Pub Date : 2020-12-01DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.025.13028
A. Guss
Digitization in the narrow sense means the conversion of analogue data into digital form. Looking more broadly through the prism of the protection of cultural heritage, digitization of its objects means not only the conversion of analogue objects into their digital version, but is also related to the processing of the obtained material, file management, and finally, but not always, the sharing of digital documentation. It is not a simple procedure because it has many limitations, including those arising from issues of the copyright protection of digitized works. The aim of this article is to present the challenges related to copyright in relation to the digitization of cultural heritage in the light of Polish law and policy. Poland is one of the countries where the process of digitization of cultural heritage is developing dynamically, both through government programmes and grassroots digitization movements. However, there is no separate regulation in the Polish legal system devoted to the digitization of cultural heritage resources. This makes it difficult to ensure the digitization of a significant part of collections due to the limitations resulting from copyright and their relation to works that can potentially be transferred into the digital space.
{"title":"The Digitization of Cultural Heritage under Polish Law and Policy: Challenges Presented by Copyright Law","authors":"A. Guss","doi":"10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.025.13028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.025.13028","url":null,"abstract":"Digitization in the narrow sense means the conversion of analogue data into digital form. Looking more broadly through the prism of the protection of cultural heritage, digitization of its objects means not only the conversion of analogue objects into their digital version, but is also related to the processing of the obtained material, file management, and finally, but not always, the sharing of digital documentation. It is not a simple procedure because it has many limitations, including those arising from issues of the copyright protection of digitized works. The aim of this article is to present the challenges related to copyright in relation to the digitization of cultural heritage in the light of Polish law and policy. Poland is one of the countries where the process of digitization of cultural heritage is developing dynamically, both through government programmes and grassroots digitization movements. However, there is no separate regulation in the Polish legal system devoted to the digitization of cultural heritage resources. This makes it difficult to ensure the digitization of a significant part of collections due to the limitations resulting from copyright and their relation to works that can potentially be transferred into the digital space.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42752547","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 : 2020-12-01DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.015.13018
Claudia S. Quiñones Vilá
This article examines the recently proposed ICOM museum definition and its detractors in order to trace the history of museums and their social purpose as they move from a traditional past into a tumultuous present and uncertain future. As countries begin to reframe the role of arts and culture in shaping a world affected by a global pandemic, museums will need to address not only practical measures – such as social distancing guidelines and limited visitor numbers – but also how these institutions are situated within the greater social context. Technology is particularly useful for museums to share their collections with audiences and transcend geographical boundaries, and it also allows these institutions to reposition themselves as relevant within the ongoing cultural heritage dialogue and context. However, it is debatable whether online and digital offerings classify as museums. Even if there is no consensus on the textbook definition of museum, pinpointing common traits will help establish their evolution and role for current and future generations. Embracing digitization, virtual museums, and other non-traditional frameworks allows for a more expansive and inclusive conception of museums, taking into account their dual role: as custodians of public knowledge and spaces for education and development.
{"title":"What’s in a Name? Museums in the Post-Digital Age","authors":"Claudia S. Quiñones Vilá","doi":"10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.015.13018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.015.13018","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the recently proposed ICOM museum definition and its detractors in order to trace the history of museums and their social purpose as they move from a traditional past into a tumultuous present and uncertain future. As countries begin to reframe the role of arts and culture in shaping a world affected by a global pandemic, museums will need to address not only practical measures – such as social distancing guidelines and limited visitor numbers – but also how these institutions are situated within the greater social context. Technology is particularly useful for museums to share their collections with audiences and transcend geographical boundaries, and it also allows these institutions to reposition themselves as relevant within the ongoing cultural heritage dialogue and context. However, it is debatable whether online and digital offerings classify as museums. Even if there is no consensus on the textbook definition of museum, pinpointing common traits will help establish their evolution and role for current and future generations. Embracing digitization, virtual museums, and other non-traditional frameworks allows for a more expansive and inclusive conception of museums, taking into account their dual role: as custodians of public knowledge and spaces for education and development.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47762389","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 : 2020-09-30DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.007.12391
Jakub Hanc
L’art pour l’art, or so-called justifications of art The issue of so-called justification of art continues to be debated intensely in the applicable literature. Academic opinion increasingly highlights the need to include international and constitutional regulations regarding freedom of expression, particularly freedom of artistic expression, in the discourse. This article adopts a somewhat different approach and aims to analyze that non-statutory justification in the context of statements by critics, art historians, artists and lawyers. This type of approach makes it possible to assess whether the conditions excluding the unlawfulness of an act proposed in the science of criminal law are useful tools to facilitate the criminal law evaluation of specific factual circumstances by a judge.
