.org). Similar sites include:

• www.bbb.org/us/Charity-Reports;
• www.bbb.org/charity-reviews/national;
• www.bbb.org/us/charity;
• www2.guidestar.org;
• http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/esearch.php; and
• http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Jun/1/129962.html.

Pennsylvania's regulators, for example, provide links to many national watchdog organizations, complete with plain-language brochures, on such matters as working with paid solicitors, hiring a fundraiser and spotting scam public-safety appeals (see, http://web.dos.state.pa.us/cgi-bin/Charities/char_form.cgi; www.dos.state.pa.us/char/site/default.asp; and www.attorneygeneral.gov/consumers.aspx?id=595). Other states' attorneys general or regulators may have similar oversight of fundraisers.

Special Considerations

Asset Protection

Protecting the integrity of the concept of a museum may not be a traditional aspect of e-commerce, but many of the challenges facing an online museum are no different than those facing any e-seller ' albeit sometimes with a twist. For example, sellers of quality goods often prefer to use high-resolution photographs of the merchandise, shot by professionals, to make the site and its products as attractive to buyers and online visitors as possible ' especially when the attraction of the Web site is the information and images on it. However, a museum-site owner must take care not to damage the property in preparing it for the Web, not only from the physical handling required to prepare it to be photographed, but also from the light from flash photography or exposure to air and humidity, due to age or other physical condition of the museum's objects. Storage and transportation are other consideration in this mix.

Don't Forget IP Rights

Similarly, all Web-site operators must protect their intellectual property, especially when it is displayed in a medium that makes copying and reproduction effortless. While curators of traditional museums have always had to guard against physical theft or damage, officials of online museums must be concerned about the potential consequences of digital theft or harm to reputation if images of their collection are used in an undesired way or, perhaps worse, to raise money for another institution. But although images and text on a Web site are protected by copyright law, the cost of taking action when an infringing use is found can be beyond the means of the site operator.

Acquisition Considerations

Of course, the online museum must also be sure that it has the right to use the images it displays ' it can be just as guilty of copyright infringement for unauthorized use of the property of others as the thief who walks out of a museum that is in a building with a painting that he or she has taken off the wall (see, “A Touch of Gray,” in the July edition of e-Commerce Law & Strategy, for an extended discussion of the challenges of securing rights for online use).

Possible Restrictions on Gifts

An unusual question that some non-profits may face is whether restrictions in the trusts or other bequest documents by which they obtained their collection and/or funds will limit their ability to go virtual. For example, can a fund dedicated to local display of an object use that money for what will be a worldwide show online?

While the risks of violating donor intent may sound much more like a law-school exam question than a real concern of an e-commerce Web-site operator, the descendants of a museum donor may have a different view if the museum Web site becomes a significant revenue source. The museum then may find that the descendents have copyright law on their side, particularly if the gift was given subject to any restrictions (rather than outright), and the descendents can make plausible and applicable arguments based on the disputed item or times being shown in a display in a medium different from the “real” one in which or for which the item was donated. For many non-profits, curators and others just thinking about these questions may deter them from trying to start the Web site.

Links and Laws

Another potential legal issue involves the common practice of linking between Web sites. In the physical world, museums will frequently lend items to one another for special exhibitions ' but online, could such loans drive traffic (and donations or potential gift-shop buyers) away from the lending site? Offline, a loan by a Florida gallery to one located in California will not take away visitors to Florida; however, online, the question of whether to allow linking is affected by potential loss of viewers and ancillary revenue.

Also, consider, for example, the concerns raised by a disclaimer at the “critter-cam” mentioned above: “Most videos and photos that are presented on this URL (sameasterson.com) are embedded within the [W]eb site by using codes that are supplied by other [W]eb sites (like YouTube, Flikr, Vimeo, etc). If a copyright owner does not want their content embedded here, please inform the site owner” (see, www.sameasterson.com/about.html). A museum operation will request
“permission to link” if its collection incorporates materials from other Web sites.

