ERC 2018 - Implications of Brexit for the Law Affecting Cultural Heritage

Implications of Brexit for the Law Affecting Cultural Heritage: Geoffrey Bennett, Institute of Art and Law, United Kingdom,

 

Frustration and beyond

Whatever you think about Brexit, uncertainty and frustration are common feelings. When Geoffrey agreed to do this talk he didn’t think we would be in the position we are in. It is still hard to know what will happen, nothing has been settled except the tone – that of a soft Brexit. Lawyers would call it an agreement to agree, which is not an agreement at all. This is a sign that the parties are still negotiating. It might be two years yet before we will really know what is what. This is the problem that much of law is about: providing certainty in an uncertain world.

 

The current situation – an agreement to agree

Article 167 of the Lisbon Treaty states that ‘the Union shall contribute to the flowering of the cultures of the Member States…bringing the common cultural heritage to the fore.’ It shall be aimed at supporting, amongst other things, ‘non-commercial cultural exchanges’. It is an EU objective that cultural mobility is facilitated and EU law that there is freedom of movement of goods and people. There is also the Network of European Museum Organisations, NEMO, which has a useful standard loan agreement template.

 

There are a number of income streams from the EU that support a variety of initiatives such as ‘Creative Europe’ which the UK has benefitted from. Liverpool for example received 10 million pounds from the EU Regional Development Fund, which unlocked more money through the multiplier effect.

 

Post Brexit

Post Brexit, the UK will be ‘beyond’ the EU, joining countries such as Iceland, Norway, Bosnia and the Ukraine. What impact will this have? The UKRG’s EU exit impact statement is a good document to see the list of areas that could be affected. Many questions are raised, such as:

• Will the spirit of loans be affected?
• Will existing long-term loans be affected by import and export changes?
• How long will the law be in limbo? Will this affect planning?
• Will costs increase?
• Will the UK be a less attractive partner?
• How will VAT, staff and transport be affected?

What can we do?
We can be weary of gaps in our contracts. There is a danger that one invalid clause invalidates the whole contract, so we need to guard against that.

 

Examples from case law  

Taylor v Caldwell (1863) – this was about hire of a music hall that was destroyed by fire, which was not the fault of either party. The hirers sued and lost. If an event renders a contract impossible/illegal the legal doctrine of frustration applies.

 

A casino magnate bought Picasso’s ‘Le Reve’ for 48 million dollars and had a contract to sell the painting to a hedge fund manager. The magnate accidentally poked a hole in the painting with his elbow. The legal question was had the contract been frustrated? The answer is unclear but in case law something has to be dire to bring about ‘frustration’.

 

Amalgamated Investment v John Walker (1977): John Walker advertised a whisky warehouse for sale. The building became a listed building, decreasing development potential. Amalgamated Investment argued for frustration of contract but this was dismissed by the court who said that the contract had not been frustrated.

 

If a loan contract stated that only the lender’s curator could handle a painting and a volcano stopped that curator’s travel, this could be frustration but if the exhibition had 30-40 works, the loss of 1 would probably not be frustration. If things happen unexpectedly there isn’t an automatic legal remedy and Brexit itself is not going to be a surprise. The new arrangement probably won’t make things illegal, just expensive and irksome and we need to prepare for it in our contracts. In this perhaps unprecedented period of legal uncertainty it is more important than ever to consider provisions for things not going as smoothly as in the past.

 

Our contracts  

• Avoid frustration by including a force majeure clause so that the contract says what will happen.
• If loans have to be cancelled, agree what would happen about costs in advance.
• Consider making a provision in the contract to limit the effect of currency fluctuation.
• Include arbitration clauses

Positives to remember!

• For the UK it shouldn’t be worse than dealing with a non EU country such as the USA.
• There is a large amount of trust and good will in the sector
• There is a common professional language
• Joint working such as the acquisition of two Rembrandts by the Louvre and Rijksmuseum shows that we can work together.

 

Written by Katie Robson, Registrar, Royal Armouries

ERC 2018: Documenting Change: Thinking Differently about Collections Documentation in Smaller Museums

Documenting Change: Thinking Differently about Collections Documentation in Smaller Museums, by Inbal Livine of the Powell-Cotton Museum.

Discussing how the Powell-Cotton Museum changed the way it approaches its documentation backlog, Inbal Livine gave some great insights into ways of collaborating with academic researchers, subject specialists, and community groups to improve cataloguing and documentation in under-resourced museums.

Inbal first discussed the Pacific Presences collaboration the museum undertook between 2016 and 2018. Having been approached by researchers doing a project on Pacific cultural objects, the Powell-Cotton Museum realised the opportunity to gain from working with a larger funded organisation.

