a mere 15 guineas. The piece went on to become incredibly successful, generating much income for the publishers, which Coleridge-Taylor did not benefit from. Similarly, the influence and appropriation of black creatives has occurred across all walks of creative practice. For example, in the US you have black musicians being covered by white artists, who then are often given the credit. For example, Hound Dog by Big Mama Horton is better known for its cover by Elvis. This is particularly the case when the creativity, such as jazz music, is not easily notated into writing or recording, especially prior to technological advancements. I think with these advance- ments, particularly with the rise of AI, we are entering a new era of IP and copyright issues.
What is Serendipity’s mission? PB – Ninety-nine per cent of our work at Serendipity is black-led, black-product. For us and by us. I have always been clear in my vision that we centre perspectives from the African and African Caribbean Diaspora by embedding them in cultural experiences for all. That means that what is on the stage or on the page is black artists and practitioners, but everyone is welcome to be part of the conversation – as an audience member or participant. As a result, our audiences are very diverse and representative of the demographics of our region. The ambition is that we move beyond common stereotypes that black-led work is amateur or only community-based and really start to position the work on a par with that of white-led institutions, such as the Tate or the Barbican.
What sorts of problems have you came across? PB – As our work across arts and heritage has grown, we have begun to see similar issues arise quite frequently. For exam- ple, a lot of works by black artists are often uncredited or miscredited. Sometimes people do not necessarily realise they need to seek permission to use the work of artists. Time and time again I have been called by artists detailing issues where they have waived their moral rights to their own work or alternatively where their intellec- tual property rights have been infringed. We have always been really clear with the artists that we work with that they need to read and interrogate their contracts, both with us and with other organisations. We have also been faced with a lot of challenges around finding the identity of portrait subjects and the creatives behind images of black communities. We have been actively trying to find the creators through research and having conversations with people who might recognise people in the photograph. Where we haven’t been able to find the creator we have registered images as Orphan Works, and this has been important for us.
28 INFORMATION PROFESSIONAL
Pawlet Brookes.
For example, even the National Portrait Gallery has been in touch with us to try and locate the photographer of an image of Eric Irons. It ensures that we keep the con- versation alive around intellectual property and ownership.
Do these problems affect all artists and performers? Are they experi- enced differently by black artists and performers? PB – I think this is an issue that all artists, performers, practitioners, archivists and researchers may face. However, working with black artists, performers, practition- ers, archivists and researchers, who are also affected by systemic racism, there is an intersection with intellectual property and ownership. For example, universities normally own the intellectual property rights to the data of a PhD thesis, but in areas of research where even the super- visors are not experts, this is incredibly problematic. Similarly, many artists and performers do not have rights to use their own photographs. We haven’t done any formal studies, but I think that emerging artists are particularly vulnerable. They are so passionate to cre- ate work and make a start in their careers that they often do not realise until it is too late that they have given their work away. A lot of the knowledge that artists have gained is through experience, often learning things the hard way. This is why the work of Serendipity and Naomi Korn Associates is so important; we are trying to create equity by giving people tools to nav- igate the complexity of copyright law from the start, so that the creative industries are fairer, and more creatives are empowered. On another note, I think understanding that copyright law is different internation- ally is also important. For example, in the
UK copyright is granted as standard but, in the US, it must be registered. We work internationally and so being aware of these differences is critical for artists.
What light has your archiving experience shed on IP problems? PB – Serendipity Institute for Black Arts and Heritage has a growing collection of archival materials called the Liv- ing Archive. The ethos for the Living Archive acknowledges the archive not as a static structure where objects are labelled definitively, but one that con- tinues to evolve through interpretation and reinterpretation. It is a collection of archival materials that can be used by all: artists, academics, researchers and those tracking their family history. However, in developing a Living Archive collection we are having to address everything from Orphan Works, third party rights, digitisation, legacy preser- vation, fair use. We are addressing what all of this looks like for our organisation and people using the archive, recognis- ing that it is a shifting landscape with technological advancements taking place. For Serendipity Institute for Black Arts and Heritage, we are actively seeking to redress the historical bias and colonial gaze, through interpretation and rein- terpretation. I think that many people in institutions have been wary about “decolonisation”, as they think that it means destroying or removing. However, I think for many people, particularly those whose heritage lies in former British colonies, they recognise that it is impossible to separate out history. The history of the Caribbean is tied up in British history; black history is part of British history. What we want to reveal is the whole picture, rather than just a part of it. This often means dealing with very difficult subject matters and difficult
March 2024
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