{"title":"L’art pour l’art, czyli o tzw. kontratypie sztuki","authors":"Jakub Hanc","doi":"10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.007.12391","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.007.12391","url":null,"abstract":"L’art pour l’art, or so-called justifications of art The issue of so-called justification of art continues to be debated intensely in the applicable literature. Academic opinion increasingly highlights the need to include international and constitutional regulations regarding freedom of expression, particularly freedom of artistic expression, in the discourse. This article adopts a somewhat different approach and aims to analyze that non-statutory justification in the context of statements by critics, art historians, artists and lawyers. This type of approach makes it possible to assess whether the conditions excluding the unlawfulness of an act proposed in the science of criminal law are useful tools to facilitate the criminal law evaluation of specific factual circumstances by a judge.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47289057","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 : 2020-09-30DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.006.12390
R. Nowicki
The Bydgoszcz Municipal Library’s Collections in the Interwar Period. On the Hundredth Anniversary of the City’s Return to Poland In 1920, after nearly a century and a half of captivity, Bydgoszcz returned to Poland. The Polish authorities took over the Stadtbibliothek Bromberg, founded by the Germans in 1903. The library contained a valuable collection of approximately 75,000 volumes, although Polish books amounted to merely 300 copies. From the mid-1920s until the outbreak of World War II, Witold Bełza served as the director of the Library. He preserved the valuable collection, including items of post-German provenance. Acting during this difficult period for Poland and the city, he obtained collections with Polish provenance and led to the inclusion of the Municipal Library in Bydgoszcz as one of the most important public libraries in the country.
{"title":"Zbiory Biblioteki Miejskiej w Bydgoszczy w dwudziestoleciu międzywojennym. W setną rocznicę powrotu miasta do Polski","authors":"R. Nowicki","doi":"10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.006.12390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.006.12390","url":null,"abstract":"The Bydgoszcz Municipal Library’s Collections in the Interwar Period. On the Hundredth Anniversary of the City’s Return to Poland In 1920, after nearly a century and a half of captivity, Bydgoszcz returned to Poland. The Polish authorities took over the Stadtbibliothek Bromberg, founded by the Germans in 1903. The library contained a valuable collection of approximately 75,000 volumes, although Polish books amounted to merely 300 copies. From the mid-1920s until the outbreak of World War II, Witold Bełza served as the director of the Library. He preserved the valuable collection, including items of post-German provenance. Acting during this difficult period for Poland and the city, he obtained collections with Polish provenance and led to the inclusion of the Municipal Library in Bydgoszcz as one of the most important public libraries in the country.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44057174","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 : 2020-09-30DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.005.12389
Olivia Rybak-Karkosz
Artists’ rights in printmaking during the Old Masters period The aim of this paper is to present a historic view on artists’ rights in printmaking before the advent of modern copyright protections. Previously, privilege was the main form of legal protection. In this paper, matters such as the aim and procedure of protection are described as well as the subjects entitled to receive and release this protection and its extent. It concerns the main countries in Europe specializing in printmaking during the Old Masters’ period of activity, which was between the 16th and 18th centuries. The last section of the article focuses on The Engraving Copyright Act 1734, an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain which is stated to be a prototype of modern copyright and its applicability to the historical context.