Budget, Agreement and
Contract Deficiencies

Problems may also exist because the person creating his or her own online museum may not have access to the resources to do so properly, whether as a matter of museum standards (the MuseDoma concern), or good Web-site policy. The typical “terms and conditions” page of fine print that tries to protect the site owner against various types of claims may not be in an already shoestring budget, resulting in “friendly” language (such as that in the critter-cam site) of questionable enforceability. Also, depending on the museum's content, language issues may also arise (see, http://about.museum/idn/idnpolicy.html and http://media.nic.museum/iuc27/karp.idn.pdf).

Registration and Regulation:
Charities and Fundraising

The home-grown museum site (as well as the professionally programmed one) must properly register with state fundraising and charity regulators. The local museum that solicits subscriptions from neighbors and visitors may never have been on the radar of state regulators of charitable solicitations, and, as a practical matter, may not raise enough money to hit the jurisdictional threshold of the applicable agency. Once the museum goes online, however, whether in search of a greater audience, more funds, or both, the scope of the potential regulatory burden can increase dramatically, as solicitation can be deemed to have occurred not only across the country, but around the world (see, www.masshightech.com/stories/2009/02/23/weekly14-Charities-go-online-for-fundraising.html; www.technewsnyc.org/v8_n2_a2.html; www.techsoup.org/learningcenter/funding/archives/page9592.cfm; and www.fundraisingsuccessmag.com/article/fundraising-big-online-how-little-charities-are-punching-above-their-weight-409796_1.html).

Help Is Available,
Online and Off

Fortunately, online resources exist to assist in compliance with multi-state fundraising and solicitation burdens. The Unified Registration Statement, for example, “represents an effort to consolidate the information and data requirements of all states that require registration of nonprofit organizations performing charitable solicitations within their jurisdictions. The effort is organized by the National Association of State Charities Officials and the National Association of Attorneys General, and is one part of the Standardized Reporting Project, whose aim is to standardize, simplify, and economize compliance under the states' solicitation laws” (see, www.multistatefiling.org). The project's Web site contains extensive information on the single registration that will satisfy most states' charitable-registration requirements, and on the states that do not accept it and those that require additional documentation.

In addition, organizations willing to pay fees to third parties to take advantage of online fundraising sites (and donors looking for so-called one-stop giving) can turn to such sites as www.justgiving.com/ and www.firstgiving.com. These sites collect funds for many charities, to avoid duplicative overhead expenses. In effect, they are like the traditional United Way, but online. In the words of Firstgiving:

Firstgiving lets people donate to nonprofits online. It's quick, easy and safe. Our goal is to help people raise as much as they can for the causes they care about, by providing an excellent service to as many people as possible. You can raise money for any nonprofit that's on GuideStar, although we're not a nonprofit ourselves. Our online fundraising pages make raising money and donating easy; they've helped transform the way people fundraise. The rest is down to the amazing and creative ways you use them. We believe in giving all nonprofits the same opportunity to raise huge amounts of money, including the smaller ones who can't afford to spend lots of money on technology, freeing them up to concentrate on what's important whether it's medical research or running the local playgroup. We're fundraisers and donors too.” (See, www.firstgiving.com/statements/about_us/team.aspd (emphasis added).)

Go Ahead and Dream

So, whether online or off, virtual or bricks-and-mortar, a museum must attract supporters to remain in existence. The virtual museum, however, allows an institution to reach more of them, whether or not they can be physically present, at less cost than traditional methods ' the same advantages that e-commerce has provided to the for-profit world.

You don't need a Ph.D. in museum operations to understand the significance of that opportunity for an institution's bottom line. If the online museum can virtually touch the hearts ' and wallets ' of its supporters, the mantra from Field of Dreams will answer the question posed at the start of this article: They will come ' with checks in hand. Counsel for virtual museum conceivers and the conceivers themselves, then, may well want to keep in mind this admonition-pep talk from the film:

Ray, people will come. They'll come to Iowa for reasons they can't even fathom. They'll turn up your driveway not knowing for sure why they're doing it. They'll arrive at your door as innocent as children, longing for the past. Of course, we won't mind if you look around, you'll say. It's only $20 per person. They'll pass over the money without even thinking about it: for it is money they have and peace they lack. ' The memories will be so thick they'll have to brush them away from their faces. ' Oh … people will come, Ray. People will most definitely come. (See, www.imdb.com/title/tt0097351/quotes.)

