Kia ora all, While I agree with Douglas on most things, I do have to voice some concern about the conflation of the interests of Māori and large institutions that is implied in the example below.
This is a big issue which would require much more discussion than I think this copyright argument can bear, and I'm happy to enter into that discussion should anyone wish to take it up in detail (it's a key interest of mine). For now, I'd rather say that while indigenous peoples have sometimes found a voice for certain concerns within a copyright frame, this is usually because any other frame has been unrecognisable to either colonial legislation or market norms. A related wide-ranging discussion can be found at the forum I moderated for the Tate Gallery in 2005: Common Ground - bodies of knowledge <http://www.tate.org.uk/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=3051> All the best, Danny On 15/07/2009, at 10:20 PM, Douglas Bagnall wrote: > > Relatedly, the big collecting institutions selectively and effectively > extend their control over images well past copyright through the use > of > contracts. For example, you might not be allowed to see images of > tupuna until you have agreed to conditions of use set by the > descendants. -- http://www.dannybutt.net _______________________________________________ Ada_list mailing list [email protected] http://aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz/
