Voracious Intellectual Property Hunting Traditional Knowledge

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vipin Sandu
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Traditional Knowledge

scholarly journals A Regional Review of Genetic Resource Access and Benefit Sharing – Key Issues and Research Gaps

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Clare Morrison ◽  
Fran Humphries ◽  
Charles Lawson
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
National Level ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Legal Mechanism

Countries are increasingly using access and benefit sharing (ABS) as a legal mechanism to support the conservation and sustainable use of the world’s biological diversity. ABS regulates collection and/or use of genetic resources/traditional knowledge and sharing benefits from their use with the provider. The purpose of this review is to assess the trends, biases and gaps of ABS literature using a regional comparative approach about the key topics of concern between each region. It analyses four key topic groupings: (1) implementation of international, regional and national ABS policy and law; (2) intellectual property and ABS; (3) traditional knowledge; and (4) research, development and commercialisation. Findings included gaps in: (1) analysing effectiveness of national level implementation; (2) addressing apparent conflicts between support for intellectual property promoting exclusivity for traditional knowledge and challenges to intellectual property exclusivity for patents; (3) examining traditional knowledge of local communities (in contrast to Indigenous Peoples); and (4) lack of practical examples that quantify benefit sharing from research and commercialisation outcomes. We conclude that future research addressing the identified gaps and biases can promote more informed understanding among stakeholders about the ABS concept and whether it is capable of delivering concrete biological conservation, sustainable use and equity outcomes.

Asian Borderlands and the Legal Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions

2013 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 1403-1433 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHRISTOPH ANTONS
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
World Intellectual Property Organization ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Nuanced Understanding

AbstractTraditional knowledge related to biodiversity, agriculture, medicine and artistic expressions has recently attracted much interest amongst policy makers, legal academics and social scientists. Several United Nations organizations, such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the Convention on Biological Diversity under the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), have been working on international models for the protection of such knowledge held by local and indigenous communities. Relevant national, regional or provincial level legislation comes in the form of intellectual property laws and laws related to health, heritage or environmental protection. In practice, however, it has proven difficult to agree on definitions of the subject matter, to delineate local communities and territories holding the knowledge, and to clearly identify the subjects and beneficiaries of the protection. In fact, claims to ‘cultural property’ and heritage have led to conflicts and tensions between communities, regions and nations. This paper will use Southeast Asian examples and case studies to show the importance of concepts such as Zomia, ‘regions of refuge’ and mandala as well as ‘borderlands’ studies to avoid essentialized notions of communities and cultures in order to develop a nuanced understanding of the difficulties for national and international lawmaking in this field. It will also develop a few suggestions on how conflicts and tensions could be avoided or ameliorated.

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

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-37
Author(s):  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Marlowe Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Traditional Cultural Expressions

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.

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

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Marlowe Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Cultural Expression ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Traditional Cultural Expressions

Abstract This article is the first part of a two-part piece, which considers the intellectual property rights of indigenous peoples. After establishing pragmatic working definitions of who “indigenous peoples” are and what folklore (or “traditional cultural expression”) is, as compared with, but dialectically related to, “traditional knowledge,” this article does the following: 1) explains why western assumptions built into intellectual property law make this area of law a problematic tool for protecting traditional knowledge (TK) and expressions of folklore (EoF) or traditional cultural expressions (TCE) of indigenous peoples; and 2) creates a general sketch of human rights related legal instruments that could be and have been harnessed, with varying degrees of success, in the protection of the intellectual property of indigenous peoples.

scholarly journals MAPPING AND PROTECTING THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT IN THE FIELD OF THE TRADITIONAL BATIK DESIGN OF TIRTOMOYO AS THE CULTURAL HERITAGE AND ITS DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THE LOCAL GENIUS IN THE CREATIVE INDRUSTRIAL ERA

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarwono
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Intellectual Property Right ◽  
Cultural Expression ◽  
The One ◽  
Local Government Policy

<p align="center"><strong><em>Abstract</em></strong></p><p><em>            In order to provide the protection to the “traditional batik art knowledge” in Tirtomoyo, Wonogiri, the local government policy rests on the </em><em>potensial of art, commerce, services, education, tourism and sports</em><em>.Here, it can be drawn the real purpose, that is to develop, to conserve, and to protect the traditional knowledge as the heritage and cultural expression, especially the traditional knowledge. I</em><em>n th</em><em>is</em><em> case</em><em>, the Intellectual Property Right protection and its all varieties should be applied on the traditional intellectual art. However, it has not yet manifested the regional regulation on the Intellectual Property Right, especially the protection to the traditional knowledge.         There has not been confirmation about what institutions will be responsible or what kind of agencies will be involved in providing the protection to the traditional knowledge, like the batik art, dance art, and others, so that they don’t seem loose accountability in handling it. The policy on the Intellectual Property Right, especially the one related to the traditional knowledge, is still partial or supplement. The Industry and Trade Department of Wonogiri regency, which handles the micro and medium industry field and is not related directly to the batik handicraft industry, has planned to make a program of batik handicraft industry as the regional superior. </em></p><strong><em>Key words: Intellectual Property Right, Traditional knowledge, Batik Art.</em></strong>