So, go ahead: Dream, and then take a swing, online.

In the movie Field of Dreams (based on the novel Shoeless Joe, by W.P. Kinsella), a mysterious voice assures the protagonist, a down-on-his-luck city-boy-turned-farmer named Ray played by Kevin Costner, that “if you build it, they will come.”

Today, however, in an age of instant, digital entertainment, curators of museums and historical sites must also wonder if anyone “will come” to their static displays to visit and donate ' and what will happen if they don't.

Yet, whether or not visitors appear each day, bills will certainly mount, and the public purpose for which the museum was created must continue to be served, not only to preserve the typical tax exemption, but also to carry out the mission of the institution of interpreting historical events in context and educating the public about the importance of its historical heritage.

Of course ' and, unfortunately, it happens ' without visitors, the attraction may have to shut down, frustrating the preservation goals of its founders, and taking away from an interested public's need, and even right, to learn about its past and various heritages, from political to religious; indeed, an historical site's closing because of lack of funding or visitors (often so closely tied) will also deny many untold numbers of citizens and other visitors the opportunity to learn.

And, in fact, for many institutions, very few people are visiting. Recent studies show measurable declines in “live” museum attendance, which have persisted over a long time (see, www.nea.gov/news/news09/SPPA-highlights.html).

While the studies did not claim or document a cause-and-effect relationship between this trend and the growth of the educational and cultural opportunities available online, in reality, the report states: “The Internet and mass media are reaching substantial audiences for the arts. ' More Americans view or listen to broadcasts and recordings of arts events (online) than attend them live” (see, www.nea.gov/news/news09/SP PA-highlights.html). In other words, today's audience for art, history and culture has many alternatives to visiting the traditional museum ' and they are voting with their touchpads. A National Endowment for the Arts 2008 survey stated that “nearly 40% (of Americans) used the Internet to view, listen to, download, or post artworks or performances” (see, www.nea.gov/news/news09/SPPA-high lights.html).

An e-Volving e-Commerce Sector

And why not? As one online museum directory states: “The Virtual Tours of Museums and Exhibits never closes. Visit our Online Tours anytime, and stay as long as you like” (see, www.virtualfreesites.com/museums.museums.html). Similarly, the online-only Museum of Family History highlights the advantages of this new format. “Creating a virtual museum, i.e., a museum that exists only on the Internet, has its advantages and offers unique opportunities,” a page on its Web site states. “Such a museum does not require the raising of funds (though contributions are gratefully accepted) to erect an actual building or pay salaries, but can be created by a person with imagination, time, knowledge and the means to do so, not to mention the material to fill such a museum” (see, www.museumoffamilyhistory.com/help-us-grow.htm).

Fortunately, the Internet is full of more than enough online museums to satisfy the demand of those seeking what the National Endowment of the Arts identifies as “virtual culture.” (For more, see, www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/science/12MUSE.html?pagewanted=all and www.virtualfreesites.com/museums.html.) Some are digital versions of bricks-and-mortar institutions, but others exist only in cyberspace. Some are professionally built and curated, while others are truly homemade. One unverified and unsubstantiated site claims that the number of online museum Web pages is growing at the rate of one per day (you be the judge and jury, at http://icom.museum/vlmp/overview.html#countries#countries).

Moreover, the ease of creating a Web site, and the availability of inexpensive tools to make visually stunning images, allows many smaller organizations that would not be able to promote themselves to a wider world, or would not likely attract visitors from a distance, to become instantly available to devotees, regardless of the devotees' place of residence. Just as the specialty retailer that once relied on highly targeted catalog mailing lists can now serve a dedicated customer base more cheaply through online marketing, a museum serving a narrow interest is only as far as the chair in front of a fan's home computer, and promotion of the Web address among the cognoscenti. Some have even melded social-networking tools with online museums to create a world of highly personalized museums of their own making and to share with others of a like persuasion (see, http://cabinet-of-wonders.blogspot.com/2009/03/news-museums-as-social-network.html). The virtual museum has become so popular that there is even an annual conference on the latest trends and issues in the field (see, www.archimuse.com/conferences/mw.html).

