US Institute Considers Legal Status of Traditional Knowledge

Posted by Tad McIlwraith on January 23rd, 2006 filed in Traditional Knowledge

The Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI), described as a conservative Dallas-based research organization, is wondering how to incorporate traditional knowledge (TK) into legal definitions of intellectual property rights (IPR). IPI held a forum in Washington, DC to consider issues and questions like:

The extension of property rights to include “traditional knowledge.”

How can the traditional knowledge of indigenous people, “owned” as a heritage, fit into the intellectual property definition?

How can traditional knowledge, involving a range of activities such as “food, plants, healing practices, with connections to cultures, societies, and economies” and are not easily classified as “intellectual” property or codified into law (e.g., patents)?

How can this knowledge be controlled [sic] when it is often sacred.

The article acknowledges many of the challenges associated with codifying traditional knowledge legally and transforming it into forms which differ from those in which it was originally produced.

Two points of view on how to handle the extension of IPR to traditional knowledge emerged from the discussions. On the one hand, the U.S. position by and large sees great benefits to the economy and society by putting into place a legal patent system which encourages innovation and the development of new products. On the other side is concern that the origin of the traditional knowledge belongs to a people or country, and they are not necessarily served well by a legal system imposed on their culture.

I wonder if questions about ‘traditional’ perspectives on property are being considered too – instead of what appears to be a strict focus on fitting traditional knowledge into non-native legal systems. Likewise, I am curious to see how these discussions handle the distribution of royalties. To be fair the article acknowledges that traditional knowledge usually belongs to a group of people and not to any one individual; as such, there may be effective ways of assigning royalties and patents to groups of people.

I’d like to hear how these issues are discussed in native communities too. I’d expect a range of opinions, from those seeing new economic and development opportunities to others seeing a new wave of exploitation.

(via Protecting Knowledge Group)

Share This

Sphere: Related Content


4 Responses to “US Institute Considers Legal Status of Traditional Knowledge”

  1. Jamie Says:
    January 24th, 2006 at 10:36 am

    One of my arch profs has written an intersting article on this subject. Although it is from an arch perspective, I think it has relevance to anthropology in general.

    Here is the abstract from EBSCO…

    “According to the authors, the rights to intellectual property have become a major issue in ethnobotany and many other realms of research involving indigenous communities. The article examines intellectual property rights related issues in archaeology, including the relevance of such rights within the discipline and the impacts of applying intellectual property protection in archaeology. This article examines ownership issues, assesses the level of protection of these products provided by existing legislation, and discusses the potential of current intellectual property protection mechanisms to augment cultural heritage protection for the indigenous communities.”

    And, of course, the citation…

    George P. Nicholas and Kelly P. Bannister. 2004. Copyrighting the Past? Emerging Intellectual Property Rights Issues in Archaeology. Current Anthropology 45(3):327-350

    The article is available online at Academic Search Elite (EBSCO).

  2. Tad McIlwraith Says:
    January 24th, 2006 at 9:49 pm

    Thanks Jamie. The article looks great. As they imply, I think the issue is getting bigger and will demand and command more attention in the near future.

  3. Shirley Says:
    January 26th, 2006 at 1:51 am

    The Canadian government is also exploring this –in Whitehorse last year they held the Northern Workshop on Access and Benefits Sharing (ABS) from the Use of Genetic
    Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge from March 15-18. You might want to check out the proceedings.

    ps. I quoted something from you in an entry in my blog

    http://www.shirleyofthenorth.dunderbug.com/index.php?p=94

  4. Tad McIlwraith Says:
    January 27th, 2006 at 10:52 am

    Shirley … thanks for the note about the Whitehorse workshop and I will take a look at the proceedings. The title of the workshop is certainly provocative and I look forward to learning what they mean by genetic resources. (And I did see your note citing my comments about Cruikshank’s book … thanks for that. It got me reading your blog and I am pleased you helped me make the connection.)

Leave a Comment

Close
E-mail It