Chris makes some interesting points that take us away from the original
concern of archaeologists and museum repositories, and professionalism.
This is an interesting thread on its own, however! I'll add the following
points:
1. During my dissertation, I operated exclusively under verbal agreements
with landowners. Has anyone run into problems with this?
2. The landowners didn't want boxes of broken pottery kiln wasters after
all.
3. My research was on private land, but I applied for a Utah Antiquities
Permit from the State History Office as a matter of professional "due
process" (although the due process was not without confusion on my part).
That permit, however, required that the artifacts pass into possession of
the State of Utah and reside at an approved curatorial facility. I expect
this is true of most states in the USA.
4. Don't forget that governments can offer a number of different income and
property tax incentives to the landowners who donate collections from
archaeological research. This can occur through historic preservation
easements or tax deductible contributions, or other means. This rewards
landowners for allowing permitted archaeological research. These are good
incentives, but are not without difficulties. I've never used anything like
this, but would like to hear thoughts from those who have good and bad war
stories related to the topic.
Some other thoughts...
Tim
On 9/5/02 9:39 AM, "Christopher Borstel" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> As I understand it (I'm not a lawyer, and this isn't legal advice):
> Under our common law system, the artifacts belong to the
> landowner. If an archaeologist wants to be sure clear title to a
> collection is established, a signed release, or "deed of gift
> agreement," transferring ownership of the collection from the
> landowner must be executed. Most of us work for an institution of
> some sort, so ownership would normally be transferred from the
> property owner to our employer (university, musuem, agency,
> company, etc.) or to our client, not to ourselves personally.
>
> How the collection gets handled from then on is a matter of
> institutional/client/corporate policy, but in general one would want
> to have a procedure to cover loans. At a minimum, it would be
> appropriate for a letter or memorandum to be prepared when
> objects are borrowed (loaned) for study elsewhere (e.g., when a
> professor retires and moves away). Even a simple document like
> this would include an inventory of the objects being loaned and
> would set an anticipated date of return.
>
> For one of our clients, a state DOT, we must get deeds of gift for
> collections obtained on private land, even if the state subsequently
> acquires the land. (The artifacts belong to the person who owns the
> land at the time of the excavation.) Up to now, we've generally
> gotten releases after the fieldwork is finished, but our client would
> like to see us obtain them before we stick shovel in the ground. I'm
> not enthusiastic about this request, because it has always seemed
> to me to be advantageous to be able to say to a landowner, "you
> own the artifacts; if we find anything we would encourage you to
> donate them to the state/state repository so that they will be
> available for others to study, but obviously you can't make an
> informed choice about this recommendation until you see what we
> find." Most landowners have been willing to sign the agreements.
> When they aren't, we send the artifacts back to them once the
> report's finished. Not happily, but we do it, because they own the
> artifacts.
>
> I suspect that the question of what intellectual property (including
> archaeological collections) belongs to an individual archaeologist
> and what belongs to his/her institution is more ambiguous in the
> context of a university than it is in the consulting world in which
> one is often the employee of a company and is usually working on
> behalf of (as an agent for) a client.
>
> --Chris Borstel
> The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
> East Orange, NJ
>
>
> Date sent: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 17:37:20 -0400
> From: Ron May <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Another newspaper article
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Send reply to: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
>
>> This raises an interesting legal question. Do archaeological
>> collections need title to be transferred from one owner to another?
>> When an agency or scientist recovers artifacts from a property owner's
>> land, do they have an actual title document of ownership? What do
>> curation facilities do for title transfer?
>>
>> Ron May
>> Legacy 106, Inc.
>>
*******************************************************************
Timothy James Scarlett
Assistant Professor of Archaeology
Program in Industrial History and Archaeology
Department of Social Sciences
Michigan Technological University
1400 Townsend Drive
Houghton, Michigan 49931-1295 USA
Tel (906) 487-2113 Fax (906) 487-2468 Internet [log in to unmask]
MTU Website: http://www.industrialarchaeology.net
SHA Website: http://www.sha.org SIA Website: http://www.sia-web.org
*******************************************************************
"Conservative, n: a statesman who is enamoured of existing evils, as
distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others."
Ambrose Bierce (1842-1913)
The Devil's Dictionary, 1911
|