Just wanted to send round a link to a project we've just finished (key findings in bullet points below). It started out being about the relatively practical issues of how to approach copyright in participative museum projects. However, the work we did with museum professionals and with people who have been participants in museum projects helped us see how much these practical issues directly relate to political questions of how museums earn legitimacy. We produced a booklet looking at the intersection of copyright and participation and a literature review. Both can be found at: http://partnershipandparticipation.wordpress.com/
If anyone on the MCG list has any thoughts/comments or similar experiences be great to hear from you!
Helen Graham, Rhiannon Mason and Nigel Nayling
Helen Graham
University Research Fellow in Tangible and Intangible Heritage and Director, Centre for Critical Studies in Museums, Galleries and Heritage
School of Fine Art, History of Art and Cultural Studies
University of Leeds
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
0113 3431224
Key findings from the project:
• Scale and timescale: Questions of copyright and consent become urgent when the outcomes of participation projects move beyond their specific context and are made widely available or are to be kept by the museum for future use.
• Personal stories: There has been a shift in the kind of knowledge produced through working with individuals and groups. This has shifted from the factual to the personal and as a result participants expect to have a more personal relationship with the museum.
• Museums’ political legitimacy: Approaches taken to copyright are often explicitly linked to the way staff think about museums’ political legitimacy. One point of view is that the museum must balance individuals’ interests and a broader ‘public interest’. In this view setting out transparent copyright and consent agreements at the outset of a project was seen as reasonable. In another point of view, a ‘bottom up’ approach placed the emphasis on how you treat people. Here copyright and consent were seen as negotiated, with agreements being drawn up together.
• Courtesy: Participants used the word ‘courtesy’ to evoke the kind of relationship they expect with museums – suggesting the importance of questions of ownership and consent being seen not simply in terms of a legal contract but as a social contract as well.
****************************************************************
website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
[un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************
