On September 15, 2020, the Manuscript Migration Lab hosted a workshop analyzing the principles and practices necessary when discussing manuscripts and objects of unknown or ambiguous origins. This discussion was co-led by our own Deborah DeMott and special guests: Dave Hansen, Associate University Librarian for Research, Collections and Scholarly Communication, Lead Copyright and Information Policy Officer, and Henry Cuthbert, Associate General Counsel.
The purpose of this workshop was to consider how we should discuss Lab related findings with one another and with the broader public. As we recognize, we may uncover matters that could be uncomfortable for the institution and for persons with whom the institution has been connected, historically, or even now. As a Lab and as an institution, we are committed to academic freedom, ground-breaking research, and to external as well as internal transparency. Even so, there are better and worse ways for us to communicate our findings. The following principles, practices, and points to keep in mind emerged from our conversation:
- Three Legal Considerations:
- Standing:
- Are you the right person to be bringing the lawsuit?
- Who has been harmed?
- Who does this matter to?
- Does anyone care?
- When:
- When did this happen?
- When was the manuscript created?
- When was it moved around?
- The question of when makes a tremendous difference when it comes to cultural heritage: there are different “trigger dates” that have implications for different cultural patrimony laws and, depending on how long ago the incident took place, it can be difficult to connect the evidence together.
- Statute of Limitations:
- Once concealment is undone of the stolen item, time starts ticking
- Must file a claim within a certain time
- Where:
- Law varies from country to country
- Jurisdiction
- For the US and the UK, an object that was stolen does not become unstolen even if purchased in good faith later on
- Standing:
- Principles:
- Accuracy:
- For us to work effectively, research must be accurate
- Do not accuse people of being criminals:
- Don’t use terms that would only apply to someone after a lawsuit has concluded (ex: guilty, criminal, fraud, etc.)
- Precise Language:
- Facts only
- No legal conclusion or conjecture
- Continue Research:
- Conduct our research with integrity, compassion, care, and generosity toward past and present stakeholders.
- Accuracy:
- Practices:
- If something serious comes up, let staff at appropriate offices at Duke know. They are here to help.
- Be wary about probing questions from persons with whom we are not acquainted.
- For example, if a reporter or researcher calls looking for information we have not yet shared publicly, check with the office of Public Affairs and Government Relations for advice before responding
- If you have a question, ask:
- Duke has the resources to answer questions
- Important Considerations:
- What is legal does not always coincide with what is ethical
- Norms change
- Claims about items in our collections may be mistaken
- Continuing research even if it is unflattering for Duke but continue to keep these goals and tips in mind
- Remember that these findings can have an impact on current and former faculty. That being said, we still need to be careful about communication when that is true