Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.020.18640
Julie Sissia
{"title":"Shaping Franco-German Cooperation in the Museum Sector","authors":"Julie Sissia","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.020.18640","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.020.18640","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138976434","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.021.18641
Joacine Katar Moreira
{"title":"Inventorying is Reckoning","authors":"Joacine Katar Moreira","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.021.18641","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.021.18641","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139003553","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.019.18639
Céline Chazelas-Baur
{"title":"Combatting the Illicit Trade in Cultural Objects: Re-visiting the 2022 EU Action Plan against Trafficking in Cultural Goods","authors":"Céline Chazelas-Baur","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.019.18639","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.019.18639","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139003557","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.030.18650
Edit Sápi
The 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions states outright in its guiding principles that culture is one of the main aspects of development, which is as important as its economic aspects, and which individuals and people have the fundamental right to participate in and enjoy. Theatrical productions are one of the best-selling forms of entertainment. From a cultural and artistic perspective, they are one of the oldest methods of expression which, in addition to self-expression, is also a mirror of the social and political order. The aim of this article is to present the theoretical, legislative, and jurisprudential positions on the copyright situation of the theatre director. The focus of the article is on the question of how the legal status of the theatre director is settled and regulated in different European legal systems. In several European countries there are no specific legal provisions on this matter. This article is organized as follows. First, the historical and cultural aspects of theatrical productions are introduced. After that, the most important copyright law features of dramatic works are reviewed, together with an overview of some European laws. In the core of the article, the current legal situation – and possible copyright law solutions for theatre directors – are elaborated.
{"title":"A European Panorama on the Copyright Status of Stage Directors","authors":"Edit Sápi","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.030.18650","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.030.18650","url":null,"abstract":"The 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions states outright in its guiding principles that culture is one of the main aspects of development, which is as important as its economic aspects, and which individuals and people have the fundamental right to participate in and enjoy. Theatrical productions are one of the best-selling forms of entertainment. From a cultural and artistic perspective, they are one of the oldest methods of expression which, in addition to self-expression, is also a mirror of the social and political order. The aim of this article is to present the theoretical, legislative, and jurisprudential positions on the copyright situation of the theatre director. The focus of the article is on the question of how the legal status of the theatre director is settled and regulated in different European legal systems. In several European countries there are no specific legal provisions on this matter. This article is organized as follows. First, the historical and cultural aspects of theatrical productions are introduced. After that, the most important copyright law features of dramatic works are reviewed, together with an overview of some European laws. In the core of the article, the current legal situation – and possible copyright law solutions for theatre directors – are elaborated.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139004424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.031.18651
P. McAuliffe
Because cultural heritage is a significant aspect of identity, it is often targeted during conflict or periods of repression. The danger may diminish with peace or transition, but it does not evaporate. Heritage is inherently contentious post bellum, so communities fear for the ongoing safety of their heritage, either because conflict might recur or because past patterns of cultural chauvinism or neglect might be repeated. The material integrity of heritage has gradually become a matter of concern for transitional justice. It has long been a maxim of transitional justice that dealing with the past implies preventing in the future. There is a need for regulatory schema and administrative structures serving the goal of preserving and protecting the tangible cultural riches of the state and/or communities of origin from the lingering threats that the politics of power might again be played out over heritage. Guarantees of non-recurrence (GNR) offer both an ethos and a framework in which to prioritize and think through this work of protection, conservation, and safeguarding. This article argues that the World Heritage Convention, notwithstanding its circumscribed emphasis on material and places of outstanding universal value, is nevertheless applicable to all heritage to which a GNR might be attached and provides an achievable “good enough” practice model, provided there is a threshold level of domestic political will.
