Annual Conference – 2019

ICOM Europe / ICOM-Greece

Embracing the virtual: European museums respond to the digital challenge

Acropolis Museum, Athens

21-22 November 2019

Poster for download: here

See final report here.

Museums as Cultural Hubs: the Future of Tradition

Just as Humanity is ever evolving, facing new limits, challenging present options and

making up new inventive answers, so does the relationship with Memory and Tradition.

The ability to build up and learn from all the generations that are our predecessors is the distinctive trace of humankind, this characteristic depends on memory to subsist, while  tradition helps to shape and frame human options and actions.

Museums thus face a permanent challenge to safeguard the past, whereas promoting the understanding of present meanings and relations,  that help to build a better, more inclusive future.

Present day societies are global, challenging institutions of memory to open up to new and different situations, while insuring a difficult balance between their inheritance and new ways of experiencing it.

Man is the measure of all human things, His residence (under no matter what shape or size) is therefore a privileged approach to all dimensions of Human activity.

Sessions                                                                                                        

Interpreting Memorial Spaces in Museological Contexts

People value what they know and have learned to understand and appreciate. Memorial spaces embody traditions, talk about significant events or people.

The residential space is instinctively apprehended by those who visit, they identify human universal needs and though through different perspectives, feel in a familiar ground.

Nevertheless, museum professionals know that the untouched ground does not exist, what really ‘talks’ to visitors is the interpretation presented by museological options, regardless of all the difficulties posed by conservation and security constraints.

What should be the boundaries, how far can we go? What are museum professionals responsibilities and how can we face up these challenges?

Programming Memorial Spaces in Museological Contexts

Museums are no longer sleeping beauties, untouched by the passage of time, offering the visitor their enigmatic stillness. Museum professionals have to program activities, propose alternative approaches, and promote curiosity and discussion.

The role of museums in present day societies is evaluated by their ability to make memory and tradition tools to reinforce social cohesion, promote learning and knowledge,  provide keys to unlock the planet diversity and increasing complexity.

Innovating in Memorial Spaces in Museological Contexts

Museums that deal with memory and tradition through the means of residences are often considered to be static, by vocation and respect by the frame provided by the container/house, contents/collection and personality/personalities they evoke.

How can we innovate without betraying tradition? How can we bring memory alive introducing different approaches?

See

Poster English

Poster Portuguese

Program

Photo report

Program

Joint Statement ICOM Europe and ICOM Germany

Photos

Proceedings published by ICOM France. See here

Let’s make copyright…. Right!

The Information Session on “Copyright Flexibilities in the US and EU”, promoted by ICOM Europe, with the support of ICOM France, ICOM Germany and the US College of Art Association, assembled almost one hundred in the Musée des Arts et Métiers, in Paris, and who  followed with deep attention the interventions of invited speakers.

After the initial welcoming words by Julliette Raoul-Duval, Chair of ICOM France, and the introductory framing remarks by Luís Raposo, President of ICOM Europe (including here the reference to a note addressed to the Session by Rina Pantalony, Chair of LEAC, which was distributed among all participants: see here), invited speakers showed how diverse can the subject of copyright be envisaged and “how fair use and other flexibilities are helping museums to fulfill their mission”.

Paul Klimpel, from Germany, emphasized the ambiguities lying behind copyright legislations. He expressly said that in this domain “uncertainty is the rule; clearness, the exception”. He also pointed out that most of the differences between US and EU derive from diverse, even opposed, perceptions of access to cultural data.

Claire Le Henaff exposed the particular situation relating the law of “droit d’auteur” in France – a case of extreme regulation in favour of author rights, but where exceptions for educational and research purposes do exist and can be used by museums.

Hunter O’Hanian and Peter Jaszi, both from CAA, explained in a very persuasive way the US situation regarding “fair use” – a conquest of the last decades, they said. They also insisted on the idea that in this experience it is not so much the particular legal US frame which deserves to be considered, less more copied, but the mental and citizen motivation lying behind it.

Charlotte Waedle, referred to recent research projects on copyright in UK, including some applications taking advantage of the fringes of law.

Finally, Ronan Deazley, professor of copyright in the University of Belfast, agreeing with the postulate of the dominance of legal ambiguity in these domains, expressed a sort of plea in favor of “citizen rebellion”, conducting to de facto actions, allowing enlarging free use of cultural heritage data.

