Hawking Hogarth

Hawking Hogarth, an installation and research project, illuminates the complexities of the open GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) movement, using William Hogarth’s A Rake’s Progress as a case study. Printed in a series of eight plates, A Rake’s Progress was one of the first visual artworks to receive copyright protection under the 1735 Engravings Act of Great Britain. To secure both commercial benefits and broader public dissemination and enjoyment, Hogarth and other artists had lobbied the government for the expansion of copyright protection to include engravings, which reproduced artists’ paintings. Once published, the copyright holder enjoyed protection for a 14-year period. After its expiration, the work passed into the public domain and could be used by anyone for any purpose without permission.

Today, most cultural institutions assert new copyrights over their digitised versions of A Rake’s Progress. By applying statements like ‘© Trustees of the British Museum’, these institutions claim the digitized work is sufficiently original to receive a new copyright protection. But is it? 

Because these prints exist in multiples, we can compare the ways that cultural institutions approach digitization and copyright law. As an installation, Hawking Hogarth visualises the conditions under which these public domain works have been made available. The research analysed 422 plates online in the collections of 64 institutions worldwide. Data collection focused on three key points:

The research revealed a starkly inconsistent landscape for those seeking to use these images. While one institution demanded AU$353 for a single image, another offered all eight plates for free download in high resolution. Notably, twenty cultural institutions released 148 images without asserting new copyright claims. Facing such exorbitant fees, akin to the financial ruin of Tom Rakewell, we opted not to pay. Ultimately, the research demonstrates that despite Hogarth’s copyright expiring over 270 years ago, spurious copyright claims continue to restrict public access to the public domain.