{"title":"From the Ashes: Guarantees of Non-Recurrence for Destruction of Cultural Heritage","authors":"P. McAuliffe","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.031.18651","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.031.18651","url":null,"abstract":"Because cultural heritage is a significant aspect of identity, it is often targeted during conflict or periods of repression. The danger may diminish with peace or transition, but it does not evaporate. Heritage is inherently contentious post bellum, so communities fear for the ongoing safety of their heritage, either because conflict might recur or because past patterns of cultural chauvinism or neglect might be repeated. The material integrity of heritage has gradually become a matter of concern for transitional justice. It has long been a maxim of transitional justice that dealing with the past implies preventing in the future. There is a need for regulatory schema and administrative structures serving the goal of preserving and protecting the tangible cultural riches of the state and/or communities of origin from the lingering threats that the politics of power might again be played out over heritage. Guarantees of non-recurrence (GNR) offer both an ethos and a framework in which to prioritize and think through this work of protection, conservation, and safeguarding. This article argues that the World Heritage Convention, notwithstanding its circumscribed emphasis on material and places of outstanding universal value, is nevertheless applicable to all heritage to which a GNR might be attached and provides an achievable “good enough” practice model, provided there is a threshold level of domestic political will.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139005133","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.024.18644
Irini A. Stamatoudi, Konstantinos Roussos
Cultural Heritage Management (CHM) is the main vehicle for helping museums to face challenges, secure sustainable competitiveness, and redefine themselves in a constantly changing world. In this context, CHM can support museums in their efforts to play a vital role in fighting the illicit trafficking of cultural property. This article focuses on how museums can benefit from the various advantages offered by CHM, specifically with respect to the fight against the illicit trade of cultural property and its return and restitution to its countries of origin. In this light, it deals with both proactive and repressive policies, discussing how museums can maintain their credibility and ensure that they operate in accordance with high legal and ethical standards. Finally, the article discusses how museums and countries have dealt with return and restitution claims in recent years. In this context the use of cutting-edge technologies, such as 3D printing, is also discussed. This work derives from the research project “Redefining the future of cultural heritage, through a disruptive model of sustainability” (ReInHerit), which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme.
文化遗产管理（CHM）是帮助博物馆应对挑战、确保可持续竞争力以及在不断变化的世界中重新定义自身的主要手段。在此背景下，文化遗产管理可以支持博物馆在打击非法贩运文化财产方面发挥重要作用。本文重点介绍博物馆如何从 CHM 提供的各种优势中获益，特别是在打击文化财产非法贸易以及文化财产送回和归还原主国方面。在这方面，文章既涉及积极的政策，也涉及压制性政策，讨论了博物馆如何维护其信誉并确保其运作符合较高的法律和道德标准。最后，文章讨论了近年来博物馆和各国是如何处理送回和归还要求的。在此背景下，文章还讨论了 3D 打印等尖端技术的使用。这项工作源于 "通过颠覆性的可持续性模式重新定义文化遗产的未来"（ReInHerit）研究项目，该项目得到了欧盟地平线 2020 研究与创新计划的资助。
{"title":"Dealing with Illicit Trade in Cultural Objects in the Context of Cultural Heritage Management for Museums","authors":"Irini A. Stamatoudi, Konstantinos Roussos","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.024.18644","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.024.18644","url":null,"abstract":"Cultural Heritage Management (CHM) is the main vehicle for helping museums to face challenges, secure sustainable competitiveness, and redefine themselves in a constantly changing world. In this context, CHM can support museums in their efforts to play a vital role in fighting the illicit trafficking of cultural property. This article focuses on how museums can benefit from the various advantages offered by CHM, specifically with respect to the fight against the illicit trade of cultural property and its return and restitution to its countries of origin. In this light, it deals with both proactive and repressive policies, discussing how museums can maintain their credibility and ensure that they operate in accordance with high legal and ethical standards. Finally, the article discusses how museums and countries have dealt with return and restitution claims in recent years. In this context the use of cutting-edge technologies, such as 3D printing, is also discussed. This work derives from the research project “Redefining the future of cultural heritage, through a disruptive model of sustainability” (ReInHerit), which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139005303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.025.18645
Vissarion Giannoulis, Galatea Kapellakou
Blockchain could be used as a mechanism to certify the provenance and movements of cultural goods and contribute to the fight against illicit trafficking of cultural property. By strengthening the traceability of cultural goods, blockchain can simplify due diligence requirements and facilitate prosecution and convictions for all the relevant offences of illicit trafficking in cultural goods. However, such an impact is necessarily tempered due to the specificity of this kind of illicit trafficking, as well as the technical and conceptual constraints of the blockchain itself. Even though blockchain in its current form cannot overcome the legal obstacles which hamper the efficacy of the fight against illicit trafficking, such as the lack of harmonization of legal systems, its value in this area should not be dismissed altogether. An overview of the relevant international and European norms, highlighted using national law examples, reveals the complementary role that blockchain can have in this field, not only in terms of best practices but also in terms of an increased visibility for cultural goods and their international movement.
