so whats the problem. Not sure where the 'community participants' come in all this.
I would look past the person being a farmer and find out if they were the landowner. It is the landowners archaeology and copyright.
In the oil industry the “landowner” would hire a geophysics company signed to confidentiality and then to make extra sure in most cases you would insist that the geophysics company gives the raw data without looking at it, other than for quality control purposes, to independent geological interpreters also signed up to confidentiality and anti-insider trader agreements . If you still didn’t trust them you would take any global positioning data out of the data set before giving it to the interpreters.
But then that’s geophysics which isn’t really any good for archaeology is it.
The ifa codes have got
1.10 A member shall not reveal confidential information unless required by law; nor use confidential or privileged information to his/her own advantage or that of a third person.
Unfortunately you can find contradictions to the rule 1.10
2.1 A member shall strive to conserve archaeological sites and material as a resource for study and enjoyment now and in the future and shall encourage others to do the same. Where such conservation is not possible he/she shall seek to ensure the creation and maintenance of an adequate record through appropriate forms of research, recording and dissemination of results.
Or
4.1 A member shall communicate and cooperate with colleagues having common archaeological interests and give due respect to colleagues’ interests in, and rights to information about sites, areas, collections or data where there is a shared field of concern, whether active or potentially so.
4.2 A member shall accurately and without undue delay prepare and properly disseminate an appropriate record of work done under his/her control.
And others
1.10 I think allows confidentiality
2.1 So you create a record the argument would be whether giving that record to the landowner was adequate dissemination. I would suggest that it is, given 1.10.
4.1Whats a colleague and whats having a common archaeological interest mean in this situation?
4.2 see 2.1
maybe at the outset you would inform the client of
4.4 A member is responsible for the analysis and publication of data derived from projects under his/her control. While The member exercises this responsibility he/she shall enjoy consequent rights of primacy. However, failure to prepare or publish the results within 10 years of completion of the fieldwork shall be construed as a waiver of such rights, unless such failure can reasonably be attributed to circumstances beyond the member’s control.
I could prepare the results but what does “prepare or publish” mean and there would only be an attack on my primacy if it was known that I had undertaken an evaluation see 1.10.
The landowner might point out that a lot of copyright is now moving to seventy years or more after death of the author..
Obviously the landowner has only your opinion of the value of their archaeological assets. This is where it gets interesting. Unfortunately have been put on the naughty chair on this forum for what I tell my clients about costs.
Heres a scenario for you
You are a landowner and one day an archaeologist requests to go on your land in order to undertake an evaluation for a potential pipeline, road scheme or runway EIA. What do you do to maximise the amount of money spent on the archaeological evaluation.?
I would look past the person being a farmer and find out if they were the landowner. It is the landowners archaeology and copyright.
In the oil industry the “landowner” would hire a geophysics company signed to confidentiality and then to make extra sure in most cases you would insist that the geophysics company gives the raw data without looking at it, other than for quality control purposes, to independent geological interpreters also signed up to confidentiality and anti-insider trader agreements . If you still didn’t trust them you would take any global positioning data out of the data set before giving it to the interpreters.
But then that’s geophysics which isn’t really any good for archaeology is it.
The ifa codes have got
1.10 A member shall not reveal confidential information unless required by law; nor use confidential or privileged information to his/her own advantage or that of a third person.
Unfortunately you can find contradictions to the rule 1.10
2.1 A member shall strive to conserve archaeological sites and material as a resource for study and enjoyment now and in the future and shall encourage others to do the same. Where such conservation is not possible he/she shall seek to ensure the creation and maintenance of an adequate record through appropriate forms of research, recording and dissemination of results.
Or
4.1 A member shall communicate and cooperate with colleagues having common archaeological interests and give due respect to colleagues’ interests in, and rights to information about sites, areas, collections or data where there is a shared field of concern, whether active or potentially so.
4.2 A member shall accurately and without undue delay prepare and properly disseminate an appropriate record of work done under his/her control.
And others
1.10 I think allows confidentiality
2.1 So you create a record the argument would be whether giving that record to the landowner was adequate dissemination. I would suggest that it is, given 1.10.
4.1Whats a colleague and whats having a common archaeological interest mean in this situation?
4.2 see 2.1
maybe at the outset you would inform the client of
4.4 A member is responsible for the analysis and publication of data derived from projects under his/her control. While The member exercises this responsibility he/she shall enjoy consequent rights of primacy. However, failure to prepare or publish the results within 10 years of completion of the fieldwork shall be construed as a waiver of such rights, unless such failure can reasonably be attributed to circumstances beyond the member’s control.
I could prepare the results but what does “prepare or publish” mean and there would only be an attack on my primacy if it was known that I had undertaken an evaluation see 1.10.
The landowner might point out that a lot of copyright is now moving to seventy years or more after death of the author..
Obviously the landowner has only your opinion of the value of their archaeological assets. This is where it gets interesting. Unfortunately have been put on the naughty chair on this forum for what I tell my clients about costs.
Heres a scenario for you
You are a landowner and one day an archaeologist requests to go on your land in order to undertake an evaluation for a potential pipeline, road scheme or runway EIA. What do you do to maximise the amount of money spent on the archaeological evaluation.?