“Narrative Museums” and Curators’ Rights: The Protection of a Museum Exhibition and Its Scenario under Polish Law

Since at least the 1990s, museums have expanded to cover a variety of societal functions, often enabling inclusive and participatory spaces for critical dialogue about the past and the future, and bridging together various narratives and cultural experiences, contributing to social cohesion and reconciliation. The new functions of museums, involving novel technological forms of display and communication, pose several legal questions concerning the management of such institutions, their resources, and exhibitions, including issues of copyright and other intellectual property rights. While referring to a recent case concerning an alleged infringement of the moral rights of the authors of the permanent exhibition of the Museum of the Second World War in Gdansk (MWII), this article examines the scope of copyright protection in new, so-called, “narrative” museums under Polish law. First it briefly scrutinizes main facts and circumstances of this case. Secondly, it discusses the current legal framework on the copyright protection of museum exhibitions under Polish law. Next, in light of the judgment rendered in the MWII case, the standard of legal protection of moral interests resulting from a museum exhibition’s design and its scenario (script) is explored. Finally, the article concludes with a set of observations concerning the extent to which copyright law may serve as a tool for protecting the integrity of museum exhibitions and their original conceptual design.

Administracyjna i sądowa egzekucja z ruchomości o wartości historycznej, naukowej lub artystycznej

Administrative and judicial execution against movables possessing historical, scientific or artistic value This article analyses specific regulations regarding the administrative execution against movables possessing historical, scientific or artistic value and judicial execution against movables possessing historical or artistic value. Such considerations are even more necessary taking into account the recent changes made to regulations regarding administrative execution, which came into force in 2020. The expressions “movables having a historical, scientific or artistic value” and “movables having a historical or artistic value” are not identical to that of monuments, which have their own legal definition in Polish law. However, the phrases imply the presence of a monument. The distinctive features of these regulations regarding the assessment, transfer and sale of the objects in question do not aim to create a specific legal regime protecting objects of this kind from administrative or judicial execution. Their purpose is to ensure the correctness of related acts and the efficiency of the execution itself. It is important that legislators do not exclude the application of ordinary forms of sale for the objects in question; i.e., they are subject to regular forms of commerce.

L’art pour l’art, czyli o tzw. kontratypie sztuki

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.

Digitization, Vulnerability, and Holocaust Collections

Although digitization has become a word that is almost synonymous with democratization and citizen participation, many museums and other cultural heritage institutions have found it difficult to live up to this political vision of inclusivity and access for all. In Sweden, political ambitions to digitize the cultural heritage sector are high. Yet, institutions still struggle to reconcile their previous practices with new technologies and ethical guidelines for collecting and curating material. In this article we identify, analyse, and try to find resolutions for the current gap that exists between cultural heritage practice and government policy on digitization, open access, and research ethics. By examining two Swedish examples of Holocaust collections that have not been digitized because of internal policies of secrecy and confidentiality, we attempt to demonstrate how discourses about vulnerability affect the ways in which certain archival practices resist policies of accessibility and ethical research. In order to unpack the discourses on vulnerability, Carol Bacchi’s post-structural approach to policy analysis has been used together with Judith Butler’s theories on vulnerability and resistance. In addition to understanding how cultural heritage institutions in Sweden have protected some of their collections and how this has obstructed efforts to make these collections more accessible, we also offer some suggestions on how these issues can be resolved by reimagining digitization as transformation.

Problematyka właściwego wyeksponowania zabytków ruchomych z perspektywy administracyjnoprawnej

The problem of adequate display of movable monuments from the perspective of administrative law As regards the Act of 23rd July 2003 on the Protection of Monuments and the Guardianship of Monuments, there are no regulations directly addressing the problem of display of movable monuments. Yet, similarly to immovable monuments’ surroundings (which are legally protected under certain conditions), movable heritage surroundings may also exert an influence on objects’ historic, artistic or scientific value. This article examines four main aspects of the aforementioned problem, including a discussion on how and in which cases the protection of immovable monuments may automatically ensure the protection of movable property’s surroundings. Moreover, this analysis concerns the scope of the legal restriction of permanent relocation of movable monuments, violating traditional notions of interior design. Next, attention is given to the specific protection of monument surroun letter analysis of current legal provisions, the analysis comprises elements of the historic evolution of regulation in this context. Furthermore, an attempt to formulate postulates de lege ferenda has been made.

The Repatriation of Human Remains in France: 20 Years of (Mal)practice

This article analyses three cases of repatriation of human remains by French public museums in order to critically examine the difficulties in the changing institutional practice. It critically ssesses the statutory and administrative processes that have been used to repatriate human remains and identifies the difficulties that have been and are mostly still encountered. Firstly, it evaluates the public/private conundrum of ownership of human remains in French law, which explains why Parliament had to intervene to facilitate the repatriation of remains in public museum collections, whereas a private society could repatriate the skulls of chief Ataï and his doctor to New Caledonia without legal difficulties. Secondly, it reviews the need for parliamentary intervention for the repatriation of the remains of Saartjie Baartman to South Africa and several Mokomokai to New Zealand. Finally, it criticizes the administrative deadlock that has prevented the development of a repatriation practice that could have b en established after the successful repatriation of the remains of Vamaica Peru to Uruguay. Unfortunately, the process has remained opaque and ineffective, owing to a variety of factors; in particular the ambiguity regarding the role of the Commission scientifique nationale des collections, which is set to be abolished and whose role will be undertaken by the Haut conseil des Musées de France, and a lack of political, financial, and structural support from the Ministry of Culture. Until these shortcomings are addressed and clear criteria for repatriation are drawn up, it is unlikely that France will develop a coherent, transparent, and effective process for the repatriation of human remains.

Misappropriation of Indigenous Cultural Heritage – Intellectual Property Rights in the Digital Era

The digitization of cultural heritage has become a common practice among cultural and educational institutions. The Internet and the widespread of new technologies have made the heritage more accessible and facilitates cultural exchange. However, digitization both raises challenges and creates opportunities for the sustainable and appropriate treatment of Indigenous digital cultural heritage collections, as the use of new technologies may render such heritage more vulnerable to misappropriation and misuse. It is therefore vital to investigate the possibilities of Intellectual Property tools to protect, preserve, and promote such heritage. This article addresses the following questions with respect the Indigenous heritage: What is the nature of the relationship between IP protection and the safeguarding of intangible heritage?; What are the consequences of misappropriation and misuse of traditional cultural expressions for Indigenous Peoples?; and What is the impact of digitization on Indigenous cultural heritage?

What’s in a Name? Museums in the Post-Digital Age

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.

Ochrona przysługująca twórcom grafiki artystycznej u mistrzów dawnych

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.

The Enhancement of Immovable Cultural Heritage by Urban Planning Law: The French Experience

Despite the incremental development of the heritage dimension of local urban planning plans, as well as an ever-more substantial relationship between immovable cultural heritage law and urban planning law, these two elements remain susceptible to raising confusion, occasionally contradicting one another frontally. The French Act of 7 July 2016 on Freedom of Creation, Architecture, and Heritage had the initial ambition of harmonizing and simplifying the mechanisms for the protection and enhancement of immovable cultural heritage, including under urban planning law. Yet the Act of 23 November 2018 on Housing Development, Urban Planning, and Digital Technology has further contributed to weakening the heritage protection mechanisms and bestowed a priority on the construction of new buildings over the conservation and enhancement of old neighbourhoods and buildings.