{"title":"Ochrona przysługująca twórcom grafiki artystycznej u mistrzów dawnych","authors":"Olivia Rybak-Karkosz","doi":"10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.005.12389","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.005.12389","url":null,"abstract":"Artists’ rights in printmaking during the Old Masters period The aim of this paper is to present a historic view on artists’ rights in printmaking before the advent of modern copyright protections. Previously, privilege was the main form of legal protection. In this paper, matters such as the aim and procedure of protection are described as well as the subjects entitled to receive and release this protection and its extent. It concerns the main countries in Europe specializing in printmaking during the Old Masters’ period of activity, which was between the 16th and 18th centuries. The last section of the article focuses on The Engraving Copyright Act 1734, an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain which is stated to be a prototype of modern copyright and its applicability to the historical context.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42119965","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 : 2020-01-01DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.008.13011
Ł. Bratasz
* Łukasz Bratasz is Associate Professor of Heritage Science at the Jerzy Haber Institute of Catalysis and Surface Chemistry of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Kraków, Poland. He is the former Head of the Sustainable Conservation Lab of the Yale University, USA (2015-2018). He also served as Head of the Laboratory of Analysis and Nondestructive Investigation of Heritage Objects of the National Museum in Kraków (2012-2018). Currently, Professor Bratasz is leader of the Horizon2020 CollectionCare project (https://www.collectioncare.eu) and IPERION-HS (http://www.iperionhs.eu/) and Polish-Norway bilateral GRIEG-Craquelure project (http://heritagescience.edu.pl/en/grieg-2/) funded by Norway Grants and HERIe project supported by Getty Conservation Institute (http://heritagescience.edu.pl/en/nawa-en/). He is laureate of Polish Returns programme of the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange. He has gained a number of prestigious recognitions of his work, including Certificate of Outstanding Recognition by Yale University for work on energy efficiency in museums and libraries (2018), and the Grand Prix European Union Prize for Cultural Heritage / Europa Nostra Awards, category: research for project NOAH’S ARK (2009). ** Ewa Manikowska is Associate Professor at the Institute of Art of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw, Poland. She is one of the co-editors of this issue of the “Santander Art and Culture Law Review”, and the leader of the Polish team of the DIGIConflict Project. Professor Manikowska is the author of Photography and Cultural Heritage in the Age of Nationalisms. Europe‘s Eastern Borderlands (1867-1945), Bloomsbury–Routledge, London 2019.
* Łukasz Bratasz是位于Kraków的波兰科学院Jerzy Haber催化和表面化学研究所的遗产科学副教授。曾任美国耶鲁大学可持续保护实验室主任(2015-2018)。2012-2018年，担任Kraków国立博物馆文物分析与无损调查研究室主任。目前，Bratasz教授是挪威政府资助的Horizon2020 CollectionCare项目(https://www.collectioncare.eu)、IPERION-HS项目(http://www.iperionhs.eu/)、波兰-挪威双边GRIEG-Craquelure项目(http://heritagescience.edu.pl/en/grieg-2/)和盖蒂保护研究所HERIe项目(http://heritagescience.edu.pl/en/nawa-en/)的负责人。他是波兰国家学术交流机构波兰回国计划的获奖者。他的工作获得了许多着名的认可，包括耶鲁大学在博物馆和图书馆能效工作方面的杰出认可证书(2018年)，以及欧盟文化遗产大奖/ Europa Nostra奖，类别:诺亚方舟项目研究(2009年)。** Ewa Manikowska是波兰华沙波兰科学院艺术研究所的副教授。她是本期《桑坦德艺术与文化法律评论》的共同编辑之一，也是digiconconflict项目波兰团队的负责人。Manikowska教授是《民族主义时代的摄影与文化遗产》一书的作者。《欧洲东部边疆(1867-1945)》，布卢姆斯伯里-劳特利奇出版社，伦敦，2019年。
{"title":"Heritage Science – The Benefits of an Interdisciplinary Approach in Protecting Cultural Heritage (Professor Łukasz Bratasz talks to Ewa Manikowska)","authors":"Ł. Bratasz","doi":"10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.008.13011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.008.13011","url":null,"abstract":"* Łukasz Bratasz is Associate Professor of Heritage Science at the Jerzy Haber Institute of Catalysis and Surface Chemistry of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Kraków, Poland. He is the former Head of the Sustainable Conservation Lab of the Yale University, USA (2015-2018). He also served as Head of the Laboratory of Analysis and Nondestructive Investigation of Heritage Objects of the National Museum in Kraków (2012-2018). Currently, Professor Bratasz is leader of the Horizon2020 CollectionCare project (https://www.collectioncare.eu) and IPERION-HS (http://www.iperionhs.eu/) and Polish-Norway bilateral GRIEG-Craquelure project (http://heritagescience.edu.pl/en/grieg-2/) funded