When a piece of equipment, a format, a library or a service stops working, the question is not only how to open the artwork again. You must decide what should be preserved, how much change it can accept and who can approve it.
Storage, migration, emulation and reinterpretation are the four strategies of the variable media approach, which the Guggenheim's Variable Media Initiative developed from 1999. They are conservation strategies, not legal categories. They are neither equivalent options nor an automatic scale, and an artwork may combine several and change strategy over time. The guide Preserving a digital artwork summarises them; this one develops how to choose, who authorises it and what to record.
What you are trying to preserve
Identify what is becoming obsolete: medium, equipment, interface, operating system, code, dependency, format, service, account or knowledge. Check whether the failure affects the artwork, an exhibition copy or only a procedure.
Before intervening, preserve the previous state: files, checksums, disk images, equipment, screenshots, manuals, logs, photographs and a recording of how it operates. To describe the artwork, what to document in a generative artwork and the technical sheet give the starting point.
Then set the significant properties, that is, what must not be lost: duration, colour, texture, resolution, latency, interaction, sound, scale, errors and the relationship with the equipment. Without that list there is no way to compare before and after.
Storage
Storing means keeping the original materials or equipment for as long as that remains viable. It buys time and preserves evidence, but it does not stop degradation, the lack of spare parts or the loss of knowledge.
Use it as one layer, not as the only promise. Check media, power supply, batteries, parts, storage conditions and the ability to read the content.
Migration
Migrating means transferring or modifying files or software so that they run in a new environment. It can be a transcoding, a recompilation, the replacement of a screen or the transfer of data. LI-MA distinguishes it from emulation: migration rewrites or modifies the source material so that the artwork works on a new platform, usually when a format becomes obsolete.
Before migrating, declare the significant properties, compare before and after, and keep the original and the record of the operation.
Emulation
Emulating means reproducing, through another system, the conditions or behaviour of the previous environment. According to LI-MA, emulation leaves the source material intact and imitates the original software and hardware environment.
In spring 2004, the Guggenheim presented the exhibition Seeing Double, which showed originals alongside emulated versions. Among the works was The Erl King, by Grahame Weinbren and Roberta Friedman (1982–1985). Interpretation derived from the case: the comparison showed that an emulation is judged not only by whether the code can start, but also by appearance, interaction and the resulting experience.
Keep the emulator, its configuration, the disk image, the controls and the tests. Emulation also ages. Further below, we discuss which programs and systems you can use and keep with legal certainty.
Reinterpretation
Reinterpreting means making the artwork again with a greater degree of change, in line with its documented parameters. It is the strategy with the greatest capacity for change and should not be used without justification.
This guide uses 'reinterpretation' for the fourth strategy of the variable media approach. 'Recreate' is kept as a general verb for producing a version of the artwork again. The two terms are not equivalent.
It may be necessary for installation, performance-based or networked artworks, but it can produce a new version or a different artwork. Define the scope, credits, the relationship with the original and the possibility of reversal.
How to choose
There is no single strategy. LI-MA applies a specific approach to each artwork and combines storage, migration, virtualisation, documentation, emulation and, in specific projects, reinterpretation. For software-based artworks, it creates a high-quality disk image, documents the concept, operation and dependencies, and monitors the artwork while managing it. This is an institutional practice, not a mandatory standard.
Compare the four strategies against the significant properties, cost, risk and reversibility. Apply the same criterion to each component:
- constitutive and irreplaceable;
- replaceable by an equivalent;
- replaceable within a range;
- consumable;
- exhibition equipment that is not part of the artwork.
A projector can be fungible if it keeps its qualities. A computer, a screen or a controller can be a historical and sculptural part of the artwork. This classification is an operational proposal of this guide.
To prepare the runtime environment, the guide on creative code covers the repository, dependencies and reinstallation; the installation instructions help validate the result.
Interviews and memory
Ask what constitutes the artwork, what may vary, which equipment is historical, which properties take priority, which strategy is preferred, which changes are rejected and who decides in the future.
Date the interview, record it with permission, transcribe it and link it to the file. Distinguish between the original intention, the current opinion and the decision for a specific intervention.
Tate interviews artists to record acceptable exhibition parameters and their views on future interventions. It warns that an artist's recollections may be incorrect or partial, and that the answers must be interpreted and qualified in the light of analysis. Cross-checking such statements against files, versions and actual operation is a recommendation of this guide.
Do not reduce consulting the artist to a formality. Nor should you treat it as the only evidence.
Who authorises
There is no single rule. The answer depends on which rights exist, who holds them, what was assigned, and what the contract, the certificate and the collection policy say. Determine:
- who holds the exploitation rights;
- which rights or uses were assigned;
- what the contract authorises;
- what the certificate states;
- what the software and firmware licences allow;
- what limits the artistic documentation sets out;
- who may exercise moral rights after the artist's death;
- which decisions are reserved to the artist, their heirs, the collection or the institution.
A contract or a certificate has only the effects its content allows. A certificate does not necessarily contain a licence: the guide on certifying a digital artwork explains what it attests. Ownership of the medium does not replace an authorisation to transform the artwork. To authorise specific uses, see how to authorise the reproduction of a work.
If consultation is not possible, apply the authority set out in the contract and record the uncertainty. Do not invent an authorisation by analogy.
