scholarly journals The protection of cultural heritage: common heritage of humankind, national cultural ‘patrimony’ or private property?

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-364
Author(s):  
Fiona Macmillan
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Community Identity ◽  
Cultural Patrimony ◽  
Postcolonial Discourse ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Property Regime ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

Starting from an argument about the relationship between cultural heritage and national and/or community identity, this article considers the different ways in which both the international law regime for the protection of cultural heritage and the international intellectual property regime tend to appropriate cultural heritage. The article argues that, in the postcolonial context, both these forms of appropriation continue to interfere with the demands for justice and for the recognition of historical wrongs made both by indigenous peoples and by many developing countries. At the same time, the article suggests that these claims are undermined by the misappropriation of the postcolonial discourse with respect to restitution of cultural heritage, particularly in the intra-European context. The article advocates the need for a regime for the protection of cultural heritage that is strong enough to resist its private appropriation through the use of intellectual property rights and nuanced enough to recognise significant differences in the political context of local and national claims to cultural heritage.

Intersections in International Cultural Heritage Law

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Transnational Organized Crime ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
World Cultural Heritage ◽  
United Nations System ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

The recent threats to cultural heritage, including in Iraq, Mali, Nepal, Syria, and Yemen, has led to increased focus on the sources of international cultural heritage law. This volume reflects that this is not a discrete and contained body of law, but rather a diverse one whose components are drawn from—and often developed and contained within—public international law. These ‘intersections’ have formed in two ways: when public international law has been used to provide greater protection for cultural heritage; and when concern for cultural heritage protection or codification of rules within cultural heritage-centric instruments have helped fuel developments within other areas of public international law. In this volume, scholars and practitioners explore some of the primary points of intersection where international cultural heritage law and public international law converge. The contributions are organized according to five major ‘intersections’: (1) the Law of Armed Conflict and the Protection of Cultural Heritage; (2) Cultural Heritage-Based Offenses in International Criminal Law and in Laws for Combatting Transnational Organized Crime; (3) the United Nations System and the Protection of Cultural Heritage; (4) Special Legal Regimes for the World Cultural Heritage and Underwater Cultural Heritage; and (5) Intersections of International, National, and Community Interests in Cultural Heritage. The result is a diverse and cohesive collection that explores these intersections and examines how the regimes operate together and how the relationship between them largely facilitates, but also sometimes hinders, the development of international law governing the protection of cultural heritage.

The Cultural Heritage Law Committee of the International Law Association: Special Session, June 8, 2009, Geneva, Switzerland

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 415-416
Author(s):  
Robert K. Paterson ◽  
James A. R. Nafziger
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
Rio De Janeiro ◽  
Special Session ◽  
Export Controls ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

In August 2008 the Seventy-third Conference of the International Law Association (ILA) in Rio de Janeiro adopted the Cultural Heritage Law Committee's “Guidelines for the Establishment and Conduct of Safe Havens for Cultural Material,” the text of which appears in this issue. The Committee, after discussing its on-going project concerning the relationship between international trade law and the protection of cultural heritage, decided to focus on national export controls.

Part III General International Law, Ch.25 Cultural Heritage and State Succession

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakubowski Andrzej
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
State Succession ◽  
State Archives ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

This chapter describes the relationship between the evolving international law regime for the protection of cultural heritage and the theory and practice of State succession. State succession in respect of cultural heritage has usually been associated with the allocation and division of movable cultural treasures following territorial transfers. Hence, much of the doctrinal effort has focused on the principles and criteria governing the passing of State cultural property and attempted to respond to the topical question of to whom cultural property belongs. The chapter then looks at the codified sources of the law on State succession. It also examines the consequences of State succession relating to distinct pre-existing legal situations: State archives and property; international cultural heritage obligations arising from treaties and customary international law; and international responsibility for cultural heritage wrongs committed prior to the date of succession.

scholarly journals A New Balance Between IP and Antitrust

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lemley
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Market Competition ◽  
Antitrust Law ◽  
Dynamic Efficiency ◽  
The Relationship

In this article, I introduce the interaction between intellectual property(IP) and antitrust law. I describe the ways in which these two importantareas of government regulation are and are not in tension, and discuss thehistory of the relationship between these laws. I argue that IP andantitrust have cycled between over- and under-protection, and that we arecurrently (and mistakenly) conditioned to think of private property andprivate ordering as efficient in and of themselves, rather than asefficient only in the context of robust market competition. Further, Iargue that antitrust can serve the goals of innovation and dynamicefficiency directly in circumstances in which competition, not monopoly,serves as a spur to innovation. The goal of the IP and antitrust lawsshould be to seek a robust balance between competition and monopoly in theservice of dynamic efficiency. When IP laws are strong, antitrust lawsshould also be strong, and vice versa.