by Norway Grants and HERIe project supported by Getty Conservation Institute (http://heritagescience.edu.pl/en/nawa-en/). He is laureate of Polish Returns programme of the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange. He has gained a number of prestigious recognitions of his work, including Certificate of Outstanding Recognition by Yale University for work on energy efficiency in museums and libraries (2018), and the Grand Prix European Union Prize for Cultural Heritage / Europa Nostra Awards, category: research for project NOAH’S ARK (2009). ** Ewa Manikowska is Associate Professor at the Institute of Art of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Warsaw, Poland. She is one of the co-editors of this issue of the “Santander Art and Culture Law Review”, and the leader of the Polish team of the DIGIConflict Project. Professor Manikowska is the author of Photography and Cultural Heritage in the Age of Nationalisms. Europe‘s Eastern Borderlands (1867-1945), Bloomsbury–Routledge, London 2019.","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70995430","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 : 2020-01-01DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.009.13012
Natalie Kane
Natalie Kane: The V&A has had ambitions to collect digital objects for some time, but it took a few steps to get there before creating a dedicated collecting position. The V&A first made some experiments in exhibition-making as a means to understand digital design within the institution. In 2009, for instance, the museum opened the exhibition Decode, which was curated by Louise Shannon and featured digital design practice current
{"title":"Collecting Digital Designs: Reasons, Definitions, Challenges, and Implications (Natalie Kane talks to Gil Pasternak)","authors":"Natalie Kane","doi":"10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.009.13012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050XSNR.20.009.13012","url":null,"abstract":"Natalie Kane: The V&A has had ambitions to collect digital objects for some time, but it took a few steps to get there before creating a dedicated collecting position. The V&A first made some experiments in exhibition-making as a means to understand digital design within the institution. In 2009, for instance, the museum opened the exhibition Decode, which was curated by Louise Shannon and featured digital design practice current","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70995479","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 : 2019-12-30DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.018.11566
A. Visconti
The Reform of Italian Law on Cultural Property Export and Its Implications for the “Definitional Debate”: Closing the Gap with the European Union Approach or Cosmetics? Some Systemic Considerations from a Criminal Law Perspective
{"title":"The Reform of Italian Law on Cultural Property Export and Its Implications for the “Definitional Debate”: Closing the Gap with the European Union Approach or Cosmetics? Some Systemic Considerations from a Criminal Law Perspective","authors":"A. Visconti","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.018.11566","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.018.11566","url":null,"abstract":"The Reform of Italian Law on Cultural Property Export and Its Implications for the “Definitional Debate”: Closing the Gap with the European Union Approach or Cosmetics? Some Systemic Considerations from a Criminal Law Perspective","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45353524","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 : 2019-12-30DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.016.11564
C. Woodhead
The United Kingdom (UK), like other countries, has made strong commitments to tackling the illicit trade in objects and those that were taken during the Nazi Era. Yet, admitting objects with such questionable provenance into the category of UK national treasures and attempting to keep them in the UK by seeking institutional support to make them available to the public would be at odds with these worthy policies. The main analysis in this paper is focused on the issues raised by the 2017 decision in the UK to designate as a national treasure a Meissen figure that was formerly owned by Emma Budge, whose heirs lost possession of her collection during the Nazi Era in a forced sale. Using the trope of “tarnished treasures” this paper argues that admitting objects with tainted provenance into the category of national treasures tarnishes the entire category of national treasures. Recognizing the need to retain the integrity of this special GENERAL ARTICLES * Charlotte Woodhead is an assistant professor