Museum Law

American museums have long recognized that their collections sometimes include two categories of artworks whose prior owners parted with them unwillingly: Nazi-looted art and illicitly exported archaeological objects. The relevant industry associations, American Association of Museums and the American Association of Museum Directors, have promulgated self-regulatory regimes that purport to ensure that museums return any objects to which they do not hold good title to their rightful owners. However, the success of these regimes has varied widely based on whether the artwork is an archaeological antiquity or a Nazi-looted piece. My paper identifies the ways in which the regimes and the contexts in which they were created diverge, applying scholarship on effective self-regulatory regimes to argue that museums need the outside scrutiny and internal convergence of opinion that have characterized the Nazi-looted art situation to assure the compliance that is lacking for their antiquities regime, which has little outside scrutiny and is marked by extreme differences in opinion within the museum community as to how to solve the problem (and even whether it is a problem at all).

There are many ways to protect cultural heritage as a valuable commodity. Although heightened security measures and extensive surveillance methods can deter theft, a more effective means for reducing theft is the elimination of the demand for black market art items. Trade in unprovenanced antiquities is a demand-driven crime; the market for illegal or undocumented items is driven by buyers’ wants. The most effective method of protection for cultural heritage is to eliminate the demand for black market for these precious objects, thereby reducing the market, a method known as the “market reduction approach.” There is a well-documented link between the demand for items without provenance and museums. To eliminate black market demand, legislation is necessary to prosecute and regulate buyers, such as museums.

Parallel to their campaign of physically exterminating the Jewish population of Europe, the Nazis carried out a highly organized plan of cultural genocide that involved the confiscation or forced sale of
hundreds of thousands of pieces of art. The Allied forces returned a sizable number of these works to their owners or their heirs after the war, but many disappeared into the hands of private possessors. While some remain hidden in private collections, a number of these artworks were given to, or purchased by, museums or other public institutions. In recent decades, the heirs of Holocaust victims have been using the American court system to make claims for the return of these works. This paper investigates one little-examined, but ethically problematic, aspect of these claims: the fact that the vast majority of these claims are made against public institutions rather than private collectors.
The paper begins with a short survey of the history of World War II art looting and the current legal responses. This introduction makes the dilemmas inherent in this legal response more concrete through descriptions of claims made against the Israel Museum of Jerusalem and the Jewish Museum of Prague. Part II discusses the public interest in keeping art in museums, and is followed by Part III, an analysis of the practical reasons explaining why claims are easier to make against museums and other public institutions. Part IV explores the goals and attitudes of claimants and their attorneys through interviews and other public statements. Finally, Part V concludes by reconsidering the identified ethical dilemmas, leading to a proposal of a better means for heirs, their attorneys, and museums to work together to preserve both the private and the public good.

This Note examines the relation between the market for unprovenanced antiquities and Congress' allowance of tax deductions for donations of in-kind gifts to nonprofit organizations. Part I lays out the current rules on charitable deductions. Part II surveys the antiquities market, arguing that the majority of unprovenanced antiquities sold in the American market during the last few decades were looted and illegally exported from their countries of origin in order to feed this market. Part III begins with a discussion of several cases of donated antiquities and then moves to a general suggestion that the current charitable deduction rules, at best, fail to reduce looting and, at worst, encourage the purchase of looted antiquities. The Note concludes with a proposal for conditioning the availability of a deduction on the presence of satisfactory provenance information and a discussion of the impact this reduction in the availability of deductions might have on the market for antiquities, scholarship and the fate of antiquities themselves.

... The model should give pre-eminence to the character of museum collections as a part of the nation's heritage, but recognize the need for collection control with rational decision-making both in the collection and disposal of specimens. ...

In respose to Conference Session Theme 3: Human Resources Development for “Code of Ethics” in Asia-Pacific:
1. Ethics and laws pertaining to museum governance, administration, and public services significantly involve collections and collection-related activities.
2. A museum professional who is primarily responsible for care, proper storage, management,
and accessibility of collections and resources held in public trust in a museum is recognized as Collection Manager / Registrar in Europe, Australia, and North America.
3. Expertise and human resources in the field of museum registration, documentation, and collections stewardship must be valued and developed in every institution for their fulfillment of legal obligations and rigorous implementation of museum professional ethics on the national, regional, and global standards.
4. Museum associations in Asia-Pacific region are expected to facilitate training and networking of Collection Managers / Registrars in their commitment to the permanent preservation of rich cultural and natural heritage in Asia-Pacific. This shall stimulate international leadership in the development of legal and ethical standards and best practices for collection stewardship across borders.

The paper discusses recent developments of the German jurisprudence and academic research concerning the legal aspects of photographing in museums. It covers the judgement of the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) form 20.12.2018 (I ZR 104/17, known in Germany as 'Museumsfotos'-case) and the literature related to the case. Two crucial legal questions arose: firstly, does a ‘right to the appearance of one’s own object’ exist under the German Law; secondly, is there any copyright protection of the reproductive photos of museum objects in Germany? The paper has been published in the Festschrift dedicated to Prof. Wojciech Kowalski from the University of Silesia (Katowice, Poland).

""""""In 1989, The National Museum of the American Indian Act (NMAIA) was successfully passed after a long and intense struggle. One year later, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) followed. These federal repatriation statutes—arguably some of the most important laws in the history of anthropology, museology, and American Indian rights—enabled Native Americans to reclaim human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony.

Twenty years later, the controversy instigated by the creation of NMAIA and NAGPRA continues to simmer. In the Smaller Scope of Conscience is a thoughtful and detailed study of the ins and outs of the four-year process behind these laws. It is a singular contribution to the history of these issues, with the potential to help mediate the ongoing debate by encouraging all sides to retrace the steps of the legislators responsible for the acts.

Few works are as detailed as McKeown’s account, which looks into bills that came prior to NMAIA and NAGPRA and combs the legislative history for relevant reports and correspondence. Testimonies, documents, and interviews from the primary players of this legislative process are cited to offer insights into the drafting and political processes that shaped NMAIA and NAGPRA.

Above all else, this landmark work distinguishes itself from earlier legislative histories with the quality of its analysis. Invested and yet evenhanded in his narrative, McKeown ensures that this journey through history—through the strategies and struggles of different actors to effect change through federal legislation—is not only accurate but eminently intriguing.""""""

Close Document Image Close Document Printer Image Print This Document! Conservation Information Network (BCIN). Author: Stec, Piotr Title Article/Chapter: "Kontrola eksportu dóbr kultury w prawie francuskim" Title Translated ...

Close Document Image Close Document Printer Image Print This Document! Conservation Information Network (BCIN). Author: Stec, Piotr Title Article/Chapter: "Kontrola eksportu dóbr kultury w prawie francuskim" Title Translated ...