Indigenous Intellectual Property: A Handbook of Contemporary Research

Taking an interdisciplinary approach unmatched by any other book on this topic, this thoughtful Handbook considers the international struggle to provide for proper and just protection of Indigenous intellectual property (IP). In light of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007, expert contributors assess the legal and policy controversies over Indigenous knowledge in the fields of international law, copyright law, trademark law, patent law, trade secrets law, and cultural heritage. The overarching discussion examines national developments in Indigenous IP in the United States, Canada, South Africa, the European Union, Australia, New Zealand, and Indonesia. The Handbook provides a comprehensive overview of the historical origins of conflict over Indigenous knowledge, and examines new challenges to Indigenous IP from emerging developments in information technology, biotechnology, and climate change. Practitioners and scholars in the field of IP will learn a great deal from this Handbook about the issues and challenges that surround just protection of a variety of forms of IP for Indigenous communities. Preface The Legacy of David Unaipon Matthew Rimmer Introduction: Mapping Indigenous Intellectual Property Matthew Rimmer PART I INTERNATIONAL LAW 1. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: A Human Rights Framework for Indigenous Intellectual Property Mauro Barelli 2. The WTO, The TRIPS Agreement and Traditional Knowledge Tania Voon 3. The World Intellectual Property Organization and Traditional Knowledge Sara Bannerman 4. The World Indigenous Network: Rio+20, Intellectual Property, Indigenous Knowledge, and Sustainable Development Matthew Rimmer PART II COPYRIGHT LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 5. Government Man, Government Painting? David Malangi and the 1966 One-Dollar Note Stephen Gray 6. What Wandjuk Wanted Martin Hardie 7. Avatar Dreaming: Indigenous Cultural Protocols and Making Films Using Indigenous Content Terri Janke 8. The Australian Resale Royalty for Visual Artists: Indigenous Art and Social Justice Robert Dearn and Matthew Rimmer PART III TRADE MARK LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 9. Indigenous Cultural Expression and Registered Designs Maree Sainsbury 10. The Indian Arts and Crafts Act: The Limits of Trademark Analogies Rebecca Tushnet 11. Protection of Traditional Cultural Expressions within the New Zealand Intellectual Property Framework: A Case Study of the Ka Mate Haka Sarah Rosanowski 12 Geographical Indications and Indigenous Intellectual Property William van Caenegem PART IV PATENT LAW AND RELATED RIGHTS 13. Pressuring ‘Suspect Orthodoxy’: Traditional Knowledge and the Patent System Chidi Oguamanam, 14. The Nagoya Protocol: Unfinished Business Remains Unfinished Achmad Gusman Siswandi 15. Legislating on Biopiracy in Europe: Too Little, too Late? Angela Daly 16. Intellectual Property, Indigenous Knowledge, and Climate Change Matthew Rimmer PART V PRIVACY LAW AND IDENTITY RIGHTS 17. Confidential Information and Anthropology: Indigenous Knowledge and the Digital Economy Sarah Holcombe 18. Indigenous Cultural Heritage in Australia: The Control of Living Heritages Judith Bannister 19. Dignity, Trust and Identity: Private Spheres and Indigenous Intellectual Property Bruce Baer Arnold 20. Racial Discrimination Laws as a Means of Protecting Collective Reputation and Identity David Rolph PART VI INDIGENOUS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: REGIONAL PERSPECTIVES 21. Diluted Control: A Critical Analysis of the WAI262 Report on Maori Traditional Knowledge and Culture Fleur Adcock 22. Traditional Knowledge Governance Challenges in Canada Jeremy de Beer and Daniel Dylan 23. Intellectual Property protection of Traditional Knowledge and Access to Knowledge in South Africa Caroline Ncube 24. Traditional Knowledge Sovereignty: The Fundamental Role of Customary Law in Protection of Traditional Knowledge Brendan Tobin Index

Turing and the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Intellectual Property, Public Health, and Access to Essential Medicines