It's e-Commerce,
And Standards Apply

Although a virtual museum certainly provides “culture,” its Web site is really just as much a form of e-commerce ' soliciting contributions, promoting the name of the institution and selling memorabilia from the gift shop ' as any traditional dot-com widget-seller. For that reason, the concept of the online museum was seen by Internet organizers as so compelling that they created a separate domain, .museum, managed by the Museum Domain Management Association (“MuseDoma”) (see, http://musedoma.museum). This domain is limited by its bylaws to “Museums, professional museum associations, and individual members of the museum profession.” According to MuseDoma, having an alternative to the widely used .com, .org and .edu domains “enables museums, museum associations and museum professionals to register .museum Web sites and e-mail addresses. This, in turn, makes it easy for users to recognize genuine museum activity on the Internet,” at the height of the dot-com era (http://about.museum, emphasis added). In a two-step registration process, MuseDoma must first “determine an applicant's eligibility to hold a name in the domain,” after which the applicant can register through an authorized .museum registrar (see, http://about.museum/registrars).

The explanatory material at the MuseDoma Web site clearly articulates a goal of using the separate domain to create an online museum culture and community, and to foster exclusivity in what is otherwise a very decentralized online world, in which caveat emptor rules the day (whether or not the viewer has the knowledge or skills to know to be cautious at a purported museum site). MuseDoma also says:

The purpose of this domain is to reserve a segment of the DNS name space reserved for the use of museums; a name space whose conventions are defined by the museum community. The museum [top-level domain ("TLD)"] grants users a quick and intuitive way to verify the authenticity of a museum site. Conversely, since it is a type of formal third-party certification, museums using this name space obtain a way to assure visitors of the site's validity. (See, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.museum.)

With such a strong vetting process, MuseDoma wants to assure visitors that anyone or any entity with a .museum domain name is a “true” museum. It states so this way:

In other [TLDs], anyone can register a domain name including the letters “museum”. This does not mean they are museums. You will only find genuine museums in .museum! Eligibility for .museum is based on the definition of museum provided by the International Council of Museums (“ICOM”). A name in .museum tells Internet users that its holder is a museum, museums association or individual member of the museum professional [sic] according to criteria established by the museum community, itself. By its restriction to genuine museums, the domain validates and verifies the legitimacy of museums around the world. (See, http://about.museum/benefits.html.)

Indeed, a searchable list of sites registered in that domain appears at http://about.museum/find. (It's interesting, though, that my firm's widely used spam filter blocks the site, despite the site's benign purpose.) The size classifications in the museum bylaws governing the .museum domain seem tilted toward the larger institutions like the one named for one of the domain's founders, the J. Paul Getty Trust (see, http://musedoma.museum/corporate_bylaws.html).

Rewarding or Redundant?
The Sector Responds

Notwithstanding this effort to facilitate finding genuine culture online, many major cultural institutions have opted for the more traditional domains. The Web sites of the “top museums” named in online lists, such as those at www.toptenlinks.com/cat.php/Reference%3AMuseums%3AUS+Museums and www.americasbestonline.net/index.php/pages/museumsbestunitedstate.html, reveal almost complete .gov, .org and .edu registrations. Perhaps this reflects only that significant institutions followed the herd to those domains at the dawn of e-commerce in the 1990s, long before the .museum domain was established, which occurred in 2001. MuseDoma tries to counter these challenges in the FAQ section of its Web site, with answers to such questions as: “Why shouldn't we wait until more people have heard about .museum before going to the trouble and expense of registering?” and “We've invested a huge amount in branding our current domain name. Why would we want to change?” (see, http://about.museum/register/faq.html).

