Tony Bennett, Differing diversities - Council of Europe

Reasearch position paper 5However, the range and rigour of research on cultural developments in industrialisedcountries is not matched by a corresponding depth of research on culturaldiversity issues. While developing countries and aboriginal peoples have receivedsome scholarly attention, “transitional” states, immigrant minorities, andRoma/Gypsy peoples are not well-represented in the literature. Moreover,research concerning the similarities between these groups remains quite rudimentary,in spite of the historical, cultural, and political resemblances which are immediatelyapparent among them.Research into copyright concepts also tends to be diagnostic in nature. In contrast,few scholars attempt to address the pragmatic and precise issue of how copyrightconcepts may help or hinder cultural diversity policies. Sustained scholarly investigationof the practical effects of copyright theory on cultural diversity appear tobe largely neglected. Systematic analyses of how copyright concepts can bemoulded to serve non-traditional cultural contexts – if at all – will be of great valueto the development of cultural policy. In particular, the problem of whether copyrightconcepts can be used to promote objectives of cultural diversity policies callsfor closer examination.Distinguishing between technologies of creation and disseminationIn the same vein, the possibilities of technology for promoting cultural objectiveshave not been extensively explored by intellectual property scholars. Here, too,research concentrates on the innovative possibilities of technology for creativeactivities, without considering the potential contribution of communications andmedia technologies to cultural diversity. Future research should focus on the waysin which intellectual property law can shape the use of technology for culturaldiversity purposes.Breakdown of traditional distinctions within intellectual property lawThe unprecedented progress of technology has also created a need to re-evaluatethe validity of accepted legal structures in the new cultural environment. Theextension of established principles of intellectual property law to new technologiesappears to be bringing traditional distinctions within intellectual property lawinto question. No doubt, this lack of clarity in the law reflects the profound socialeffects of technological developments, which often render such traditionaldichotomies in western culture as those of art and science, artist and audience, andprivate rights and public interest somewhat ambiguous. 1For example, current scholarship on intellectual property has found that attemptsto create a framework for the legal regulation of programs for computer softwarehave caused a blurring of the boundary dividing copyright from patents. 2__________1. Christie (1995: 525) points out that, “there is a trend towards subject-matters in which the user playsa role in determining the ultimate nature of the work.” The participatory possibilities of technology for theart of classical music were also envisioned by Canadian pianist, Glenn Gould, who labelled the technologically-implicatedand empowered listener the “New Listener” (see G. Payzant, Glenn Gould: Musicand Mind, Van Nostrand Reinhold, Toronto, 1978, pp. 29-32, 42, 70).2. For example, see Franzosi and De Sanctis, 1995.149