Over two years, the museum worked with subject-specialist experts and diaspora communities to improve the documentation and cataloguing of Pacific objects within their ethnographic collection. Objects were scanned and the specialist knowledge of communities and experts were recorded to be put on the database – through which they could move past the minimum of skeleton records required by SPECTRUM.

She then moved on to how this has helped the museum tackle their dreaded backlog.

While the museum, like many other small or medium sized museums, is understaffed (with traditionally only one curator) they were able to utilise the opportunity to gain knowledge about their collection and, ultimately, improve the catalogue, location tracking, and packing of a key group of objects within the collection.

Through the project, they were also able to outline a framework for future work with similar organisations, which opens up the possibility for funding through new streams, such as research councils.

But how can projects like this become a legacy, rather than a ‘once off’? Firstly, you need to consider these projects as actual possibilities, not just a one-time thing. Working with small museums is attractive to funders, so why can’t museums benefit from this? As so many small museums have seen a reduction in staff, and increase in multiple-hate working, we need to take the help we can get. 

By showing your museum as a place that is ready and willing to work with larger organisations, you can open up these funding streams and help improve your documentation without the capital required for a self-led documentation project. Use who you know to build your reputation as a place to work with, including subject specialist networks, social media, and local links, and be sure you know what your museum wants to achieve.

Once this is in place, Inbal suggests that these projects can help to take museums back to the basics of good documentation. By working with specialists on these projects, small museums can move beyond the minimum requirements of SPECTRUM to have fantastically in-depth catalogue records.

And, most importantly, keep the projects going. Keep looking for partners to focus on the next section of your collection – by having discrete projects of collection types, you can succeed in one area completely then move on to the next, rather than attempting the daunting (and impossible) task of improving everything at once.

Finally, make sure you’re getting the most out of the projects. Be creative, be innovative, and be efficient; this message was surely the most important message in how to rethink documentation. Involve everyone and work together; you can get much more done than alone.

Written by Samantha Jenkins, Peoples History Museum

ERC 2018 - Copyright, Collections, and Visitor Photography

Copyright, Collections, and Visitor Photography - Fredric Saunderson (National Library of Scotland, United Kingdom)

Fredric Saunderson is Rights and Information Manager at the National Library of Scotland and Chair of the UK Libraries and Archives Copyright Alliance. Fredric shared with attendees how the National Library of Scotland has adapted its processed in two copyright areas: collection donations and visitor photography.

Fredric Saunderson. Photo: Nadine Loach, 2018

 Fredric highlighted that the library holds collections but does not necessarily hold copyright; an issue many museums, libraries and archives regularly have to deal with when looking at sharing or engaging with their collections. One of the key points made was that when accepting objects for donation, institutions must make clear the copyright status of the objects from the offset, and ensure this is documented appropriately. For example with a copyright form outlining the known copyright status, ownership, contact information where possible, and whether the donor is in a position to approve all or some copyright for particular usage.

As copyright guidance and legislation can be unclear and challenging, Fredric discussed the importance of clear guidance on copyright rules, and the reasons why these exist to be communicated to all collections users from visitors to exhibitions to researchers and staff.

In terms of developing visitor understanding of copyright and photography of their collections, The National Library of Scotland has made changes that enable and encourage visitor photography. For example, with ‘Photography Encouraged’ signage in exhibition and collections spaces. The signage gave an overview of the reasons for copyright law and how visitors can engage with collections through their own personal photography.

Importantly, Fredric quoted the UK Intellectual Property Office by stating that it is not infringement to put literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works on display. So, although Registrars must have a good understanding of copyright and implications for collections, it is also their responsibility to manage the risk and encourage engagement with collections through their display and research.

Written by Nadine Loach, Leeds Museums and Galleries

ERC 2018: The Registrar in the 21st Century

Panel Discussion: The Registrar in the 21st Century - Chair: Aisha Burtenshaw (UKRG, United Kingdom)

Aisha Burtenshaw chaired a panel looking at how our profession has changed since the first European Registrars Conference in 1998. Panellists considered how the role differs across countries, how we can work together and what we can expect for the role in the future.

The panel included Registrars at difference stages in their careers across the UK, US and Europe: Freda Matassa from Matassa-Toffolo, Linda Pacifici from Palazzo Strozzi, Brandi Pomfret from Echelon Arts Management, David Chan from Wellcome Collection, and myself, Nadine Loach from Leeds Museums and Galleries.

The discussion began by looking at what has changed in the last 20 years. One of the key points was that the role of the Registrar is more widely understood and recognised as a vital part of the management and development of collections. At the same time, Registrars are required to have a deeper understanding of more complex legal issues as the industry and surrounding markets have developed. The Institute of Art and Law courses were recommended to provide a good grounding.