In general, all speakers and participants in the debate agreed that laws of copyright express first of all cultural and citizen postures. The US one is much more oriented by the predominance of practice over norm; and the EU is maybe the opposite. Also, the US one is axed on users; and the EU one, in authors.

In closing the Session, Luís Raposo quoted the petition currently in course in EU, promoted by teachers and education agents, claiming that in any future revision of these themes in EU, copyright has to be addressed… rightly. And this was a kind of closing consensus of the session.

 

 

(abstract)

Legal framework and access to cultural heritage in the US and Europe

The legal framework is crucial for cultural heritage in the digital word – Especially for the 20th century. In Europe we speak about the black hole of the 20th century. The reasons are various, but the core reason is simple. The legal status of each and every item in the collections of museums and archives must be cleared, before it can be digitized and shown online. Orphan Works are only the tip of an iceberg, the problem of legal uncertainty is much bigger.

Comparing Europe with the US, the US is better of. I will describe four differences.

– The US joined the Bern convention 1989. Before that, the US had a mandatory copyright registration.

– The work made for hire doctrine in the US vs contract agreements in Europe

– The fair use doctrine in the US vs strict and limited limitations end exceptions

– The concept of copyright as an individual right in Europe vs the utilitarian American concept of copyright, where society should benefit.

– notice and take down and opt out in the US vs written warning with high costs in Europe.

These aspects create a culture of access in the US with huge digitalization Projects like Google Books or Internet Archive, while Europe is dominated by a culture of fear. Institution very afraid of the consequences of formal copyright violation by showing our culture online – for good reasons.

We found some solutions in Europe too – but with very limited effect. One solution is the Norwegian way. The Norwegian national library is digitizing everything older than 2002, shows it online and pays general compensation to collecting societies. But the Norwegian cultural heritage is only accessible in Norway, it is only a national solution.

Other approaches just failed like the orphan works directive of the European Union. The burdens of diligent search are to heavy to bear for cultural institutions.

To sum it up, the 20th century of Europe’s rich culture stays a black hole in the digital age. Only copyright reform will change that.

(presentation)

–See PKlimpel pdf

(abstract)

Re-thinking copyright strategy in museums

The main points I would like to present are:

• The multiplication of exceptions to copyright introduced by the legislator: the number of exceptions has increased. The last ones were introduced by the law for a digital Republic in October 2016. Several exceptions have an impact for the museums, without any entirely dedicated to them.

• In parallel with increased exceptions of copyright, the French judge has created praetorian exceptions such as the “accessory theory”. He also with the checks and balances method oppose other fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression, with copyright.

Thus, under the influence of the judge, French copyright tends to adapt to technological and societal developments.

(presentation)

–See Full text.

(abstract)

-Not received

(presentation)

–See HunterOHanian pdf

(abstract)

-Not received

(presentation)

–See PJaszi pdf

(abstract)

Re-thinking copyright strategy in museums
Frustration is a recurrent theme in the cultural heritage sector when it comes to digitizing and making available museum artefacts.  At the heart of this frustration seems to be the (perceived) impediments that copyright places in the way of this process and the failure of the copyright flexibilities to meet practical needs.  This in turn leads to siren calls for changes to the law.  In this contribution, I will describe the copyright strategies pursued in two recently completed EU funded projects  with cultural heritage at their core.  The first is RICHES- Renewal innovation and change: heritage and European Society – which was concerned with the recalibration of relationships within the cultural heritage sector in response to digitization and co-creation.  The copyright strategy developed for the project sought to persuade heritage institutions to think about cultural heritage as a resource (via the human rights framework) before considering it an asset (via the intellectual property framework). Heritage does, after all, belong to ‘the people’. The starting point was to ask how the rights to culture and cultural rights in the human rights framework could be fulfilled when developing institutional strategies, and then find ways in which copyright could support that approach including thinking creatively about copyright flexibilities.
The second – Europeana Space – was concerned with the creation of new opportunities for employment and economic growth within the creative industries sector, through finding new (business) models for monetising digital cultural heritage.  Here, the project developed a ‘protected’ space, a legal and technical space in which project participants could experiment with digital works and tools while thinking about ideas for exploitation.  While this experimentation may have pushed the parameters of the flexibilities, nothing was allowed beyond the boundaries of the space unless and until agreement had been attained.
The presentation will finish with a question for ICOM and its members:  when institutions incorporate intangible heritage within their collections, what copyright matters arise in practice, and how do the flexibilities feature in that process – if at all?

