The Government Art Collection is a programme that manages over 14,700 works of art for display in British government buildings in the UK and around the world. The GAC is overseen by the UK Government's Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).
The general public can explore the Collection on the GAC website.
The Government Art Collection also has a substantial library of digital images of the Collection, which DCMS makes available for commercial reproduction, educational or personal use.
DCMS charges for a licence to reproduce an image – charges vary according to how long the image will be re-used and for what purpose.
The digital images are covered by Crown Copyright, i.e. they are publicly owned.
Some of the works of art themselves are also subject to copyright – usually held by the artists or their beneficiaries. However, a majority of the works of art in the Government Art Collection are out of copyright.
I recently submitted a Freedom of Information request to DCMS, in which I asked for an annual breakdown of DCMS's income from licensing of GAC images. I also asked for the costs of running the GAC licensing operation.
DCMS responded with the following figures:
| Financial Year | Total Commercial | Total Non-Commercial | Total Licensing Income | Estimated Total Cost of Operating Licensing Facility |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018/19 | £4,967.50 | £437.50 | £5,405.00 | £9,317.93 |
| 2019/20 | £4,222.50 | £307.50 | £4,530.00 | £9,860.29 |
| 2020/21 | £2,491.50 | £945.00 | £3,436.50 | £9,992.00 |
| 2021/22 | £3,460.00 | £597.00 | £4,057.00 | £9,999,28 |
| 2022/23 | £2,792.00 | £450.00 | £3,242.00 | £10,335.56 |
As we can see from those figures, DCMS's licensing operation for reproduction of images from the Collection does not cover its own costs.
In the most recent financial year, adminstering the licences cost the taxpayer more than three times the amount that the GAC's charging model brought in.
DCMS has also provided some comments:
The Government Art Collection (GAC) promotes British art, culture and creativity through displays in UK Government buildings worldwide. It is the most widely distributed collection of British art, with displays in over 125 countries, and makes an important contribution to the UK's cultural diplomacy through being seen by thousands of visitors to these buildings each year.
The GAC has delegated authority from the Keeper of Public Records, now part of The National Archives (TNA), to licence and re-use the Crown Copyright material held in its photographic and digital archives independently. This framework allows the GAC to issue licences and charge for images of works of art in its care. The Collection contains over 14,700 works of art, of which almost 50% are in copyright; the GAC maintains an image library of these works both for internal use and for external public access and research purposes.
The GAC's licensing operation has always been run as a public service and not for profit. The charging model in the GAC's licensing operation is subject to the Re-use of Public Sector Information Regulations 2015. The charging structure makes images of artworks held in the Collection accessible for both commercial and non-commercial use. We are regularly reviewing this process to ensure that we provide a fair and responsible model for artists, users of the Collection and the taxpayer.
As an open data campaigner, I believe that publicly funded information assets (including digital images) should normally be available for re-use under an open licence, such as the Open Government Licence. The cost of access should be no more than the marginal cost of production – which will almost always be nil.
Of course, I recognise that sometimes public bodies are sceptical about the benefits of open release, particularly if they have an opportunity to derive revenue directly from the information assets they control.
But the Government Art Collection's licensing model makes no sense – the Government is actually losing money by charging for reproduction licences.
If, as DCMS says, the GAC's licensing operation is run as a public service and not for profit, it would be more economic to allow the public to download and re-use images of out of copyright works under an open licence. That would greatly increase the potential for re-use of the images, while saving on administration of non-open licences.