Use Cases

Scenarios for risks associated with going open

This section captures potential risks associated with opening access to digital cultural heritage collections. Each use case highlights real-world scenarios faced by GLAM organisations, featuring key personas, underlying causes, and potential impacts. Each use case is structured as follows:

[Persona] doesn't make [X type] collection or work open access, because [Y] will happen and that has an impact on [Z].

These use cases are drawn from responses to open-ended questions in the Working Group’s online survey on risk management in open access to digital collections, as well as from community feedback on the draft Geopolitical Risks section received during the public consultation period (October, 22 – November, 30 2025).

A variety of personas are included to represent the diverse roles involved in managing digital collections within GLAM organisations, and sharing them openly with the public.

The use cases are listed below by collection type and risk areas. Click on the arrow (>) to expand each section.

By Risk Areas

⚖️ Legal

⚠ Cultural heritage professionals don’t make certain digital collections open access because of copyright ambiguity. If materials are made available without proper copyright checks, there’s a risk of copyright infringement or misuse by the public, which can impact legal compliance and damage the reputation of the institution.

⚠ Decision makers don’t make certain digital collections open access, because inaccurate licensing or uncertainties in copyright ownership could lead to privacy breaches or unauthorised sharing or misuse. This would impact the institution’s ability to safeguard sensitive cultural materials and comply with contractual obligations, especially in cases involving Indigenous communities.

🕊️ Ethical

⚠ Digital collection managers don’t make certain culturally sensitive audio and video materials open access, because there’s a risk of them being exploited for commercial purposes without permission. This could disrespect the cultural heritage of the content and negatively affect the institution’s relationships with content owners and the public.

⚠ Data managers don’t make certain open datasets available without restrictions, because the information could be misused for illicit excavations or fuel conspiracy theories. This misuse can lead to cultural misinformation and damage public trust in scholarly research.

⚠ Curators don’t make Indigenous collections open access, because there is a risk of unethical sharing without proper decolonial protocols. This could lead to cultural exploitation and disrespect towards the communities, undermining trust and collaboration with Indigenous partners.

⚠ Institution managers don’t make certain heritage photographs open access, because of potential self-image rights violations and misuse for commercial purposes. This can harm the dignity of the individuals depicted and damage the institution’s commitment to ethical and respectful representation.

⚙️ Technical

⚠ Research data managers don’t make datasets open access, because inadequate or technically misleading data may spread rapidly and be misinterpreted. This can negatively impact the credibility of the research institution and result in difficulties securing future funding.

⚠ Digital archivists don’t make raw datasets open access, because unrefined data might contain sensitive personal or institutional information. This could lead to security breaches or exploitation of system vulnerabilities, affecting the safety and privacy of both the institution and its stakeholders.

💰 Financial

⚠ Repository managers don’t make high-resolution image collections fully open access, because unrestricted use could lead to commercial exploitation without compensation. This undermines potential revenue from licensing agreements with partner picture agencies, affecting the institution’s funding and financial viability.

⚠ Institution administrators don’t make all digital assets open access, because without control over usage, there’s a risk of images being used in commercial products. This affects revenue streams from licensing, which may be crucial for funding preservation and digitisation projects.

⚠ Publishers don’t make all their publications open access, because this would lead to a significant loss of revenue from hard copy sales. This loss impacts the financial sustainability of the journals, especially since they do not charge author processing fees to offset costs.

🏛️ Policy

⚠ Institutional decision makers don’t make collections open access, because there is no unified policy or clear leadership direction. This results in inconsistent approaches to monetization and accessibility, impacting the institution’s ability to maintain a cohesive strategy for sharing and protecting its collections.

⚠ Collection managers don’t make certain items open access, because there is a lack of clear procedural workflows for obtaining permissions. This can result in legal and copyright issues, impacting the institution’s ability to share its full range of collections effectively.

⚠ Curators at smaller, understaffed institutions don’t make all their collections open access, because they lack the resources and trained personnel to manage rights and permissions accurately. This could lead to mismanagement of copyright information, affecting the institution’s credibility and the quality of its publicly accessible collections.

⚠ Institutional decision makers don’t make collections open access, because there is no unified policy or clear leadership direction. This results in inconsistent approaches to monetisation and accessibility, impacting the institution’s ability to maintain a cohesive strategy for sharing and protecting its collections.

🌍 Geopolitical

⚠ A publicly funded institution restricts access to sensitive digital materials because political pressure and funding controls are used to reshape governance and priorities, impacting curatorial autonomy, staff capacity, and long-term trust in the collection.

⚠ An institution relies on foreign-hosted cloud infrastructure for its digital collections, because it is cost-effective and previously considered low-risk. When geopolitical relations shift, legal and political controls restrict access or impose takedowns, impacting collection integrity, autonomy, and availability.

⚠ A cultural heritage institution relies on local data centres, servers, and on-site collection storage to provide access to its digital and physical collections. When war or crisis damages power, telecom, and storage infrastructure, and disrupts supply chains, digital services become unreachable and undigitised physical collections are placed at heightened risk, impacting access, preservation, and institutional continuity.

