Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are Digital Cultural Commons Culturally Diverse?

  • Published:
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. Article 4 of the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions of 2005.

  2. Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/1970 of 10 November 2021 on a common European data space for cultural heritage, C/2021/7953, article 3.5.

  3. Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/1970 of 10 November 2021 on a common European data space for cultural heritage, C/2021/7953, article 3.3.

  4. Commission Recommendation of 27 October 2011 on the digitisation and online accessibility of cultural material and digital preservation, OJ L 283, 29.10.2011.

  5. Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/1970 of 10 November 2021 on a common European data space for cultural heritage, C/2021/7953.

  6. Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act), PE/30/2022/REV/1, OJ L 277, 27.10.2022.

  7. Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector and amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Digital Markets Act), PE/17/2022/REV/1, OJ L 265, 12.10.2022.

  8. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data (Data Act), COM/2022/68 final.

  9. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and Council on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act), COM/2020/842 final.

References

  1. Clément-Fontaine, Mélanie. 2022. La numérisation des collections muséales: accès et pluralisme culturel. In Les restitutions des collections muséales: aspects politiques et juridiques, ed. Clémentine Bories, Bouglé-Le Roux, Philippe Charlier, and Mélanie Clément-Fontaine, 327–338. Droit & Science Politique. Paris: Editions Mare & Martin.

  2. Haux, Dario, Antoinette Maget Henri, Dominicé, and Raspotnig Jana Alexandra. 2021. A Cultural Memory of the Digital Age? International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 34. Springer: 769–782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09778-7.

  3. Lixinski, Lucas. 2020. Digital Heritage Surrogates, Decolonization, and International Law: Restitution, Control, and the Creation of Value as Reparations and Emancipation. Santander Art and Culture Law Review (SAACLR) 2020: 65–86.

  4. Lesage-Münch, Anne-Sophie. 2018. Première vente aux enchères d’un tableau réalisé par intelligence artificielle. Connaissance des Arts, October 26.

  5. Strowel, Alain. 2022. Le droit d’auteur européen en transition numérique: de ses origines à l’unification européenne et aux défis de l’intelligence artificielle et des Big Data. Bruxelles: Larcier.

    Google Scholar 

  6. de Clippele, Marie-Sophie. 2022. La réception juridique diffuse des communs, au-delà du public et du privé. In Distinction (droit) public / (droit) privé brouillages, innovations et influences croisées, eds. Jérémie van Meerbeeck, Diane Bernard, and Antoine Bailleux, 187–215. Bruxelles: Presses de l’Université Saint-Louis.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. L’échelle de communalité. Propositions de réforme pour intégrer les biens communs en droit. 2021. 17–34. Paris: Mission de recherche Droit & Justice.

  8. Cornu, Marie, Fabienne Orsi, and Judith Rochfeld, eds. 2017. Dictionnaire des biens communs. Paris: Presses universitaires de France: Quadrige.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Mattei, Ugo. 2013. The Commons Movement in Italy. South Atlantic Quarterly.

  11. Gutwirth, Serge, and Isabelle Stengers. 2016. Le droit à l’épreuve de la résurgence des commons. Revue Juridique de l’environnement: 306–343.

  12. Dardot, Pierre, and Christian Laval. 2014. Commun: essai sur la révolution au XXIe siècle. Paris: Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Tanas, Alessia, and Serge Gutwirth. 2020. Une approche ‘écologique’ des communs dans le droit. Regards sur le patrimoine transpropriatif, les usi civici et la riviere-personne. In Situ. Au regard des sciences sociales: 17p.

  14. Misonne, Delphine, Marie-Sophie de Clippele, and François Ost. 2018. L’actualité des communs à la croisée des enjeux de l’environnement et de la culture. Revue interdisciplinaire d’etudes juridiques Volume 81. Université Saint-Louis - Bruxelles: 59–81.

  15. Coriat, Benjamin. 2017. Communs informationnels. Dictionnaire des biens communs, 275. Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Le Crosnier, Henri. 2017. Communs de la connaissance. Dictionnaire des biens communs, 272. Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Madison, Michael J., M. Brett, Frischmann, and Katherine J. Strandburg. 2008. Constructing Commons in the Cultural Environment. Cornell Law Review 95: 657.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hardin, Garrett. 1968. The tragedy of the Commons. Science 162: 1243–1248. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3859.1243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Thompson, Edward Palmer, and Philippe Minard. 2014. La guerre des forêts luttes sociales dans l’Angleterre du XVIIIe siècle. Translated by Christophe Jaquet. Paris: la Découverte.

