Vancouver-based writer, poet and translator Yilin Wang is suing the British Museum for copyright and moral rights infringement after raising more than £15,000 through hundreds of contributions. Mob Justice Campaign. The London firm Howard Kennedy LLP will now take up his case.
According to his campaign page, Wang recently discovered that the British Museum exhibition China’s Hidden Century featured a complete copy of her published translation of a poem by Chinese feminist poet Qiu Jin without contacting her “and therefore without any permission, credit or payment”.
Wang’s translations of Qiu Jin’s poetry have been used “in multiple formats,” she says, including in a giant projection, on a panel, in digital and printed audio guides, and in an audio guide in their boutique. apps. His translations are also cited in the exhibition catalog, without citation or credit.
After Wang challenged the museum, it removed her translations from its display, although the translator claims the institution’s correspondence with her “added insult to injury.” Wang says that initially the British Museum claimed he had simply forgotten to credit her and sent her a permission form, “highlighting how other contributors let them use their work for free or at low cost.” About 24 hours later, the museum contacted her to tell her that they had removed all of Wang’s translations from the exhibit. The Chinese originals have also been erased.
In a statement, the British Museum said it “fully accepts that it made a mistake, has apologized to Ms Wang and has sought to make amends financially.” We didn’t just offer £150 as Ms Wang suggested, but £600. This is compared to industry rates”.
According to the museum, “the translations were made at the explicit request of Ms. Wang.” The statement continues: “The museum did not consider it appropriate to continue to use the translations when Ms. Wang had expressly informed us that they did not consent to their use and there had been no engagement in the museum’s efforts to obtain their consent. We spoke with Ms. Wang as soon as we were alerted to the issue they raised and acted in good faith in trying to resolve this issue through the appropriate channels and directly with her, and not on social media.
Wang denies asking that her work be taken down, rather that she asked that it be taken down “unless I am promptly paid and credited for [its] use”, she Campaign website states. Additionally, Wang says the museum “refuses to provide further details about the shortcomings in their processes that made this human oversight possible.”
According to Wang’s campaign page, the British Museum said it could not reinstate its translations and Qiu Jin’s poetry “for practical reasons” – a stance Wang described as “the worst possible outcome”. She adds, “Audiences are now not only denied the ability to see my translations and who wrote them, but also the ability to read Qiu Jin’s lyrics. The result is that two female writers of color have both had their work erased. We are not disposable.
The British Museum’s statement points out that, although the poem Qiu Jin translated by Wang no longer appears, “Qiu Jin and his story remain an important part of our exhibition.” According to an earlier statement released June 21, the museum said it worked with more than 400 people from 20 countries to produce the exhibit, including 30 lenders and many other contributors. The show is the culmination of a four-year research project made possible by a grant of over £700,000 and led by two UK academics.
“Although we have offered an apology and compensation to Ms Wang, we have not been able to reach an agreement on how to resolve the issue,” the British Museum statement concludes.
Jon Sharples, intellectual property and art attorney at Howard Kennedy LLP, says it’s “shameless” to say that Wang will no longer be credited “because her words and the original words of revolutionary feminist poet Qiu Jin will remain airbrushed from the exhibition.” He adds, “One wonders what the show’s sponsors, Citibank and the Huo Family Foundation, think of this reckless disregard for the value of poetry and its place. in Chinese culture.” Sharples notes that the court case will not only focus on copyright, but also on Wang’s moral rights, in particular the right of attribution – or the right to be named or identified as the author.
Mark Stephens, a partner at Howard Kennedy LLP, says the British Museum has “handled this in a high-handed and cavalier way”. He adds: “It’s really shoddy for a big national organization that presents itself as a bastion of British enlightenment and fair play to behave in this way.” Stephens describes the misuse of Wang’s work as “just the latest example of the colonialist attitudes of the British Museum and the rapacious despoliation of other cultures”.
