With Abdullah Maulani
- What are the key technical and methodological challenges in digitising both tangible and intangible cultural heritage, particularly in ensuring accuracy, context, and long-term preservation?
Indonesia and Southeast Asia are among the most culturally diverse regions in the world. The rich variety of ethnic groups, cultures, religions, and traditions has given rise to distinct identities, many of which are preserved through written artefacts. Unfortunately, only a small number of people today are still able to read and understand literary works and manuscripts from the past. For instance, how many young people from Javanese, Sundanese, Bugis, Makassarese, or other ethnic communities can still read their traditional scripts today? From both technical and methodological perspectives, ensuring the accuracy of content and context in the long-term preservation of cultural heritage is only possible when there are still communities capable of reading, understanding, and engaging with these materials, thereby fostering a sense of awareness and care. - How does the digital representation of cultural heritage reshape collective memory and identity, especially for younger generations who primarily engage with heritage online?
Digital representation is one way of bringing cultural heritage from the past closer to the present. From my perspective, digital formats serve as an entry point for introducing younger generations to the cultural heritage of their own communities and nation. We know that access to cultural objects collectively owned by certain groups is often challenging to acquire. Many manuscripts and cultural artefacts preserved in royal courts, Islamic boarding schools, or private collections are subject to strict access protocols, whether because of their sacred nature or their physical fragility.
Undeniably, there is a consequence that when cultural objects come into the online sphere, they may lose part of their sacred context. However, among younger generations, this is often replaced by new forms of appreciation that are more rational and critical in nature. They begin to cherish manuscripts not merely because they are “old”, but because their contents, such as ethnopharmacological knowledge or local wisdom, continue to hold relevance for future challenges. - What are the key legal and structural challenges related to copyright and ownership when cultural heritage—both tangible and intangible—is digitised, particularly in balancing protection, access, and the rights of source communities?
In the process of converting cultural heritage into digital form, there are two important elements: the physical cultural object itself and its digital representation, whether in the form of photographs or specific metadata. Both contain highly valuable information. Many cultural heritage objects have technically entered the public domain due to their age. However, in some jurisdictions, there is ongoing deliberation over whether high-quality digital photographs of such objects create a “new copyright” belonging to the organisation or individual responsible for the digitisation process.
Inequality of access also presents a significant challenge, as many of the original communities that collectively own these cultural objects often lack the necessary infrastructure, such as internet access or digital devices, to access their own digitised heritage. This creates an irony in which the material becomes more readily accessible to researchers in developed countries than to the communities from which it originates.
At the same time, certain aspects of cultural heritage may be considered sacred or confidential by the originating communities. Digitisation projects that provide open access to global audiences can therefore violate cultural norms or traditions of secrecy. For example, during the past eight years of joint DREAMSEA missions to remote regions, sacred amulet manuscripts and rajah manuscripts have frequently been encountered. In most cases, their owners prohibited digitisation out of concern that the materials could be misused without proper authority or oversight. In another case, while digitising manuscripts in a region of West Sumatra, legal documents were discovered whose holders refused permission for digitisation because they worry about the documents could lead to future disputes or conflicts. - What role should governments and cultural institutions play in regulating and supporting digitisation, particularly in ensuring ethical standards, data sovereignty, and equitable access?
Governments and cultural institutions must strengthen cross-sector collaboration in order to establish a clear and robust legal framework for the preservation of cultural heritage objects. At present, several legal foundations issued by the Indonesian government are commonly used as references, including Law No. 28 of 2014 on Copyright, particularly Article 38, which explicitly states that the State holds copyright over Traditional Cultural Expressions (TCEs); Law No. 5 of 2017 on the Advancement of Culture; and Government Regulation No. 56 of 2022 concerning Communal Intellectual Property.
Nevertheless, to the best of my knowledge, and as an issue that remains important for further discussion, there are still no specific establishments within copyright law governing the legal status of digital files produced through the photography of ancient manuscripts, for example. Does the photographer hold copyright over the photograph itself, or does the State retain rights over the substance of the data contained within it? These are essentially two different forms of subject matter, and the peculiarity remains legally significant. - How can local communities—especially young people—be meaningfully involved in the digital preservation of their cultural heritage without losing authenticity or agency?
For me, it is crucial to ensure that technology follows culture, rather than forcing culture to match to technology. If younger generations come to see these manuscripts not simply as institutional responsibilities, but as part of their identity and as “assets for the future”, then preservation determinations will develop more organically and independently. One example would be transforming and adapting visual elements from manuscripts, such as illumination motifs, calligraphy, or decorative patterns, into creative products, including graphic design, fashion, or game assets, while still acknowledging their origins and respecting communal rights.
Furthermore, I believe that one of the most important steps is to revive literacy in local scripts. For example, young people from Bugis and Makassarese communities should once again be able to read the Lontara script, young people in Jambi should learn the Incung script, and newer generations across the archipelago should be encouraged to recognise and understand their regional scripts, much as colonisation once imposed the use of the Latin alphabet on earlier generations, the effects of which continue to this day. The government cannot rely solely on local content subjects in schools, especially given the current disparities in cultural awareness between regions. In many ways, the digitisation of cultural heritage objects, particularly manuscripts, risks becoming meaningless if literacy in regional scripts continues to decline and there are no longer communities capable of reading them.