  20. Boyle, James. 2003. The second Enclosure Movement and the construction of the Public Domain. Law and Contemporary Problems 66: 33–74.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lessig, Lawrence. 2004. Free Culture: how big media uses Technology and the Law to lock Down Culture and Control Creativity. New York: Penguin Press HC, The.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hess, Charlotte, and Elinor Ostrom, eds. 2006. Understanding knowledge as a Commons: from theory to practice. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dusollier, Séverine. 2015. Inclusivity in intellectual property. In Intellectual property and General Legal Principles - is IP a Lex Specialis? ed. G. Dinwoodie, 101–118. London: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pélissier, Maud. 2018. Communs culturels et environnement numérique: origines, fondements et identification. tic&société. ARTIC: 95–129. https://doi.org/10.4000/ticetsociete.2395.

  25. Stallman, Richard, and Sam Williams, and Christophe Masutti. 2013. Richard Stallman et la révolution du logiciel libre: une biographie autorisée. $ {number}nd édition. Paris: Eyrolles.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Romainville, Céline. 2014. Le droit à la culture, une réalité juridique - Le régime juridique du droit de participer à la vie culturelle en droit constitutionnel et en droit international. Bruxelles: Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bertacchini, Enrico, Giangiacomo Bravo, Massimo Marrelli, and Walter Santagata, eds. 2012. Cultural commons: a new perspective on the production and evolution of cultures. Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bertacchini, Enrico, Giangiacomo Bravo, and Massimo Marrelli. 2012. Defining Cultural Commons. In Cultural Commons, ed. Walter Santagata Edward Elgar Publishing.

  29. Guillier, Valérian. 2018. La culture comme commun: une approche à préciser. tic&société. ARTIC: 43–68. https://doi.org/10.4000/ticetsociete.2350.

  30. de Clippele, Marie-Sophie. 2020. Protéger le patrimoine culturel: à qui incombe la charge? Collection Générale 157. Bruxelles: Presses de l’Université Saint-Louis.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Strowel, Alain. 2018. Omnia sunt ©ommunia: des opera au Big Data. Revue interdisciplinaire d’etudes juridiques Volume 81. Université Saint-Louis - Bruxelles: 177–209.

  32. Bortolotto, Chiara. 2011. Le trouble du patrimoine culturel immatériel. Terrain - revue d’Ethnologie de l’Europe.

  33. Blake, Janet. 2008. UNESCO’s 2003 convention on Intangible Cultural Heritage: the implications of community involvement in ‘safeguarding.’ Intangible Heritage, 29. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203884973-8.

  34. Wang, Li. 2013. La Convention pour la sauvegarde du patrimoine culturel immatérial: son application en droits français et chinois. Droit Du Patrimoine Culturel et Naturel. Paris: L’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Cornu, Marie, Anita Vaivade, Lily Martinet, and Clea Hance, eds. 2020. Intangible Cultural Heritage under National and International Law: going beyond the 2003 UNESCO Convention. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Carugno, Giovanna. 2018. How to protect traditional folk music? Some reflections upon traditional knowledge and copyright law. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique 31: 261–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-017-9536-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Valette, Jean-Jacques. 2022. C’est la guerre des Pixels… Mais qu’est ce qu’il se passe sur Reddit ? April 4.

  38. Dusollier, Severine. 2019. Intellectual property and the bundle-of-rights Metaphor. Rochester, NY: SSRN Scholarly Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Cabay, Julien, and Maxime Lambrecht. 2015. Remix prohibited: how rigid EU copyright laws inhibit creativity. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 10: 359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Terrier, Émilie. 2021. Vers une nouvelle figure du droit d’auteur: l’affirmation d’une logique publique culturelle. Création, information, communication. Bruxelles: Larcier.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bertacchini, Enrico, and Federico Morando. 2013. The future of museums in the digital age: new models for access to and use of digital collections. International journal of arts management 15: 60–72.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Strowel, Alain. 2020. Les communs numériques et les outils juridiques de la transition. In Le droit en transition. Les clés juridiques d’une prospérité sans croissance, ed. Antoine Bailleux, 285–331. Bruxelles: Presses de l’Université Saint-Louis.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  43. Strowel, Alain. 2019. Nature, culture et langue: entre propriété et commun. In Le droit malgré tout: Hommage à François Ost, ed. Antoine Bailleux, Diane Bernard, Yves Cartuyvels, Hugues Dumont, Isabelle Hachez, and Delphine Misonne, 753–782. Collection Générale. Bruxelles: Presses de l’Université Saint-Louis.