To survive against such widespread use of alternative domains by well-regarded institutions, MuseDoma tries to persuade potential registrants to “double pay.” It recommends that they maintain a .museum domain, and their existing one, in the name of building the .museum domain as a place for culture-lovers to find sites easily. “If a museum has a well-established and otherwise satisfactory domain identity, the most appropriate short-term action is probably to supplement, rather than replace, it with a newly-acquired name in .museum,” the organization says at http://about.museum/register/faq.html. The person seeking culture online, then, could go to a directory of the .museum domain, and flip through the list of all “authentic” museums found there ' the .museum domain becomes an online “signpost” to find Web sites and museums that the person searching had not known previously.

But in the age of Google and Bing, does anyone use the Internet that way, which, really, adds multiple steps, in favor of search engines that will take one directly to the site one wants? The concept that a person would go to a particular domain to find a particular type of Web site echoes e-commerce and the Web as it existed several e-generations ago, when “portals” were all the rage, before the existence of powerful search engines. Why should I pick through listings at a .museum directory, when Google or Bing or Yahoo can take me to exactly the place I want to be (or to a listing that is just as good)?

Also, today, a crucial skill for using the Internet for any information ' whether the data sought is news, culture or another type ' is assessment of a Web site's credibility. Many other Web sites, such as the well known www.snopes.com, www.quatloos.com, www.millersmiles.co.uk, www.truthorfiction.com and www.hoaxbusters.org, try to fill the need identified by the well intended folks behind the .museum domain. In other words, do most Web surfers today need the service that a specialized domain such as .museum provides? In an electronic version of the chicken-and-egg conundrum, until some museums use the domain, none will.

MuseDoma, however, believes it knows the answer. “Adopting a wait-and-see stance toward actively supporting .museum will ' certainly slow the rate at which the domain becomes known. In the worst of cases, it might be taken to indicate that something as specialized as a top-level domain dedicated to the museum community is not sustainable,” the organization's Web site states at http://about.museum/register/faq.html. Unfortunately for its organizers, perhaps this has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Regardless of one's philosophical position over the need for an online museum domain, the .museum organizers' advice also faces a hard financial challenge. While MuseDoma's noble goals may work well for a cultural elite unconstrained by such mundane commercial matters as budgets and staffing, they are less appealing when the cost of building the concept is borne by individual institutions, often themselves non-profits, rather than by donors.

Also, while the .museum selection criteria described by MuseDoma may try to ensure the integrity of the concept of a museum, that self-selection flies in the face of another, much stronger, Internet ethos, the so-called “information wants to be free” culture (see, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_wants_to_be_free). The democratization of information online allows anyone with access to a Web browser and an online account to find, publish or critique information. The Internet has enabled anyone to create an online museum to make information available to others, bypassing the cultural elite at traditional museums, at relatively little cost.

This is the educational and cultural do-it-yourself analog to the growth of e-commerce sites that created the disintermediation that has changed the role of the travel agent, bookstore and other well compensated middlemen, and the way that content is distributed in the 21st century in general. For example, a science journal reported the story of a self-labeled master collator who created a site linking to remote-camera videos of animals (see, www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55975 and www.sameasterson.com/map). Without the scrutiny of an organization such as MuseDoma, anyone can create a museum online, and the only protection against misinformation that the casual Internet user can rely on are his or her own skepticism, and the proclivity of Internet posters to expose shams and frauds by publishing corrective information on sites such as those listed above.

The Nitty e-Gritty

The concern for integrity of the .museum domain is also well taken, in light of the prevalence of quasi-charitable institutions that sometimes seem to exist more to pay the salaries of their officers and solicitors than to raise funds for a public purpose ' especially when the name is similar to a well known and trusted charity, but not close enough to trigger prosecutorial enforcement. There have been so many frauds that play on the gullibility of the well intentioned (e.g., http://abcnews.go.com/Business/PersonalBest/story?id=4228271&page=1) that many organizations now have lists and guidance available online to help people spot frauds (such as the Wise Giving initiative that is now a part of the Better Business Bureau's site at www.bbb.org/us/charity), or the American Institute of Philanthropy's Charity Watch (www.charitywatch.org). Similar sites include:

• www.bbb.org/us/Charity-Reports;
• www.bbb.org/charity-reviews/national;
• www.bbb.org/us/charity;
• www2.guidestar.org;
• http://tfcny.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/esearch.php; and
• http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Jun/1/129962.html.

