[Centre] draft

[Sally-Jane Norman]

ps - referenced e-science paper strictly internal/ confidential please as it's a working document at present

best
sj




________________________________________
From: Sally-Jane Norman
Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2011 9:11 p.m.
To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy
Cc: Caroline Bassett; Kirk Woolford; Ed Steinmueller
Subject: RE: [Centre] draft

Hi Volker

Appended version features comments transcribed for Caro Bassett (cc'd), and updated profiles for Sussex team minus that for Ed Steinmueller still awaited. For some reason I can't get tracked modifs to feature - apart from tracked comments, these concern Sussex bio data. Let me know if you want me to integrate this some other way.

If for Australia Ned's a good bet (we get an Australian/ Chinese double whammie this way as he's a West Australia based Sinophile with prof status at Ningbo), let me know and I'll try to make contact as a fellow antipodean... unless he's in Siberia or somewhere as is his wont...

Re sustainable funding, why don't we make a vibrant case for policy work?  The Centre should become an international reference given its ambitions, thus capable of conducting unique and possibly major policy consultancy works for national and international bodies. Heck, why not. Brits still have a Demos hang-up. Let's use it.

In addition to policy, it should also be able to carry out major advisory works and contribute expertise to bodies building up archival resources with a view to public use (e.g. declared south east partner The Keep - www.eastsussex.gov.uk/leisureandtourism/localandfamilyhistory/esro/thekeep/)

Volker your 4th point might usefully be linked with the UK e-science agenda - might say for example that:
The proposed consortium's strong links with the UK e-science community, and notably its contributions to ongoing efforts to enhance the UK Research Computing Ecosystem, will be further developed to ensure that copyright implications of distributed and high performance platforms are integral to the Centre's reflection and feature incisively and usefully in its outputs (etc etc etc).  (see http://www.allhands.org.uk/)

Maybe our Southampton Innovation Centre colleagues also have links to this and/ or similar initiatives worth quoting - I'm tuned via Peter Coveney et al at UCL - http://wikis.nesc.ac.uk/_escienvoy/files/3/31/ResearchcomputingV44.pdf


best

sj



Sally Jane Norman
Professor of Performance Technologies
Director, Attenborough Centre for the Creative Arts
Silverstone 310
University of Sussex
Brighton BN1 9RG
United Kingdom
www.sussex.ac.uk/acca/

________________________________________
From: p2p-centre-bounces at lists.ourproject.org [p2p-centre-bounces at lists.ourproject.org] on behalf of Volker Grassmuck [vgrass at rz.hu-berlin.de]
Sent: Thursday, 1 September 2011 8:00 p.m.
To: Group working in the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy
Subject: Re: [Centre] draft

Dear all,

some more edits in the version below. I would like to highlight two issues:

* Funding:
- Since the ￡5 million is an 80% funding, we will have to come up with an additional ￡1.25 million. We have two suggestions: Google, OSI and UoSouthampton. The instructions say: "In  order  to  demonstrate  the  institutional  commitment  to  the  project  the  lead  institution  will   be  expected  to  provide  a  level  of  support  for  the  Centre...” Is such a commitment (personnel, space, equipment) feasible, and if so would it add up to ￡1.25 million? I have not approached Google or OSI. Should I try? Does anyone have good contacts with them? The only personal contact I have is with Vera Franz at OSI. I could contact someone at Google Germany, but that might not work for a project in the UK.

- As for sustained funding after the four-year period, the only suggestions we have so far is contract research and FP7/8 calls.

I think this should be a top priority for the remaining days. I’m afraid if we don’t come up with something plausible our EoI might be out before they even look at the rest of it. ("There  is  an  expectation  that  the  Centre   will  leverage  significant  additional  income  or  support  from  partners  and  other  sources,  both   during  and  after  the  award  period...”)


* IPRs vs. copyright. The instructions say: "3. Key  aims  of  the  Centre ... It  should  aim  to  encompass  research  into   copyright,  business  models,  creative  industries  and  digital  technologies,” and emphasizes again that these are the "4 critical aspects.” Since there is no mention of patents, trade marks or IPRs in general, I think we should replace „IPRs” with „copyright” in most if not all places.

Also, we don’t say much on the 4th point yet. The instructions mention:

"Research  the  business  potential  of  new  digital  technologies,  such  as  new  forms  of  high-­‐speed  internet  connectivity,  smart  phone  technologies  or  cloud  computing  systems,  and  their  relationship  to  copyright” and
"Include  the  use  of  novel  digital  technologies  and  their  development  in  a  real  world context,  to  ensure  challenges  arising  from disruptive  digital  technology  are   considered  and  copyright  issue  consideration  can  be  embedded  in  underpinning   Digital  Economy  research;”

Best,
Volker