(presentation)

–See CWaedle pdf

(abstract)

-Not received

(presentation)

–See RDeazley pdf

Program seminarium

Program of the seminar

 9.30

Otwarcie i głosy wprowadzające / Opening and introductory speeches

Prowadzi / Chaired by

Paweł JASKANIS

Alberto Garlandini

Vice-prezident / vice-president ICOM

 

Luis RAPOSO

prezydent / president ICOM Europe

Dorota FOLGA-JANUSZEWSKA

prezydent  Komitetu Narodowego ICOM Polska / president ICOM Poland

Paulina FLORJANOWICZ

dyrektor Departamentu Dziedzictwa Kulturowego w Ministerstwie Kultury i Dziedzictwa Narodowego  / director of Cultural Heritage Department, Ministry of Culture and National Heritage

Piotr MAJEWSKI

dyrektor Narodowego Instytutu Muzealnictwa i Ochrony Zbiorów / director of National Institute for Museums and Public Collections

 

10.15

Prowadzi / Chaired by

Dorota FOLGA – JANUSZEWSKA

Alberto GARLANDINI

Nowe muzea wobec nowych wyzwań społecznych. Muzeum „rozszerzone” a rezolucja ICOM 2016 „Odpowiedzialność muzeów za krajobraz” i  Rekomendacja dla muzeów UNESCO  z 2015 r./

New museums for new social challenges.  The “extended museums” facing ICOM’s 2016 Resolution on the Responsibility of Museums towards Landscape and UNESCO’s  2015 Recommendation on Museums.

 

Luis RAPOSO

Rola Muzeów we wspólnocie i poza nią/ Community Museums and beyond

EULAC MUSEUMS (http://eulacmuseums.net/)

Daniele JALLA

Odpowiedzialność muzeów za krajobraz. Historia idei na przykładzie Italy we Włoszech/ Responsibility of museums towards Landscape, history and practice of an idea: the case of Italy

 

François MAIRESSE

Muzealizacja Świata. Odpowiedzialność Muzeów wobec krajobrazu – raport/

Musealisation of the World. Responsibility of Museums  toward Landscape – report

Donatella MURTAS

Od teorii do praktyki: z doświadczeń Ekomuzeum położonego w północno-zachodnich Włoszech; krainie tarasów i winnic / From theory to practice: the experience of the Ecomuseum of the terrace landscapes and the vineyards’, North-West Italy 

Dyskusja po każdym wykładzie / Discussion after every speech

13.30

Lunch

14.30

Prowadzi / Chaired by

Paulina FLORJANOWICZ

Paweł JASKANIS

dyrektor Muzeum Pałacu Króla Jana III w Wilanowie / director of Museum of King Jan III’s Palace

at Wilanów

oraz/and

Agnieszka LAUDY

pełnomocnik dyrektora Muzeum Pałacu Króla Jana III w Wilanowie do spraw środowiskowych /

Museum of King Jan III’s Palace at Wilanów plenipotentiary for the enviroment

Muzeum villa rustica w nowym mieście / Villa rustica Museum in the modern city

Michał NIEZABITOWSKI

dyrektor Muzeum Historycznego Miasta Krakowa oraz prezes Stowarzyszenia Muzealników Polskich /

director of The Historical Museum of the City of Kraków and president of Polish Association of Museums

Kraków – Miasto Muzeum / Cracow – Museum City

Michał WOŹNIAK

dyrektor Muzeum Okręgowego im. Leona Wyczółkowskiego w Bydgoszczy /

director of the Leon Wyczółkowski District Museum in Bydgoszcz

Wewnątrz i zewnątrz muzeum techniki / Inside and outside of Museum of Technology

 

Wiesław SKROBOT

Polsko-Niemiecki Instytut Badawczy, Collegium Polonicum w Słubicach /

Polish-German Research Institute, Collegium Polonicum at Słubice

Muzeum i krajobraz – horyzonty odniesień stwórczych / Museum and landscape – the horizons of maker’s interactions

