Who Owns Oral History?

Abolfazl Hassan Abadi (PhD)
Translated by: Mohammad Ayyoubi

2015-10-21

Once an interviewee provides his memories for others through vocal or video interviews and archives them after writing and ordering, data is introduced which may be useful in different scientific or business  aspects. The question is who will be the owner and the user of the data produced through oral history? Which one interviewee or the narrator of data in oral history the owner or the organization which provides the budget or arrange for this interview? How much are the authority and duties of the archive centers in deciding on restrictions or simplifying for accessing the field? Should deciding on restrictions be based on archive willing and policies or knowing the addressee? Is copyright rule prevailing in oral history? Does keeping the interviews in the centers endorse their ownership right? Does interviewee’s right summarize in communizing the memories and to be used merely for keeping and printing completely selected interviews without any name and verification so that the nature of narrator remains ambiguous?

Considering the copyright rule in the world today indicates that after oral history introduced to archives in 60s, creation of world and international societies for oral history and the possibility of access to archive sources always there were concerns about it, so when international society  created  standards for oral history, they allocated a chapter to copyright . Digitalization, weblog writing, planning websites and increasing activities of peoples and private companies regarding oral history found new possibility to be made public, so oral history evicted from monopoly of vital sources and there were concerns about unjustified instrumental use. In this respect there were some discussions in international society for oral history and US National Archive in cooperation with US Congress conducted a research about preserving copyright of archive sources including oral history which created useful outcomes.

Considering the background of the centers and institutions related to oral history indicates that these centers have been less involved in ownership subject in oral history after 2 decade activities. As 90 percent of oral history activities were state and dependent to state budget, more propagandized use of the interviews, and moral glance at creating data more useful for subjects such as The Imposed War and Islamic Revolution and when instrumental use of oral history overcame, there were no archive concerns regarding the ownership in the centers. The minimum standards such as filling the forms about preserving moral ownership right and observing the interviewee’s right were the subject seldom.  As a clear example of these kinds of interviews I can state the collective data gathered in the activities of the martyr Heads or martial institutions.

The consuming nature of creating oral history sources in Iran challenged the archive station and preserving moral ownership subjects so that using the interviews were endangered by some changes in political views and attitudes .The outspread production and use of oral history sometimes made some people render inconsistent data in similar interviews they have done with official or private centers. The case created some distrust about the nature of oral history usage and also made the possibility for the victory journalist and propaganda view. Those involved in collecting oral history interviews in official or private centers should be aware about preserving moral ownership in oral history and interviewee’s right of any possible usage. It seems that regarding moral ownership subject there should be serious observation for non-archive centers such as ordinary people and private societies to make them observe the minimums in this regard, otherwise considering the accessibility of internet and the possibility of arranging various kind of information , creates a lot of unverifiable oral historical data not respecting it’s narrator’s right overwhelming cyber space and this is not to the benefit oral history archives , information society , and users.