scholarly journals Pelindungan Hak Paten atas Pengetahuan Obat Tradisional Melalui Pasal 26 UU No. 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten (Protection of Patent Rights on Traditional Medicine Knowledge Through Article 26 of Law No. 13 of 2016 Concerning Patents)

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-65
Author(s):  
Trias Palupi Kurnianingrum
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Medicine ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Traditional Medicines ◽  
Patent Rights

Patent as a branch of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) serves to protect inventions on the field of technology, one of them being medicine. The rise on the number of cases on the theft of genetic resources and traditional knowledge on the field of medicine for commercialization purposes shows that the protection of patent rights on traditional medicine knowledge is still not optimal. This article is the result of a normative juridical research which is supported by an empirical data, examines the protection of patent rights on traditional medicine knowledge and the implementation of Article 26 of Law No. 13 of 2016 on Patents (Patent Law year 2016). In the research results, it was mentioned that even though the TRIPs Agreement did not accommodate the traditional knowledge, the presence of Patent Law year 2016 complemented the Indonesian government's efforts to save the knowledge of traditional medicines from biopiracy and misappropriation. It is necessary to regulate the disclosure obligation in TRIPs agreement and further mechanism regarding benefit sharing and granting access to traditional medicines knowledge. AbstrakPaten merupakan salah satu cabang Hak Kekayaan Intelektual yang berfungsi untuk melindungi invensi di bidang teknologi, salah satunya obat-obatan. Maraknya kasus pencurian sumber daya genetik dan pengetahuan tradisional di bidang obat-obatan untuk tujuan komersialisasi menunjukkan bahwa pelindungan hak paten atas pengetahuan obat tradisional masih belum maksimal. Artikel ini merupakan hasil penelitian yuridis normatif yang didukung dengan data empiris, membahas mengenai pelindungan hak paten atas pengetahuan obat tradisional dan implementasi Pasal 26 Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten (UU Paten 2016). Di dalam hasil penelitian, disebutkan meskipun Perjanjian Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) belum mengakomodasi pengetahuan tradisional namun hadirnya UU Paten 2016 melengkapi usaha pemerintah Indonesia dalam menyelamatkan pengetahuan obat tradisional dari biopiracy dan misappropriation. Perlu pengaturan kewajiban disclosure di dalam Perjanjian TRIPs dan mekanisme lebih lanjut mengenai benefit sharing dan pemberian akses atas pengetahuan obat tradisional.

scholarly journals Ochrona prawna tradycyjnej wiedzy rolniczej dotyczącej zasobów genetycznych

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Paweł Gała
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Regulations ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Living Organisms

<p>Traditional knowledge, including genetic resources of living organisms, especially plants, plays an extremely important role also in the development of modern science and present-day industry. This prompts us to consider the need, scope, and model of legal protection for such knowledge, both for the needs of the communities that create and cultivate it and for the wider public good. The present article includes an analysis of international legal regulations concerning the protection of traditional knowledge, with particular emphasis on the knowledge related to genetic resources, as well as legal works in this field. The considerations cover issues related to the development of the conceptual framework of such legal norms and the foundations of the legal protection of traditional knowledge, in particular the arguments concerning the need for such protection. The article also presents the basic types of intellectual property rights that can be the basis for legal protection of traditional knowledge.</p>

Traditional Knowledge, Indigenous Peoples, and Local Communities

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susy Frankel
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Minimum Level ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Practical Matter ◽  
Ip Law ◽  
Level Of Agreement

This chapter situates the claims for protection of traditional knowledge in the international intellectual property (IP) context. Drawing on examples, it discusses the meaning of “traditional knowledge” and how the goals and means of protecting that knowledge do not fit within the framework of IP law. In order to address the overlap with IP and provide protection against misuse of traditional knowledge, a number of international bodies have been involved in negotiations and treaty drafting. The chapter discusses those developments, and concludes that even though international resolution looks unlikely in the short-term, the protection of traditional knowledge will continue to feature in international IP debates until a minimum level of agreement at least reached. In order to attain such agreement, there needs to be relevant national laws and, as a practical matter, sufficient investment in the innovation of traditional knowledge in order to deliver the value of protection to its holders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document