⚠ A small, regionally funded organisation does not make its physical collections and associated digital records open access or prioritise mass digitisation, because of limited resources and competing short-term priorities. When armed conflict disrupts power, telecommunications, and local infrastructure, undigitised collections and locally stored digital files become inaccessible or are damaged, impacting long-term preservation, international access, and the institution’s ability to safeguard cultural heritage during and after the conflict.

⚠ An organisation offers open access to its collections without adequate security and integrity controls. When cyberattacks compromise systems or data, collection authenticity and public trust are damaged, and access is disrupted.

⚠ An organisation records preservation actions but does not invest in regular software maintenance, because systems appear stable and cost savings are prioritised. After several years without updates, technical debt and security risks force the system offline, impacting access, preservation continuity, and institutional resilience.

By Collection Type

All types of works and collections

⚠ Cultural heritage professionals don’t make certain digital collections open access because of copyright ambiguity. If materials are made available without proper copyright checks, there’s a risk of copyright infringement or misuse by the public, which can impact legal compliance and damage the reputation of the institution.

⚠ Decision makers don’t make certain digital collections open access, because inaccurate licensing or uncertainties in copyright ownership could lead to privacy breaches or unauthorised sharing or misuse. This would impact the institution’s ability to safeguard sensitive cultural materials and comply with contractual obligations, especially in cases involving Indigenous communities.

⚠ Library administrators don’t make certain collections open access, because many of them have not been digitised. This delays public access and impacts the institution’s ability to share resources effectively in the digital age.

⚠ Collection managers don’t make certain items open access, because there is a lack of clear procedural workflows for obtaining permissions. This can result in legal and copyright issues, impacting the institution’s ability to share its full range of collections effectively.

⚠ Curators at smaller, understaffed institutions don’t make all their collections open access, because they lack the resources and trained personnel to manage rights and permissions accurately. This could lead to mismanagement of copyright information, affecting the institution’s credibility and the quality of its publicly accessible collections.

⚠ Institutional decision makers don’t make collections open access, because there is no unified policy or clear leadership direction. This results in inconsistent approaches to monetisation and accessibility, impacting the institution’s ability to maintain a cohesive strategy for sharing and protecting its collections.

⚠ A publicly funded institution restricts access to sensitive digital materials because political pressure and funding controls are used to reshape governance and priorities, impacting curatorial autonomy, staff capacity, and long-term trust in the collection.

⚠ An institution relies on foreign-hosted cloud infrastructure for its digital collections, because it is cost-effective and previously considered low-risk. When geopolitical relations shift, legal and political controls restrict access or impose takedowns, impacting collection integrity, autonomy, and availability.

⚠ A cultural heritage institution relies on local data centres, servers, and on-site collection storage to provide access to its digital and physical collections. When war or crisis damages power, telecom, and storage infrastructure, and disrupts supply chains, digital services become unreachable and undigitised physical collections are placed at heightened risk, impacting access, preservation, and institutional continuity.

Indigenous collections

⚠ Curators don’t make Indigenous collections open access, because there is a risk of unethical sharing without proper decolonial protocols. This could lead to cultural exploitation and disrespect towards the communities, undermining trust and collaboration with Indigenous partners.

Audiovisual materials

⚠ Institution managers don’t make certain heritage photographs open access, because of potential self-image rights’ violations and misuse for commercial purposes. This can harm the dignity of the individuals depicted, and damage the institution’s commitment to ethical and respectful representation.

⚠ Repository managers don’t make high-resolution image collections fully open access, because unrestricted use could lead to commercial exploitation without compensation. This undermines potential revenue from licensing agreements with partner picture agencies, affecting the institution’s funding and financial viability.

⚠ Institution administrators don’t make all digital assets open access, because without control over usage, there’s a risk of images being used in commercial products. This affects revenue streams from licensing, which may be crucial for funding preservation and digitisation projects.

⚠ Digital collection managers don’t make certain culturally sensitive audio and video materials open access, because there’s a risk of them being exploited for commercial purposes without permission. This could disrespect the cultural heritage of the content and negatively affect the institution’s relationships with content owners and the public.

Publications

⚠ Publishers don’t make all their publications open access, because this would lead to a significant loss of revenue from hard copy sales. This loss impacts the financial sustainability of the journals, especially since they do not charge author processing fees to offset costs.

Datasets

⚠ Data managers don’t make certain open datasets available without restrictions, because the information could be misused for illicit excavations or fuel conspiracy theories. This misuse can lead to cultural misinformation and damage public trust in scholarly research.

⚠ Research data managers don’t make datasets open access, because inadequate or technically misleading data may spread rapidly and be misinterpreted. This can negatively impact the credibility of the research institution and result in difficulties securing future funding.

⚠ Digital archivists don’t make raw datasets open access, because unrefined data might contain sensitive personal or institutional information. This could lead to security breaches or exploitation of system vulnerabilities, affecting the safety and privacy of both the institution and its stakeholders.