In 2017, a request was made to the Rodin Museum to identify and provide public access to 3D scans of Auguste Rodin's sculptures, which are public domain cultural heritage works. The museum initially resisted these requests.
The Commission on Access to Administrative Documents (CADA) issued an opinion stating that the museum's 3D scans were administrative documents and should be made accessible to the public. The museum's director, despite this opinion, indicated plans to ignore the French freedom of information (FOI) law.
A lawsuit was filed in 2019 in the Administrative Tribunal of Paris, joined by organizations like Communia, Wikimédia France, and La Quadrature du Net. Both the Paris court and, subsequently, the Conseil d'État on appeal, ruled in favor of the Rodin Museum. The Conseil d'État's decision stated that the 3D scans were not administrative documents, thereby denying public access.
This ruling by France's highest administrative court establishes a precedent that limits public access to 3D scans of cultural heritage works, even those in the public domain. The decision contradicts earlier interpretations of freedom of information laws regarding such digital assets.
✨ This summary was generated by AI from the outlets' reporting listed below. It is not independently verified and may contain errors — check the original sources. How BrevFeed works →
One email each morning: the day's tech stories, clustered across outlets and summarized. No account needed.
One email a day. Unsubscribe in one click, any time.
Spend a few minutes, get the whole day. Every topic's top stories in one hands-free rundown — listen, watch, or read the transcript.
▶ Play today's briefNew every morning, and the back catalogue is archived by date.
France's highest administrative court, the Conseil d'État, ruled that 3D scans of Auguste Rodin's sculptures held by the Rodin Museum are not administrative documents, denying public access. This decision overturns an earlier opinion by the Commission on Access to Administrative Documents (CADA) and sets a precedent against freedom of information for cultural heritage data.