The panel also looked at other new challenges such as working with contemporary art and new media, meaning Registrars must be more flexible and more creative in their problem-solving and planning than ever. Overall, the role is broader than ever, with Registrars providing support to colleagues across all manner of collections issues.

How did the panel become Registrars? Most did not make a conscious decision to be a Registrar, particularly with an awareness of the role and what it entails not being communicated as well as, for example, Curators. Some came from collections management, curatorial and exhibitions roles. Although, the understanding of the role of the Registrar has improved in recent years, with the visibility of the role is developing with sector-related courses and traineeships. The importance of on the job training was highlighted as an important part of gaining an understanding of the role, and provide practical experience that ensures individuals are confident and prepared to deal with the myriad of issues Registrars deal with on a day to day basis.

Sustainability has been a buzzword for many years now, but was it on the agenda when the panel first started out in the sector? The Arts Council require funded institutions in the UK to report on sustainability – covering environmental, financial and social sustainability. Importantly, the panel felt they had to negotiate more than ever now – to do more with less, so in effect are embedding sustainability into their practices. The panel agreed that environmental sustainability is one of the main challenges for the next 10 years – but that it is equally an opportunity as well as a challenge.

What advice did the panel give for new Registrars? Interact and build networks, share experiences to develop your own skills, and work across a variety of institutions to gain a good understanding of how different places work and how you can work with your colleagues across the sector. Being a Registrar is about supporting people and projects, and this requires patience and significant people skills to develop trust. Finally the panel agreed that Registrars are multi-talented and diplomatic and should be more active in cultural matters as a result.

Written by panel member Nadine Loach, Leeds Museums and Galleries

Australasian Registrars Conference: Duration and Dimension - Day Two

What do you mean the artwork is no longer approved for exhibition?!

Even though it was a gloriously sunny day, probably better suited to sitting by the river than in a darkened lecture theatre, I was excited to return to Melbourne Museum for day two of Duration and Dimension, the Australasian Registrars Committee’s two-day conference looking at all things digital and time-based. The speakers on day one had been engaging, funny, and generously shared their experiences (both good and bad) of working with time-based media, and day two promised more of the same.

While day one had been full of practical advice on how to manage time-based media, many of the presentations of day two focused on case studies. As a time-based media newbie, this really helped to cement what I’d learned the previous day and demonstrate how these things could be put into practice.

A selection of the case studies will be added to the UKRG website as a separate post, but one of the ones I found most interesting came from Alexandra Nichols at the Met in New York. In 2012, the Met had acquired You the Better by artist Erica Beckman, a single channel video artwork made in 1983. In 2017, the Met contacted the artist, who said the work that had been acquired was out of date and was not approved for exhibition. A registrarial nightmare (and one I’m pretty sure will now feature on the list of things which make me wake up in a cold sweat in the middle of the night). Further discussion with the artist revealed that there were now three versions of the work that were approved for exhibition: a theatre-based presentation (which was how the work was originally presented), a digital projection with strict guidance on how the room should be laid out, and an installation-based presentation. The version the Met had purchased was no longer approved for exhibition as the film had since been remastered. Fortunately, the artist provided the remastered version, but this presents its own challenges, for example, what date should be given on the label text when the work is displayed?

Day two again emphasised the importance of collaboration. As well as registrars and conservators, we heard from an AV manager, a solicitor, and a university lecturer who is also an established artist working with video and installation. The other big takeaway from across both days was don’t be afraid to try. As registrars, we often feel pressure to instantly know all the answers, but the conference emphasised that it is ok to say ‘I don’t know’, to seek advice from others (both internally and externally), and to try different approaches, as long as these are done in collaboration with the artists (or preserving the artist’s intent), and with colleagues, and meticulously documented (obviously!)

The conference closed in the best way – with a presentation of a selection of recently digitised and wonderfully dated adverts from the 70s, 80s, and 90s, thanks to Sarah Davy at Ngā Taonga Sound and Vision.

Overall, the conference was fantastic experience, and one that has left me buzzing with new ideas. I’m hugely grateful to UKRG, and Blackwall Green, for making it possible for me to attend, and would be happy to chat with anyone wanting to hear about anything from the conference in more detail – just drop me an email at ffyles@museumoflondon.org.uk.

Written by Flora Flyes, Assistant Registrar Museum of London, who attended the arcs conference in 2018, Melbourne 3-6th October 2018 after receiving an international bursary from UKRG

This bursary has been made possible by the generosity of Blackwall & Green

Australasian Registrars Conference: Duration and Dimension - Day One

A Head of Conservation, a Digital Systems Manager, an Assistant Curator, and a Time-Based Media Conservator walk into a lecture theatre…  

I feel the need to start this blog with a bit of a confession (or maybe a caveat): I am not technologically minded. Beyond ‘turn it off and on again’, I’m not very good with computers, and I’ve also never worked with time-based media. So, with all this in mind, I was a little bit nervous as I approached day one of ‘Duration and Dimension’, a two-day conference organised by the Australasian Registrars committee looking at all things digital and time-based.

