“Evelin Heidel (@scannopolis on Twitter) recently asked me to document our Caselaw Access Project (website, video) digitization workflow, and open up the source for the CAP “Tracking Tool.” I’ll dig into our digitization workflow in my next post, but in this post, I’ll discuss the Tracking Tool or TT for short. I created the TT to track CAP’s physical and digital objects and their associated metadata. …”
Abstract: This article is primarily a case study of the Nuremberg Trials Project at the Harvard Law School Library in Cambridge, Massachusetts. It begins with an historical note about the war crimes trials and their documentary record, including the fate of the several tons of trial documents that were distributed in 1949. The second part of the article is a description of the Harvard Law School Nuremberg project, including its history, goals, logistical considerations, digitization process and challenges, and resulting impact. The structure and function of the project website is described, followed by a description of a typical user experience, the project’s current status, comparison to related projects, and plans for the future. Appendices provide information on the current distribution of Nuremberg trial documents within the United States, a bibliography on this topic, and a list of U.S. repositories holding related collections (primarily collections of personal papers of participants).
“As an academic non-profit research institute [associated with Harvard and MIT], Broad recognizes the unique role that such institutions play in propelling the biomedical ecosystem by exploring fundamental questions and working on risky, early-stage projects that often lack clear economic return.
To maximize its impact, our work (including discoveries, data, tools, technologies, knowledge, and intellectual property) should be made readily available for use, at no cost, by other academic and non-profit research institutions….
With respect to commercial licensing, our most important consideration is maximizing public benefit.
- In most cases, we believe that this goal is best accomplished through non-exclusive licensing, which allows many companies to use innovations and thus compete to bring to market products incorporating them.
- In some cases, we recognize that an exclusive license to an innovation may be necessary to justify the level of private investment required to develop a product and bring it to market. (An example is the composition-of-matter of drug. Without an exclusive license, a company would be reluctant to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in a clinical trial to demonstrate safety and efficacy, because competitors could subsequently ‘free-ride’ on their results to bring the same product to market.)
In each case, we evaluate the justification for exclusivity and seek to limit the scope of exclusivity….”
“The Schlesinger Library on the History of Women in America at Harvard’s Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study has received a grant of $870,000 from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. The grant will support fellowships and public programming centered on the 2020 centennial of the 19th Amendment at the Schlesinger Library and the broader Radcliffe Institute….
The Project will also create an open-access digital portal to facilitate interdisciplinary, transnational scholarship and innovative teaching on newly digitized Schlesinger Library collections along with historical databases tracking voting patterns….”
“The Cultural Observatory at Harvard is working to enable the quantitative study of human culture across societies and across centuries. We do this in three ways:
- Creating massive datasets relevant to human culture
- Using these datasets to power wholly new types of analysis
- Developing tools that enable researchers and the general public to query the data …”