Pennsylvania's regulators, for example, provide links to many national watchdog organizations, complete with plain-language brochures, on such matters as working with paid solicitors, hiring a fundraiser and spotting scam public-safety appeals (see, http://web.dos.state.pa.us/cgi-bin/Charities/char_form.cgi; www.dos.state.pa.us/char/site/default.asp; and www.attorneygeneral.gov/consumers.aspx?id=595). Other states' attorneys general or regulators may have similar oversight of fundraisers.

Special Considerations

Asset Protection

Protecting the integrity of the concept of a museum may not be a traditional aspect of e-commerce, but many of the challenges facing an online museum are no different than those facing any e-seller ' albeit sometimes with a twist. For example, sellers of quality goods often prefer to use high-resolution photographs of the merchandise, shot by professionals, to make the site and its products as attractive to buyers and online visitors as possible ' especially when the attraction of the Web site is the information and images on it. However, a museum-site owner must take care not to damage the property in preparing it for the Web, not only from the physical handling required to prepare it to be photographed, but also from the light from flash photography or exposure to air and humidity, due to age or other physical condition of the museum's objects. Storage and transportation are other consideration in this mix.

Don't Forget IP Rights

Similarly, all Web-site operators must protect their intellectual property, especially when it is displayed in a medium that makes copying and reproduction effortless. While curators of traditional museums have always had to guard against physical theft or damage, officials of online museums must be concerned about the potential consequences of digital theft or harm to reputation if images of their collection are used in an undesired way or, perhaps worse, to raise money for another institution. But although images and text on a Web site are protected by copyright law, the cost of taking action when an infringing use is found can be beyond the means of the site operator.

Acquisition Considerations

Of course, the online museum must also be sure that it has the right to use the images it displays ' it can be just as guilty of copyright infringement for unauthorized use of the property of others as the thief who walks out of a museum that is in a building with a painting that he or she has taken off the wall (see, “A Touch of Gray,” in the July edition of e-Commerce Law & Strategy, for an extended discussion of the challenges of securing rights for online use).

Possible Restrictions on Gifts

An unusual question that some non-profits may face is whether restrictions in the trusts or other bequest documents by which they obtained their collection and/or funds will limit their ability to go virtual. For example, can a fund dedicated to local display of an object use that money for what will be a worldwide show online?

While the risks of violating donor intent may sound much more like a law-school exam question than a real concern of an e-commerce Web-site operator, the descendants of a museum donor may have a different view if the museum Web site becomes a significant revenue source. The museum then may find that the descendents have copyright law on their side, particularly if the gift was given subject to any restrictions (rather than outright), and the descendents can make plausible and applicable arguments based on the disputed item or times being shown in a display in a medium different from the “real” one in which or for which the item was donated. For many non-profits, curators and others just thinking about these questions may deter them from trying to start the Web site.

Links and Laws

Another potential legal issue involves the common practice of linking between Web sites. In the physical world, museums will frequently lend items to one another for special exhibitions ' but online, could such loans drive traffic (and donations or potential gift-shop buyers) away from the lending site? Offline, a loan by a Florida gallery to one located in California will not take away visitors to Florida; however, online, the question of whether to allow linking is affected by potential loss of viewers and ancillary revenue.

Also, consider, for example, the concerns raised by a disclaimer at the “critter-cam” mentioned above: “Most videos and photos that are presented on this URL (sameasterson.com) are embedded within the [W]eb site by using codes that are supplied by other [W]eb sites (like YouTube, Flikr, Vimeo, etc). If a copyright owner does not want their content embedded here, please inform the site owner” (see, www.sameasterson.com/about.html). A museum operation will request
“permission to link” if its collection incorporates materials from other Web sites.

Budget, Agreement and
Contract Deficiencies

Problems may also exist because the person creating his or her own online museum may not have access to the resources to do so properly, whether as a matter of museum standards (the MuseDoma concern), or good Web-site policy. The typical “terms and conditions” page of fine print that tries to protect the site owner against various types of claims may not be in an already shoestring budget, resulting in “friendly” language (such as that in the critter-cam site) of questionable enforceability. Also, depending on the museum's content, language issues may also arise (see, http://about.museum/idn/idnpolicy.html and http://media.nic.museum/iuc27/karp.idn.pdf).