I needn’t have worried. Seb Chan, the keynote speaker, gave an impressive introduction to the wide-ranging digital projects he had worked on (if you haven’t checked out the Cooper Hewett’s Collections Online, where you can browse using a variety of factors, including colour, do it now!). I particularly liked his question ‘If every object was digitised, online, and addressable, how might we train visitors to use the building differently?’ Digitisation for digitisation’s sake is not the right approach – it must have a purpose, and this should be built into any digitisation projects.

All the talks were fascinating, but the one that probably most caught my attention on day one (and resulted in pages and pages of notes) was the presentation from the team at the Art Gallery of New South Wales. One of the key messages of the conference was the need for cross departmental collaboration, and this presentation demonstrated this perfectly. Delivered by the AGNSW Head of Conservation, Digital Systems Manager, Assistant Curator, and Time-based Art Conservator, their presentation gave an in depth look into how the AGNSW had overhauled the way that time-based media collections were thought about and managed, and the resulting policies, documents and processes. Time-based artworks have different considerations to your standard oil painting, and by building these in to the acquisitions process at an early stage, this can relieve pressure when it comes to installation, and offers a great way to build relationships with artists, which can be key when it comes to the long-term preservation of time-based media. Time-based artworks are experiential as well as physical, and the systems that AGNSW put in place help to ensure that this is captured at the point of acquisition. How does the artist view their work, both now and in the future? And what is permitted to change?

Other talks covered the complexities of shipping time based artworks across the world when there isn’t a universal understanding of what constitutes ‘art’, practical considerations for long term preservation of both physical carriers (the VHS tape or memory stick that the work originally came on) and digital files, and great examples of how different institutions manage their information relating to time-based media (I am particularly jealous of SFMOMA’s internal Wikipedia for artworks, which allows them to capture narrative information each time the work is displayed and allows different departments to contribute – a great example of collaboration, and also sharing the burden of documentation!)

Written by Flora Flyes, Assistant Registrar Museum of London, who attended the arcs conference in 2018, Melbourne 3-6th October 2018 after receiving an international bursary from UKRG

This bursary has been made possible by the generosity of Blackwall & Green

UKRG event: It’s Good To Talk – Sharing Training and Development Ideas

Following group discussion at the UKRG CPD day, 6 July 2018 Cinema Museum;

On a very, very hot afternoon, UKRG members were welcomed by the Cinema Museum for their annual CPD event. The aim of the day was to share personal experiences of development opportunities and to share what resources and courses were available.

After hearing presentations form several speakers, the UKRG members were asked to split into groups and discuss with their fellow Registrars ‘What makes good CPD and what goes wrong?’. Also, they were asked for suggestions for future actions to be taken by UKRG to improve their training offer. I have summarised the results below, with some future actions. 

 

Summary of Discussions:

• Practical, hands-on training and scenario/problem solving is more effective (Momart airport security training quoted as a good example)
• Use in-house training opportunities – shadowing, across the floor, anecdotes
• Training notes or manual limits a loss of knowledge, can be referred to
• Use feedback as a way to inform future training
• Specialist training offered by large organisations can benefit smaller organisations with more generic posts
• Training can be too generic or too niche – need clear guidance for course/event content
• Mandatory attendance for non-relevant subjects
• Quality of training – Train the Trainer plays a vital role, the trainer has to be good, and have specialist/practical knowledge
• Quality of training – draw from real life experiences
• Cost and time can be prohibitive
• Placements with legal experts
• Make time after training to ‘unpack’ new knowledge
• Cross training across organisations to share colleague’s skills
• Consider training outcomes
• MA and Museum Studies courses required for jobs, but not always put into practice
• Break out of specialist areas and learn from other areas – interdepartmental learning

Actions to be taken from suggestions and comments:

• UKRG to send CPD email alert, same as the job email alert
• On membership list add specialist knowledge/experience to signpost expertise to membership

Future actions to be considered by Committee and next Development Officer:

• E-learning podcasts
• Whatsapp Members Group
• Job swap or secondments network scheme (nationally/internationally) Museums/Galleries/Shippers
• More UKRG bursaries like the joint one with IAL, to attend expensive courses such as CLORE
• Networking and soft skills events
• Making sure Registrar skills are represented on Museum Studies courses

Thank you to everyone who took part.

Written by Lyn Stevens, Registrar, National Museums Scotland and Professional Development Officer, UKRG committee.