Moral rights and transformation
Under Spanish law, the Intellectual Property Act (LPI) distinguishes several layers:
- Integrity. Article 14.4 recognises the author's right to demand respect for the integrity of the artwork and to prevent distortions, modifications or alterations that harm their legitimate interests or reputation.
- Exploitation rights. Article 17 grants the author their exclusive exercise: reproduction, distribution, public communication and transformation.
- Transformation. Article 21 defines it as translation, adaptation and any other modification of its form. Whether a migration, an emulation or a reinterpretation constitutes a transformation in a legal sense depends on the case and is not resolved by a general rule.
- Ownership of the medium. According to Article 56.1, anyone who acquires ownership of the medium in which the artwork was incorporated does not, by that title alone, obtain exploitation rights over it. Article 56.2 recognises the owner of the original of a work of fine art or photography the right of public exhibition, unless the author expressly excludes this when transferring the original. If the exhibition harms the author's honour or professional reputation, the author may object.
Therefore, ownership of the medium or of the copy does not in itself convey exploitation rights or a general adaptation right. Do not assume that whoever holds the artwork automatically authorises a migration, an emulation or a reinterpretation.
In each case, distinguish between technical conservation, reproduction, transformation, adaptation, exhibition, distribution, material intervention on the medium and modification of the software. Each may fall under a different regime.
Software, firmware and copies
Computer programs have a specific regime, which this guide does not analyse article by article; it is based on Directive 2009/24/EC, which harmonises the limits of the rights over them.
The directive reserves to the rights holder the reproduction, adaptation and distribution of the program. It allows exceptions for the lawful acquirer: acts necessary to use the program in accordance with its purpose, a backup copy that the contract cannot prohibit where it is necessary for that use, and the observation, study and testing of how it works. Decompilation is allowed only under strict interoperability conditions. None of these exceptions is a general authorisation to emulate.
The right to make a backup copy is not, in itself, a general authorisation to emulate, transform, distribute, communicate to the public or share disk images.
Use only firmware, operating systems and software obtained and used in accordance with their licences and the applicable legal limits. Record where each component comes from and under which licence you keep it.
Directive (EU) 2019/790 provides for a preservation exception for cultural heritage institutions. It refers to copies of works or other subject matter that are permanently in their collections, in any format or medium, and that are necessary for their preservation. It does not extend to private individuals. Its transposition into Spanish law must be consulted in the current text, which this guide does not analyse.
Comparative testing
Define the tests before you intervene:
- start-up and stability;
- image, sound and rhythm;
- interaction and latency;
- scale and spatial relationship;
- extreme behaviour;
- audience experience;
- reversibility;
- comparison with the documentation and the previous state.
Involve the artist where possible, but also keep the technical and curatorial assessment.
Intervention record
This record is an operational proposal of this guide, not a museum standard. Record:
- artwork and identifier;
- previous version;
- problem identified;
- strategy chosen and alternatives discarded;
- files, equipment and environment;
- rights and licences reviewed;
- authorising party and grounds;
- person carrying out the work;
- changes made;
- acceptance tests;
- behaviour before and after;
- date;
- new files and checksums;
- location of the previous state;
- visual documentation;
- possibility of reversal.
Do not overwrite the certificate or the sheet as if the artwork had never changed. Give the new exhibition version an identifier, a date, files, equipment, instructions and compatibility. State whether it replaces the previous version, coexists with it or is provisional, and maintain the genealogy between the original, migration, emulation and reinterpretation.
After the artist's death
Exploitation rights pass on death by any of the means recognised in law (Article 42 of the LPI). The exercise of the rights in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 14, including integrity, falls under Article 15 to the person designated by the author in their last will or, failing that, to the heirs, without time limit. If there are none or their whereabouts are unknown, Article 16 provides that the State, the autonomous communities, local authorities and public cultural institutions may exercise them.
Keep a written record of the artist's preferences on strategies, historical equipment and rejected changes. This documentation offers guidance but does not replace the legal authorisations that each intervention may require.
Checklist
- The obsolete layer was identified.
- The previous state is preserved.
- The significant properties are declared.
- Storage, migration, emulation and reinterpretation were compared.
- Constitutive and replaceable components are kept separate.
- Rights, licences and authority to intervene have been checked.
- The interview was checked against other evidence.
- Tests and criteria were established before the change.
- The intervention has a complete record.
- The new version preserves the genealogy and declares its limits.
Further reading
- Preserving a digital artwork.
- What to document in a generative artwork.
- How to prepare creative code so that it can run again.
- How to certify a digital artwork and its editions.
- How to authorise the reproduction of a work.
Sources
- Guggenheim, The Variable Media Initiative.
- Guggenheim, Seeing Double: Emulation in Theory and Practice.
- LI-MA, Migration, Emulation, Digitisation. No authorship or date visible.
- Tate, Conservation interviews. No date visible.
- BOE, Intellectual Property Act (consolidated text). Last update indicated: 30 March 2022.
- BOE (OJEU), Directive (EU) 2019/790.
- EUR-Lex, Directive 2009/24/EC.
Status: Verified. Review: 11 October 2026. General information, not legal authorisation for a specific intervention. If you find an error, write to me.