A recent controversy in the United States over drug pricing by Turing Pharmaceuticals AG has raised larger issues in respect of intellectual property, access to medicines, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). In August 2015, Turing Pharmaceuticals AG – a private biopharmaceutical company with offices in New York, the United States, and Zug, Switzerland - acquired the exclusive marketing rights to Daraprim in the United States from Impax Laboratories Incorporated. Martin Shkreli, Turing’s Founder and Chief Executive Officer, maintained: “The acquisition of Daraprim and our toxoplasmosis research program are significant steps along Turing’s path of bringing novel medications to patients with serious disorders, some of whom often go undiagnosed and untreated.” He emphasised: “We intend to invest in the development of new drug candidates that we hope will yield an even better clinical profile, and also plan to launch an educational effort to help raise awareness and improve diagnosis for patients with toxoplasmosis.” In September 2015, there was much public controversy over the decision of Martin Shkreli to raise the price of a 62 year old drug, Daraprim, from $US13.50 to $US750 a pill. The drug is particularly useful in respect to the treatment and prevention of malaria, and in the treatment of infections in individuals with HIV/AIDS. Daraprim is listed on the World Health Organization’s (WHO) List of Essential Medicines. In the face of much criticism, Martin Shkreli has said that he will reduce the price of Daraprim. He observed: “We've agreed to lower the price on Daraprim to a point that is more affordable and is able to allow the company to make a profit, but a very small profit.” He maintained: “We think these changes will be welcomed.” However, he has been vague and ambiguous about the nature of the commitment. Notably, the lobby group, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhARMA), disassociated itself from the claims of Turing Pharmaceuticals. The group said: “PhRMA members have a long history of drug discovery and innovation that has led to increased longevity and improved lives for millions of patients.” The group noted: “Turing Pharmaceutical is not a member of PhRMA and we do not embrace either their recent actions or the conduct of their CEO.” The biotechnology peak body Biotechnology Industry Organization also sought to distance itself from Turing Pharmaceuticals. A hot topic: United States political debate about access to affordable medicines This controversy over Daraprim is unusual – given the age of drug concerned. Daraprim is not subject to patent protection. Nonetheless, there remains a monopoly in respect of the marketplace. Drug pricing is not an isolated problem. There have been many concerns about drug pricing – particularly in respect of essential medicines for HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. This recent controversy is part of a larger debate about access to affordable medicines. The dispute raises larger issues about healthcare, consumer rights, competition policy, and trade. The Daraprim controversy has provided impetus for law reform in the US. US Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton commented: “Price gouging like this in this specialty drug market is outrageous.” In response to her comments, the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index fell sharply. Hillary Clinton has announced a prescription drug reform plan to protect consumers and promote innovation – while putting an end to profiteering. On her campaign site, she has emphasised that “affordable healthcare is a basic human right.” Her rival progressive candidate, Bernie Sanders, was also concerned about the price hike. He wrote a letter to Martin Shkreli, complaining about the price increase for the drug Daraprim. Sanders said: “The enormous, overnight price increase for Daraprim is just the latest in a long list of skyrocketing price increases for certain critical medications.” He has pushed for reforms to intellectual property to make medicines affordable. The TPP and intellectual property The Daraprim controversy and political debate raises further issues about the design of the TPP. The dispute highlights the dangers of extending the rights of pharmaceutical drug companies under intellectual property, investor-state dispute settlement, and drug administration. Recently, the civil society group Knowledge Ecology International published a leaked draft of the Intellectual Property Chapter of the TPP. Knowledge Ecology International Director, James Love, was concerned the text revealed that the US “continues to be the most aggressive supporter of expanded intellectual property rights for drug companies.” He was concerned that “the proposals contained in the TPP will harm consumers and in some cases block innovation.” James Love feared: “In countless ways, the Obama Administration has sought to expand and extend drug monopolies and raise drug prices.” He maintained: “The astonishing collection of proposals pandering to big drug companies make more difficult the task of ensuring access to drugs for the treatment of cancer and other diseases and conditions.” Love called for a different approach to intellectual property and trade: “Rather than focusing on more intellectual property rights for drug companies, and a death-inducing spiral of higher prices and access barriers, the trade agreement could seek new norms to expand the funding of medical research and development (R&D) as a public good, an area where the US has an admirable track record, such as the public funding of research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other federal agencies.” In addition, there has been much concern about the Investment Chapter of the TPP. The investor-state dispute settlement regime would enable foreign investors to challenge government policy making, which affected their investments. In the context of healthcare, there is a worry that pharmaceutical drug companies will deploy their investor rights to challenge public health measures – such as, for instance, initiatives to curb drug pricing and profiteering. Such concerns are not merely theoretical. Eli Lilly has brought an investor action against the Canadian Government over the rejection of its drug patents under the investor-state dispute settlement regime of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The Health Annex to the TPP also raises worries that pharmaceutical drug companies will able to object to regulatory procedures in respect of healthcare. It is disappointing that the TPP – in the leaks that we have seen – has only limited recognition of the importance of access to essential medicines. There is a need to ensure that there are proper safeguards to provide access to essential medicines – particularly in respect of HIV/AIDs, malaria, and tuberculosis. Moreover, there must be protection against drug profiteering and price gouging in any trade agreement. There should be strong measures against the abuse of intellectual property rights. The dispute over Turing Pharmaceuticals AG and Daraprim is an important cautionary warning in respect of some of the dangers present in the secret negotiations in respect of the TPP. There is a need to preserve consumer rights, competition policy, and public health in trade negotiations over an agreement covering the Pacific Rim.