{"title":"Blockchain and Illicit Trafficking in Cultural Goods","authors":"Vissarion Giannoulis, Galatea Kapellakou","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.025.18645","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.025.18645","url":null,"abstract":"Blockchain could be used as a mechanism to certify the provenance and movements of cultural goods and contribute to the fight against illicit trafficking of cultural property. By strengthening the traceability of cultural goods, blockchain can simplify due diligence requirements and facilitate prosecution and convictions for all the relevant offences of illicit trafficking in cultural goods. However, such an impact is necessarily tempered due to the specificity of this kind of illicit trafficking, as well as the technical and conceptual constraints of the blockchain itself. Even though blockchain in its current form cannot overcome the legal obstacles which hamper the efficacy of the fight against illicit trafficking, such as the lack of harmonization of legal systems, its value in this area should not be dismissed altogether. An overview of the relevant international and European norms, highlighted using national law examples, reveals the complementary role that blockchain can have in this field, not only in terms of best practices but also in terms of an increased visibility for cultural goods and their international movement.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139004938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.022.18642
G. Giardini
Squaring the Triangle of Cultural Property Law. Seventy Years of UNIDROIT’s Work A lot has been written about the “Eternal Triangle of Cultural Property Law”, the sale of a cultural object by a non-owner, and the innovative provisions of Article 4 of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects. This article aims to demonstrate how almost 70 years of UNIDROIT’s work in the field have shaped the principles regulating a non domino sales of stolen cultural objects. The article focuses on the work conducted by UNIDROIT; from the drafting of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and the draft Convention providing a Uniform Law on the Acquisition in Good Faith of Corporeal Movables to the adoption of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention; and examines its impact on domestic legislation and case law.
{"title":"Squaring the Triangle of Cultural Property Law. Seventy Years of UNIDROIT’s Work","authors":"G. Giardini","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.022.18642","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.022.18642","url":null,"abstract":"Squaring the Triangle of Cultural Property Law. Seventy Years of UNIDROIT’s Work\u0000\u0000A lot has been written about the “Eternal Triangle of Cultural Property Law”, the sale of a cultural object by a non-owner, and the innovative provisions of Article 4 of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects. This article aims to demonstrate how almost 70 years of UNIDROIT’s work in the field have shaped the principles regulating a non domino sales of stolen cultural objects. The article focuses on the work conducted by UNIDROIT; from the drafting of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and the draft Convention providing a Uniform Law on the Acquisition in Good Faith of Corporeal Movables to the adoption of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention; and examines its impact on domestic legislation and case law.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139005227","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.034.18654
Kamil Zeidler, Paula Chmielowska
Under Polish law objects that are archaeological cultural heritage discovered, accidentally found, or acquired as a result of archaeological research, are the property of the state. This is the situation of the original acquisition of the monument. As a further consequence, archaeological monuments are excluded from trade (becoming res extra commercium). Besides trade, the export of archaeological cultural goods is also highly problematic. In the case of permanent export of a monument abroad, the law imposes the obligation to obtain a permit for such permanent export, issued by the minister responsible for culture and the protection of national heritage. The regulation in Polish law makes it almost impossible for any archaeological cultural goods to be legally exported. The restricted freedom on the market of works of art and monuments in relation to archaeological finds, together with the limited options of mainly temporary export, have created high activity in the black market, calling for a change of approach of the national law towards archaeological heritage. This leads to the question: Should we introduce some legal changes in the ownership rights of archaeological heritage to bring it closer to people?