Registration and Regulation:
Charities and Fundraising

The home-grown museum site (as well as the professionally programmed one) must properly register with state fundraising and charity regulators. The local museum that solicits subscriptions from neighbors and visitors may never have been on the radar of state regulators of charitable solicitations, and, as a practical matter, may not raise enough money to hit the jurisdictional threshold of the applicable agency. Once the museum goes online, however, whether in search of a greater audience, more funds, or both, the scope of the potential regulatory burden can increase dramatically, as solicitation can be deemed to have occurred not only across the country, but around the world (see, www.masshightech.com/stories/2009/02/23/weekly14-Charities-go-online-for-fundraising.html; www.technewsnyc.org/v8_n2_a2.html; www.techsoup.org/learningcenter/funding/archives/page9592.cfm; and www.fundraisingsuccessmag.com/article/fundraising-big-online-how-little-charities-are-punching-above-their-weight-409796_1.html).

Help Is Available,
Online and Off

Fortunately, online resources exist to assist in compliance with multi-state fundraising and solicitation burdens. The Unified Registration Statement, for example, “represents an effort to consolidate the information and data requirements of all states that require registration of nonprofit organizations performing charitable solicitations within their jurisdictions. The effort is organized by the National Association of State Charities Officials and the National Association of Attorneys General, and is one part of the Standardized Reporting Project, whose aim is to standardize, simplify, and economize compliance under the states' solicitation laws” (see, www.multistatefiling.org). The project's Web site contains extensive information on the single registration that will satisfy most states' charitable-registration requirements, and on the states that do not accept it and those that require additional documentation.

In addition, organizations willing to pay fees to third parties to take advantage of online fundraising sites (and donors looking for so-called one-stop giving) can turn to such sites as www.justgiving.com/ and www.firstgiving.com. These sites collect funds for many charities, to avoid duplicative overhead expenses. In effect, they are like the traditional United Way, but online. In the words of Firstgiving:

Firstgiving lets people donate to nonprofits online. It's quick, easy and safe. Our goal is to help people raise as much as they can for the causes they care about, by providing an excellent service to as many people as possible. You can raise money for any nonprofit that's on GuideStar, although we're not a nonprofit ourselves. Our online fundraising pages make raising money and donating easy; they've helped transform the way people fundraise. The rest is down to the amazing and creative ways you use them. We believe in giving all nonprofits the same opportunity to raise huge amounts of money, including the smaller ones who can't afford to spend lots of money on technology, freeing them up to concentrate on what's important whether it's medical research or running the local playgroup. We're fundraisers and donors too.” (See, www.firstgiving.com/statements/about_us/team.aspd (emphasis added).)

Go Ahead and Dream

So, whether online or off, virtual or bricks-and-mortar, a museum must attract supporters to remain in existence. The virtual museum, however, allows an institution to reach more of them, whether or not they can be physically present, at less cost than traditional methods ' the same advantages that e-commerce has provided to the for-profit world.

You don't need a Ph.D. in museum operations to understand the significance of that opportunity for an institution's bottom line. If the online museum can virtually touch the hearts ' and wallets ' of its supporters, the mantra from Field of Dreams will answer the question posed at the start of this article: They will come ' with checks in hand. Counsel for virtual museum conceivers and the conceivers themselves, then, may well want to keep in mind this admonition-pep talk from the film:

Ray, people will come. They'll come to Iowa for reasons they can't even fathom. They'll turn up your driveway not knowing for sure why they're doing it. They'll arrive at your door as innocent as children, longing for the past. Of course, we won't mind if you look around, you'll say. It's only $20 per person. They'll pass over the money without even thinking about it: for it is money they have and peace they lack. ' The memories will be so thick they'll have to brush them away from their faces. ' Oh … people will come, Ray. People will most definitely come. (See, www.imdb.com/title/tt0097351/quotes.)

So, go ahead: Dream, and then take a swing, online.