Who Owns Our Ancestors’ Voices?

T. Reed
{"title":"Who Owns Our Ancestors’ Voices?","authors":"T. Reed","doi":"10.7916/JLA.V40I2.2060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Part I, this Note will explore federal cultural property statutes as well as the doctrines of common law copyright and aboriginal title, each of which might be employed to determine ownership interests in pre-1972 sound recordings made on Indian reservations. In Part II, this Note will present a case study, involving a nonindigenous collector who captured a massive body of Native American cultural expression prior to 1972, to illustrate the complexities of applying cultural property statutes and common law doctrines to these types of materials in the present. Finally, recognizing that the Copyright Act’s treatment of pre-1972 sound recordings has been identified by Congress as an area in need of revision,1 Part III explores the potential risks and benefits of applying the Copyright Act’s frameworks to pre-1972 sound recordings made on federally recognized Indian reservations. If Congress does have the power to impose these frameworks on pre- 1972 sound recordings made on tribal lands, how might such a framework affect tribal communities? And, should tribal communities oppose such a move by Congress?","PeriodicalId":222420,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7916/JLA.V40I2.2060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Part I, this Note will explore federal cultural property statutes as well as the doctrines of common law copyright and aboriginal title, each of which might be employed to determine ownership interests in pre-1972 sound recordings made on Indian reservations. In Part II, this Note will present a case study, involving a nonindigenous collector who captured a massive body of Native American cultural expression prior to 1972, to illustrate the complexities of applying cultural property statutes and common law doctrines to these types of materials in the present. Finally, recognizing that the Copyright Act’s treatment of pre-1972 sound recordings has been identified by Congress as an area in need of revision,1 Part III explores the potential risks and benefits of applying the Copyright Act’s frameworks to pre-1972 sound recordings made on federally recognized Indian reservations. If Congress does have the power to impose these frameworks on pre- 1972 sound recordings made on tribal lands, how might such a framework affect tribal communities? And, should tribal communities oppose such a move by Congress?
谁拥有我们祖先的声音?
在第一部分中,本说明将探讨联邦文化财产法规以及普通法版权和土著所有权的理论,其中每一个都可能被用来确定1972年以前在印第安保留地录制的录音的所有权利益。在第二部分中,本笔记将介绍一个案例研究,涉及一位非土著收藏家,他在1972年之前收集了大量的美洲土著文化表现形式,以说明在当前将文化财产法规和普通法理论应用于这些类型的材料的复杂性。最后,认识到《版权法》对1972年以前录音的处理已被国会确定为需要修订的领域,1第三部分探讨了将《版权法》框架应用于1972年以前在联邦承认的印第安保留地录制的录音的潜在风险和好处。如果国会有权将这些框架强加于1972年以前在部落土地上录制的声音,那么这样的框架将如何影响部落社区?部落社区应该反对国会的这一举动吗?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信