  44. Aigrain, Philippe. 2012. Sharing: culture and the economy in the internet age. Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.26530/OAPEN_409602.

  45. Strowel, Alain, and Luc Desaunettes-Barbero. 2022. Les données, une ressource en quête d’un régime d’appropriation optimal. D A O R 1: 84–101.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Cotiga-Raccah, Andra, Hervé Jacquemin, and Yves Poullet, eds. 2020. Les blockchains et les smart contracts à l’épreuve du droit. Collection du CRIDS 49. Bruxelles: Larcier.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Non-fungible Token (NFT). 2022. Arts Law Centre of Australia. https://www.artslaw.com.au/information-sheet/non-fungible-token-nft/. Accessed April 8.

  48. Vandenbulke, Antoine. 2022. Les aspects juridiques de la blockchain et ses applications. Limal: Anthémis.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Gould, Emily. 2022. NFTs as property: courts start to rein in the NFT. ‘Wild West’ | Institute of Art and Law.

  50. ‘We have no doubt NFTs are art’: after selling tokenised Leonardo, Hermitage plans exhibition of born-digital works. 2021. The Art Newspaper - International art news and events. September 13.

  51. Goffaux-Callebaut, Géraldine. 2022. Les NFT de musées français bientôt en vente ? Billet. Droit, patrimoine et culture.

  52. Gould, Emily. 2022. Can an NFT be art? And why it matters… Institute of Art and Law.

  53. Welcome to the Celestial Hermitage. 2022. https://celestialhermitage.ru/en/. Accessed April 8.

  54. Whitaker, Amy, Anne Bracegirdle, Susan de Menil, and Michelle Ann Gitlitz, and Lena Saltos. 2021. Art, antiquities, and blockchain: new approaches to the restitution of cultural heritage. International Journal of Cultural Policy 27: 312–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2020.1765163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Abrams, Amah-Rose. 2022. Meet Looty, a New Project That Infiltrates Museums, Makes NFTs From Stolen Objects, and Sells Them to Fund Young African Artists. Artnet News. May 25.

  56. Vlassis, Antonios, Michèle Rioux, and Destiny Tchéhouali, eds. 2020. La culture à l’ère du numérique: plateformes, normes et politiques. Liège, Belgium: Presses Universitaires de Liège: Essai.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Ranaivoson, Heritiana Renaud. 2020. Cultural Diversity. In Handbook of cultural economics, ed. Ruth Towse and Trilce Navarrete Hernandez, 183–191. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

  58. Rosen, Sherwin. 1981. The Economics of Superstars. The American Economic Review 71. American Economic Association: 845–858.

  59. Operational guidelines. 2017. Diversity of Cultural Expressions. June 20.

  60. Vlassis, Antonios. 2021. Governance of culture and regulation of online platforms: cross-national issues (global watch on culture and digital trade, n°16). International Federation of Coalitions for Cultural Diversity.

  61. Martinet, Lily. 2022. Europeana: une plateforme réalisant le droit d’accès au patrimoine culturel européen. Revue de droit d’Assas: 62–70.

  62. Usage Guidelines for Metadata. 2022. https://www.europeana.eu/fr/rights/usage-guidelines-for-metadata. Accessed July 13.

  63. Silberman, Neil Asher. 2014. From Cultural Property to Cultural Data: The Multiple Dimensions of “Ownership” in a Global Digital Age. International Journal of Cultural Property 21. Cambridge University Press: 365–374. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739114000162.

  64. Ost, François, Delphine Misonne, and Marie-Sophie de Clippele. 2017. Propriété et biens communs. In La propriété et ses limites/Das Eigentum und seine Grenzen, 131–172. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie Beiheft, 154. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

  65. Clément-Fontaine, Mélanie. 2017. Communs numériques. In Dictionnaire des biens communs, 275. Paris: PUF.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Université Saint-Louis - Bruxelles, Boulevard du Jardin botanique 43, 1000, Brussels, Belgium

    Marie-Sophie de Clippele

Authors
  1. Marie-Sophie de Clippele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie-Sophie de Clippele.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

de Clippele, MS. Are Digital Cultural Commons Culturally Diverse?. Int J Semiot Law 36, 2067–2086 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-10020-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-10020-3

Search

Navigation