{"title":"Trade and Export of Archaeological Cultural Goods: A Conflict of Ideas","authors":"Kamil Zeidler, Paula Chmielowska","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.034.18654","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.034.18654","url":null,"abstract":"Under Polish law objects that are archaeological cultural heritage discovered, accidentally found, or acquired as a result of archaeological research, are the property of the state. This is the situation of the original acquisition of the monument. As a further consequence, archaeological monuments are excluded from trade (becoming res extra commercium). Besides trade, the export of archaeological cultural goods is also highly problematic. In the case of permanent export of a monument abroad, the law imposes the obligation to obtain a permit for such permanent export, issued by the minister responsible for culture and the protection of national heritage. The regulation in Polish law makes it almost impossible for any archaeological cultural goods to be legally exported. The restricted freedom on the market of works of art and monuments in relation to archaeological finds, together with the limited options of mainly temporary export, have created high activity in the black market, calling for a change of approach of the national law towards archaeological heritage. This leads to the question: Should we introduce some legal changes in the ownership rights of archaeological heritage to bring it closer to people?","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139003488","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-13DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.027.18647
Guangyu Ding
Previous decades have witnessed the widespread use of human rights discourses in explaining cultural heritage issues. The content of the cultural heritage right (a term used interchangeably with “right to cultural heritage” in this text), and the relationship between cultural heritage and human rights are diversely demonstrated in international cultural heritage instruments and previous studies. Some of them may overlap or even contradict each other, causing confusion about the relevant concepts. This article aims to answer the twin question: What is the relationship between the “right to cultural heritage” and “rights related to cultural heritage”, which together comprise the cultural heritage rights system? The main feature of cultural heritage is its spiritual significance, which constitutes the basis of the human right to cultural heritage. The core content of the right to cultural heritage is the right to enjoy the intangible value of; meaning of; and interests inherent in cultural heritage. The holder of the right to cultural heritage is “everyone” – a concept so vague that it results in the intractable tension between the right and the rights of states, communities, individuals, Indigenous peoples, humanity as a whole, and so on. “Rights related to cultural heritage”, which are not cultural heritage rights per se, include public participation rights, the right to education, ownership rights, the rights to a livelihood, development, human dignity, equality, and other basic human rights. Some of them may promote the right to cultural heritage, while some may conflict with or limit the same right.
{"title":"Cultural Heritage Rights and Rights Related to Cultural Heritage: A Review of the Cultural Heritage Rights System","authors":"Guangyu Ding","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.027.18647","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.23.027.18647","url":null,"abstract":"Previous decades have witnessed the widespread use of human rights discourses in explaining cultural heritage issues. The content of the cultural heritage right (a term used interchangeably with “right to cultural heritage” in this text), and the relationship between cultural heritage and human rights are diversely demonstrated in international cultural heritage instruments and previous studies. Some of them may overlap or even contradict each other, causing confusion about the relevant concepts. This article aims to answer the twin question: What is the relationship between the “right to cultural heritage” and “rights related to cultural heritage”, which together comprise the cultural heritage rights system? The main feature of cultural heritage is its spiritual significance, which constitutes the basis of the human right to cultural heritage. The core content of the right to cultural heritage is the right to enjoy the intangible value of; meaning of; and interests inherent in cultural heritage. The holder of the right to cultural heritage is “everyone” – a concept so vague that it results in the intractable tension between the right and the rights of states, communities, individuals, Indigenous peoples, humanity as a whole, and so on. “Rights related to cultural heritage”, which are not cultural heritage rights per se, include public participation rights, the right to education, ownership rights, the rights to a livelihood, development, human dignity, equality, and other basic human rights. Some of them may promote the right to cultural heritage, while some may conflict with or limit the same right.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139005433","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：