In the straw poll, Steve Dietz DISAGREED and stated that it was "not clear why AMICO should take an inflexible stance without experience of the market". This is complex question though it sounds simple. I'd like to answer this in three ways:

1) The choice of fixed fee versus pay by use is a philosophical one. It is what universities and other cultural institutions prefer and it makes sense for museums because in their educational roles they want to encourage increased use where pay-by-use discourages it.

2) Fixed fees are simple to administer on both ends. We find that there are plenty of technical problems for universities even making use of this data without implementing complex monitoring systems. All such systems involve fairly extensive overhead costs and cut into the return to museums also.

3) The market will offer many pay-by-use alternatives. Indeed we expect museums to continue to offer rights negotiasted on a use by use basis. What seems difficult to create as a single institution (and probably impossible to sell, manage or administer) is a one fee library. Since the commercial market and individual museums can't do this, we propose it as a basis for business planning for AMICO. If AMICO is formed and it turns out the market won't accept this approach, or its members want to offer pay by use also, this is fine and they can do so. But for planning the question is - can we build realistic models with market analysis based on this option.

On a more general point, remember this document is a framework for a business plan to be developed over the next several months. David