Beyond Unbridled Optimism and Fear: Indigenous Peoples, Intellectual Property, Human Rights and the Globalisation of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore: Part II

In: International Community Law Review

Abstract

In Part I of this two-part article, we explained why western assumptions built into intellectual property law make this area of law a problematic tool, as a way of protecting traditional knowledge (tk) and expressions of folklore (EoF) or traditional cultural expressions (tce) of indigenous peoples. Part II of this article aims to: 1) provide a brief review of the Convention on Biological Diversity (cbd) and the Nagoya Protocol, and examine the evolution of the intellectual property rights of indigenous peoples from the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (trips Agreement) to the cbd to the Nagoya Protocol; and 2) examine possible core principles, inducted (rather than deduced) from actual practices already in place in the areas of patents, copyrights, and trademarks in relation to protecting tk and EoF. These explorations could allow for discussions regarding indigenous peoples, human rights and international trade law to become less adversarial.

  • 2

    Declarationsupra note 1 Art. 17.

  • 15

    Hernandez and Powellsupra note 10 p. 222 citing the cbd Art. 15(5).

  • 16

    Declarationsupra note 1 Art. 29.

  • 20

    Hernandez and Powellsupra note 10 p. 216.

  • 31

    Veit Koester“The Nagoya Protocol on ABS: ratification by the EU and its Member States and implementation challenges”No. 3: Biodiversity Institut du développement durable et des relations internationales [IDDRI] (12 June 2012) p. 6.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40

    Patelsupra note 30 p. 318.

  • 42

    Koestersupra note 31 p. 13.

  • 47

    Bavikatte and Robinsonsupra note 29 p. 48.

  • 48

    Koestersupra note 31 p. 13. See also West supra note 37 p. 38 (“The relative success or failure of the Protocol . . . depends on the extent to which rules regarding access and benefit-sharing can be made to ‘stick’ on both user and provider countries . . .”); Bavikatte and Robinson supra note 29 p. 38 (“[m]any users of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge have not necessarily felt obliged to follow principles of prior informed consent and benefit-sharing” (internal citations omitted)).

  • 50

    Nagoya articlesupra note 26 ¶5.

  • 52

    Nagoya articlesupra note 26 ¶5.

  • 55

    Rodolphe Paternostre Comment“The Nagoya Protocol: A Legally Sound Framework for an Effective Regime?”Utrecht University (2011) p. 79.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 57

    Nagoya articlesupra note 28 ¶¶3 and 5.

  • 59

    Nagoya articlesupra note 26 ¶7.

  • 61

    110301 Debatesupra note 51 §2 ¶5.

  • 62

    Nagoya articlesupra note 26 ¶9.

  • 64

    Bavikatte and Robinsonsupra note 29 p. 48.

  • 65

    Westsupra note 39 p. 41.

  • 66

    Ibid. p. 21.

  • 67

    Ibid. p. 22.

  • 73

    Nagoya articlesupra note 26 ¶14.

  • 74

    Paternostresupra note 55 p. 28 quoting S. Laird Biodiversity and Traditional Knowledge: Equitable Partnerships in Practice (2002) p. xxvi.

  • 78

    Nagoya articlesupra note 26 ¶13 (Bolivia with the support of Venezuela went as far as submitting a proposal first presented in March 2010 to amend trips so that patenting of all life forms is banned. 110301 Debate supra note 53 §2 ¶6; Nagoya article supra note 26 ¶¶12 and 17).

  • 79

    Bavikatte and Robinsonsupra note 29 p. 29.

  • 84

    Koestersupra note 31 p. 11.

  • 92

    Von Lewinski Introductionsupra note 90 p. 36.

  • 97

    Von Lewinski Introductionsupra note 90 p. 36.

  • 104

    Von Lewinski Introductionsupra note 90 p. 37.

  • 110

    Hernandez and Powellsupra note 8 p. 228.

  • 111

    Dwyersupra note 111 p. 250.

  • 113

    Dwyersupra note 109 p. 250.

  • 114

    Ibid. p. 249.

  • 115

    Trebilcock and Howsesupra note 108 p. 436.

  • 117

    Dwyersupra note 109 p. 245.

  • 123

    Hernandez and Powellsupra note 8 p. 227.

  • 124

    Dwyersupra note 109 p. 246.

  • 125

    Hernandez and Powellsupra note 8 p. 228.

  • 126

    Dwyersupra note 109 p. 252.

  • 130

    Dwyersupra note 109 p. 252.

  • 133

    Dwyersupra note 109 p. 248.

  • 154

    Dwyersupra note 109 p. 21.

  • 157

    Hernandez and Powellsupra note 8 p. 29.

  • 158

    Ibid. p. 230.

  • 160

    Finger and Schulersupra note 141 p. 10.

  • 171

    Finger and Schulersupra note 141 p. 18.

  • 178

    Bhalasupra note 106 p. 1623.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 64 53 2
Full Text Views 187 179 1
PDF Downloads 13 11 1