Jan GODŁOWSKI

dyrektor Muzeum Żup Krakowskich Wieliczka / director of The Cracow Saltworks Museum

Zabytkowa kopalnia soli w Wieliczce – ochrona, muzeum, komercja / The historic salt mine in Wieliczka – protection, museum and commercialism

Monika MURZYN – KUPISZ

Zakład Dziedzictwa Kulturowego i Studiów Miejskich UNESCO, Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Krakowie / UNESCO Unit for Heritage and Urban Studies at Cracow University of Economics

 Złożoność relacji między muzeami a ich kulturowym i społeczno-ekonomicznym otoczeniem /

 Complexity of relations between museums and their cultural and socio-economic environment

Dyskusja / Discussion

17.30

Zwiedzanie pałacu / Visit to the Wilanów Palace

 18.30

Kolacja (wykładowcy i organizatorzy) / Dinner (lecturers and organizers)

alternatywnie zapraszamy na Galę Sybilii, która odbędzie się na Zamku Królewskim

  

17 maja 2017

  9.00

Prowadzi / Chaired by

 Paweł JASKANIS

 Jan MAĆKOWIAK

dyrektor Muzeum Narodowego Rolnictwa i Przemysłu Rolno – Spożywczego w Szreniawie /

director of The National Museum of Agriculture and Food Industry in Szreniawa

Muzeum historyczne, przyrodnicze, etnograficzne – a  może techniki rolniczej? Po prostu: Muzeum Narodowe Rolnictwa i Przemysłu Rolno – Spożywczego /

The identity of the museum as historical, natural, ethnographic and perhaps agricultural technology. Finally: National Museum of Agriculture and Food Industry

               

Antoni BARTOSZ

dyrektor Muzeum Etnograficznego im. Seweryna Udzieli w Krakowie/

director of The Ethnographic Museum in Kraków

Etnografia w przestrzeni publicznej. Czyli jak odpowiedzieć życiu /

Ethnography in the public space. How to respond to life

Jarosław GAŁĘZA

dyrektor Muzeum Wsi Opolskiej / The Opole Open-Air Museum of Rural Architecture

110 lat, 2 miesiące i 2 tygodnie. Historia i teraźniejszość polskiego muzealnictwa na wolnym powietrzu w świetle Rezolucji Nr 1 przyjętej na Generalnym Zgromadzeniu ICOM w Mediolanie 9 lipca 2016 roku / 110 years, 2 months, and 2 weeks. History and present time of Polish open-air museums in reference to ICOM General Assembly Resolution NO. 1, Milano July 9, 2016

 

Anna WENDE – SURMIAK

dyrektor Muzeum Tatrzańskiego im. dr. Tytusa Chałubińskiego w Zakopanem /

director of The Tatra Museum in Zakopane

Muzeum Tatrzańskie – Muzeum w przestrzeni / The Tatra Museum – museum in space

 

Andrzej WYRWA

dyrektor Muzeum Pierwszych Piastów na Lednicy / director of Museum of the First Piasts at Lednicy

Muzea w otwartej przestrzeni – niewygasłe ślady przyrodniczej i kulturowej przeszłości /

Open-air museums – unextinguished traces of natural and cultural past

Robert KOTOWSKI

dyrektor Muzeum Narodowego w Kielcach / director of The National Museum in Kielce

Muzeum Narodowe w Kielcach w przestrzeni kulturowej Wiślicy /

 The National Museum in Kielce in the context of  cultural space of Wiślica

Lech KARWOWSKI

dyrektor Muzeum Narodowego w Szczecinie / director of The National Museum in Szczecin

Misja a taktyka. Meandry rozwoju muzeum w otoczeniu społecznym / Mision and tactics. Developing museum in social milieu.

 

Waldemar RATAJ

prezes Fundacji Colegium Wigierskie / president of The Collegium Vigrense

Muzeum w systemie rzecznictwa ochrony dziedzictwa lokalnego i wartości przestrzeni publicznej / Museum as advocate of the local heritage care and values in public space. 

 

Dyskusja / Discussion

 12.00

Przerwa kawowa / Coffee brake

 12.30

Podsumowanie, dyskusja i wnioski / Summary discussion and conclusions

Dorota FOLGA – JANUSZEWSKA

and Luis RAPOSO