COMMENTARY: Intellectual Property Issues in Archaeology?

Nicholas, George P.; Hollowell, Julie

doi:10.1111/an.2004.45.4.6

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Partly this means that IIP is not bound by the typical categorisations of time that Western culture imposes (Gould, 1987;Nicholas, Bannister, 2004 ;Zimmerman, 1987). This presents accessed by following the link in the citation at the bottom of the page.…”

Section: Understanding the Main Stakeholder -The Indigenous Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights: Ethical Insights for Marketers

Kennedy

Laczniak

2014

Australasian Marketing Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Present copyright laws do not protect Indigenous intellectual property (IIP) sufficiently. Indigenous cultural artefacts, myths, designs and songs (among other aspects) are often free to be exploited by marketers for business' gain. Use of IIP by marketers is legal as intellectual property protection is based on the lifetime of the person who has put the IP in tangible form. However, Indigenous groups often view ownership in a very different light, seeing aspects of their culture as being owned by the group in perpetuity. Misuse of their cultural heritage by marketers in products often denies the Indigenous group a monetary benefit from their use and is frequently disrespectful. This article discusses ethical insights that might shed moral weight on this issue.

show abstract

Section: Understanding the Main Stakeholder -The Indigenous Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights: Ethical Insights for Marketers

Kennedy

Laczniak

2014

Australasian Marketing Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Various segments of the public, especially indigenous and descendant communities may have strong claims about the past and documentation about the past (Brown 2003b;Hayden 2003;Nicholas and Bannister 2004;Brown 2005). Here the application and perceived benefit of Creative Commons licenses are more problematic (Christen 2005;Kansa et al 2005;Kansa 2009).…”

Section: Copyright and Licensingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Googling the Grey: Open Data, Web Services, and Semantics

Kansa

Burton

et al. 2010

Arch

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

________________________________________________________________Primary data, though an essential resource for supporting authoritative archaeological narratives, rarely enters the public record. Lack of primary data publication is also a major obstacle to cultural heritage preservation and the goals of cultural resource management (CRM). Moreover, access to primary data is key to contesting claims about the past and to the formulation of credible alternative interpretations. In response to these concerns, experimental systems have implemented a variety of strategies to support online publication of primary data. Online data dissemination can be a powerful tool to meet the needs of CRM professionals, establish better communication and collaborative ties with colleagues in academic settings, and encourage public engagement with the documented record of the past. This paper introduces the ArchaeoML standard and its implementation in the Open Context system. As will be discussed, the integration and online dissemination of primary data offer great opportunities for making archaeological knowledge creation more participatory and transparent. However, different strategies in this area involve important trade-offs, and all face complex conceptual, ethical, legal, and professional challenges. ________________________________________________________________ RESEARCHSince Open Context is operated in the United States, the European Union's database protection laws are less applicable. Similar systems in the European Union would need appropriate policies to insure the legal reusability of database content. Résumé: Les données primaires, bien que sources d'information essentielles pour étayer les récits archéologiques faisant autorité, deviennent rarement de notoriété publique. L'absence de publication des données primaires est également un obstacle majeur pour la préservation du patrimoine culturel et pour les objectifs de gestion des informations culturelles. En outre, l'accès aux données primaires est un élément crucial pour contester les affirmations sur le passé et formuler d'autres interprétations plausibles. En réponse à ces préoccupations, les systèmes expérimentaux ont mis en oeuvre un certain nombre de stratégies pour soutenir la publication en ligne des données primaires. La diffusion de données en ligne peut être un outil puissant pour répondre aux besoins des professionnels de gestion des informations culturelles, établir une meilleure communication et développer des liens de collaboration avec des collègues dans les milieux universitaires, ainsi que pour favoriser la participation du public envers la documentation du passé reposant sur des recherches sérieuses. Cette étude présente la technologie de référence ArchaeoML et sa mise en oeuvre dans le système Open Context. Comme on le verra, l'intégration et la diffusion en ligne de données primaires offrent de grandes possibilités pour rendre la création des connaissances archéologiques plus participative et transparente. Toutefois, les différentes strat...

show abstract

“…Nicholas and Bannister (2004) illuminate this as they consider ownership of traditional "knowledge systems," "know-how," or "lifeways" that are uncovered through archaeological research. Standing alone, this knowledge may be of largely local value, but when it is commodified to predict climate patterns, improve farming techniques, or manufacture pharmaceuticals, it acquires significant intellectual and economic capital.…”

Section: W H At F I E L D W O R K E R S O W Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…our understandings of "copyright and patent are now in crisis and no longer hold the legitimacy they once did" (1). Thus, it seems reasonable to believe that just as Nicholas and Bannister (2004) assert, that "intellectual property rights will be a major factor in shifting current power structures and mind sets toward more equitable models between archaeologists and other stakeholders" (2004, 528), so, too, will fieldworkers work push our understandings of IP and ownership in other academic as well as professional arenas.…”

Section: F R O M I P C O N C E P T S To T E a C H I N G P R A C T I Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who owns this text?: plagiarism, authorship, and disciplinary cultures

2009

Choice Reviews Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

COMMENTARY: Intellectual Property Issues in Archaeology?

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights: Ethical Insights for Marketers

Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights: Ethical Insights for Marketers

Googling the Grey: Open Data, Web Services, and Semantics

Who owns this text?: plagiarism, authorship, and disciplinary cultures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About