Part II Substantive Aspects, Ch.4 Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lenzerini Federico
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Special Significance ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

This chapter focuses on the practice of deliberate destruction of cultural heritage, which has represented a plague accompanying humanity throughout all phases of its history and has involved many different human communities either as perpetrators or victims. In most instances of deliberate destruction of cultural heritage, the target of perpetrators is not the heritage in itself but, rather, the communities and persons for whom the heritage is of special significance. This reveals a clear discriminatory and persecutory intent against the targeted cultural groups, or even against the international community as a whole. As such, intentional destruction of cultural heritage, in addition of being qualified as a war crime, is actually to be considered as a crime against humanity. Furthermore, it also produces notable implications in terms of human rights protection. Protection of cultural heritage against destruction is today a moral and legal imperative representing one of the priorities of the international community. In this respect, two rules of customary international law exist prohibiting intentional destruction of cultural heritage in time of war and in peacetime.

scholarly journals Digital Information and Value: A Response to Jakob Rigi

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-85
Author(s):  
Bryan Parkhurst
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Value Theory ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
Digital Production ◽  
The Status ◽  
To Come ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Property Regime ◽  
Labour Time ◽  
Do So

In a series of recent articles, Jakob Rigi has formulated an articulate and sophisticated Marxian view about the relationship between digital production and value theory. Anyone interested in the economic dynamics of FAMGA (Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Google and Amazon) needs to come to terms with the position Rigi stakes out. In this article, I challenge Rigi’s thesis that profits from the sale of digital information (DI) constitute rent. I do so by calling into question his conclusions concerning the valuelessness of DI. After summarising Rigi’s core position and sketching out its entailments, I make the case that (1) Rigi’s assertions about the intrinsic valuelessness of DI are not supported by the model of production he invokes; that (2) Rigi’s valuelessness argument in fact presupposes that DI has value; that (3) far from furnishing evidence that DI is valueless and therefore a source of rent income, as Rigi holds, the existence of the intellectual property regime is precisely what allows DI to act as a congealment of value (i.e. labour time) in commodity form; and that (4) Rigi misapplies Marx’s notion of reproduction to the sale/copy/distribution of DI. I offer this critique as an invitation for us to rethink, from a Marxian perspective, the status of the digital economy within the order of global capitalist value production.

Policy on Protection of Cultural Heritage through Communal Copyright in Supporting Sustainable Tourism

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 920
Author(s):  
Ni Luh Made MAHENDRAWATI
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Copyright Protection ◽  
Sustainable Tourism ◽  
Integrated Model ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Close Attention ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

Tourism has become a prevalent discourse in Indonesia, considering that in the last few years, Tourism has become the highest contributor to the commodity revenue line. Paying close attention to the integration of tourism certainly involves multidiscipline in it so that efforts to develop tourism require integrated efforts from various parties as well as multidiscipline. It is essential to realize that the attractions of tourism in Indonesia can consist of everything that has a uniqueness, beauty, and value in the form of the diversity of natural, cultural, and human-made diversity. In real terms, it can be observed that cultural heritage is one of the valuable assets owned by a country (Indonesia) in supporting the development of tourism. Culture is a way of life that develops, is shared by a group of people, and is passed down from generation to generation. The culture referred to is the result of reason and reason, so that philosophy can be understood as originating from nothing, then thought by reason and ideas, then becoming. The process of creating a culture can logically be protected by Intellectual Property Rights (Copyright). During this time, the copyright-protected in Indonesia based on Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright is an Individual Right. It is understood that the copyright needed to protect cultural heritage is communal rights. How to regulate and apply copyright protection Communal communities will be studied more deeply so that there is a comprehensive and integrated model for protecting cultural heritage in Indonesia.

Part V Regional Approaches, Ch.37 Central and South America

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lixinski Lucas
Keyword(s):  
South America ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
Specific Area ◽  
South American ◽  
Main Approach ◽  
Pan American ◽  
European Colonialism ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

This chapter discusses the protection of cultural heritage in Central and South America. The key defining features of Central and South American regional efforts in the field of heritage are the use of heritage as a tool for development and the connection between heritage and indigeneity. With respect to development, the main approach is policy-driven, explained both by the nature of the objective (economic) and by the fact that most organizations engaging in this area have reduced mandates for rule-making with respect to heritage. With indigeneity, rule-making is stronger, engaging a proud tradition of international lawmaking in the region, which started as part of a Pan-American reliance on the rules of international law to shield Central and South American nations from European colonialism and US neo-colonialism. In the specific area of heritage, there is certainly a conversation between the regional and the global that needs to be accounted for.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document