and is a non-practising barrister. Charlotte researches in the field of cultural heritage law. Her current project focuses on the ways in which the UK cares for cultural heritage, analysing the way in which notions of heritage are translated into, and out of, law. The other aspect to her work focuses on the restitution and repatriation of objects from museum collections, in particular claims made to the UK’s Spoliation Advisory Panel for Nazi Era cultural objects and claims made against museums for the repatriation of human remains and other contentious objects. Between 2013 and 2019 she served as a member of the UK Museums Association Ethics Committee. ** Thanks are due to my anonymous reviewers and to Alessandro Chechi for his comments, in particular highlighting the relevance of colonial era dispossessions in this context. This paper has been translated into a policy brief by Research Retold and as part of that process, the discussions during which I explained my work also helped me to crystallize some of the more tangible recommendations that I put forward here. As ever, any errors or omissions are the author’s own. Santander Art and Culture Law Review 2/2019 (5): 109-134 DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.19.016.11564
{"title":"Tarnished Treasures: Provenance and the UK’s Waverley Criteria","authors":"C. Woodhead","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.016.11564","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.016.11564","url":null,"abstract":"The United Kingdom (UK), like other countries, has made strong commitments to tackling the illicit trade in objects and those that were taken during the Nazi Era. Yet, admitting objects with such questionable provenance into the category of UK national treasures and attempting to keep them in the UK by seeking institutional support to make them available to the public would be at odds with these worthy policies. The main analysis in this paper is focused on the issues raised by the 2017 decision in the UK to designate as a national treasure a Meissen figure that was formerly owned by Emma Budge, whose heirs lost possession of her collection during the Nazi Era in a forced sale. Using the trope of “tarnished treasures” this paper argues that admitting objects with tainted provenance into the category of national treasures tarnishes the entire category of national treasures. Recognizing the need to retain the integrity of this special GENERAL ARTICLES * Charlotte Woodhead is an assistant professor and is a non-practising barrister. Charlotte researches in the field of cultural heritage law. Her current project focuses on the ways in which the UK cares for cultural heritage, analysing the way in which notions of heritage are translated into, and out of, law. The other aspect to her work focuses on the restitution and repatriation of objects from museum collections, in particular claims made to the UK’s Spoliation Advisory Panel for Nazi Era cultural objects and claims made against museums for the repatriation of human remains and other contentious objects. Between 2013 and 2019 she served as a member of the UK Museums Association Ethics Committee. ** Thanks are due to my anonymous reviewers and to Alessandro Chechi for his comments, in particular highlighting the relevance of colonial era dispossessions in this context. This paper has been translated into a policy brief by Research Retold and as part of that process, the discussions during which I explained my work also helped me to crystallize some of the more tangible recommendations that I put forward here. As ever, any errors or omissions are the author’s own. Santander Art and Culture Law Review 2/2019 (5): 109-134 DOI: 10.4467/2450050XSNR.19.016.11564","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44495750","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 : 2019-12-30DOI: 10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.019.11567
C. Simoes
A Registry for Movable Cultural Property of Significant Importance to Switzerland: Limit to the Cross-Border Movement and Right of Ownership
对瑞士具有重要意义的文化动产登记处：对跨境流动和所有权的限制
{"title":"A Registry for Movable Cultural Property of Significant Importance to Switzerland: Limit to the Cross-Border Movement and Right of Ownership","authors":"C. Simoes","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.019.11567","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.19.019.11567","url":null,"abstract":"A Registry for Movable Cultural Property of Significant Importance to Switzerland: Limit to the Cross-Border Movement and Right of Ownership","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44911749","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：