Weighing your options: how to protect your property from shoreline erosion, a handbook for estuarine property owners in North Carolina

If you own property on one of North Carolina’s estuaries, you can use this guide as a tool to learn about the choices you have to control your shoreline erosion and help decide which approach may be right for you. In North Carolina, we make a distinction between waterfront property that is located on the estuary, referred to as estuarine, shoreline, soundfront or riverside property, and waterfront property located directly on the ocean, referred to as oceanfront. Why? State laws and regulations addressing estuarine and oceanfront property, and the available erosion control methods, are quite different. This guide focuses on estuarine property. We’ll introduce you to the six main erosion control options in use in North Carolina and give you information about the out-of-pocket costs and tangible benefits of each option. We’ll also give you information about “hidden” costs and benefits that you may want to factor into your decision-making. You are fortunate to have a piece of estuarine shoreline to call your own, whether it’s your year-round residence or a weekend getaway. And if you’ve noticed some shoreline erosion lately, you’re probably a little concerned. But there are ready solutions.

The right to humanitarian assistance in natural and human-made disasters: progress and challenges for an emerging international legal framework

Natural and human-made disasters cause on average 120,000 deaths and over US$140 billion in damage to property and infrastructure every year, with national, regional and international actors consistently responding to the humanitarian imperative to alleviate suffering wherever it may be found. Despite various attempts to codify international disaster laws since the 1920s, a right to humanitarian assistance remains contested, reflecting concerns regarding the relative importance of state sovereignty vis-à-vis individual rights under international law. However, the evolving acquis humanitaire of binding and non-binding normative standards for responses to humanitarian crises highlights the increasing focus on rights and responsibilities applicable in disasters; although the International Law Commission has also noted the difficulty of identifying lex lata and lex ferenda regarding the protection of persons in the event of disasters due to the “amorphous state of the law relating to international disaster response.” Therefore, using the conceptual framework of transnational legal process, this thesis analyses the evolving normative frameworks and standards for rights-holders and duty-bearers in disasters. Determining the process whereby rights are created and evolve, and their potential internalisation into domestic law and policy, provides a powerful analytical framework for examining the progress and challenges of developing accountable responses to major disasters.

Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark: possession - mortgagee's right or discretionary remedy?

Comments on the Chancery Division decision in Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark on whether a mortgagee's exercise of its contractual right, on the mortgagor falling into arrears, to appoint receivers such that the property could be sold and possession obtained without triggering the court's discretionary powers pursuant to the Administration of Justice Act 1970 s.36 infringed the mortgagor's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 Protocol 1 art.1. Considers the implications of proposed reforms recasting the mortgagee's right to possession as a discretionary remedy. [From Legal Journals Index]

Estoppe right there

Examines the House of Lords judgment in Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Management Ltd on whether an experienced property developer was entitled to relief on the basis of proprietary estoppel for the cost of obtaining planning permission to demolish an existing property and build new houses under a non-binding oral agreement. Sets out two requisite conditions needed when deciding whether estoppel existed. Considers whether unconscionability was a separate element in making a claim for proprietary estoppel. [From Legal Journals Index]

'Leaving Nothing to Chance'?: Joint Tenancies, The 'Right' of Survivorship and Unilateral Severance

The joint tenancy with its inherent right of survivorship is the most prevalent form of co-ownership in the common law world today. Most couples will be joint tenants of a family home, while relations (such as siblings) who purchase property together may opt for this arrangement. Inter vivos acquisitions aside, the huge intergenerational transfer of wealth within families on death can result in a joint tenancy, and it may also be a convenient estate planning device. The fact that property automatically vests in the surviving joint tenants on death is the reason why many people choose this form of co-ownership. However, there is one serious disadvantage. A joint tenancy is an inflexible form of landholding where relationships sour or family circumstances change over time, and co-owners want their respective `shares' of the property to pass to someone else on death. Where consensual severance is not possible, one joint tenant can sever unilaterally. The latter mechanism is vital in terms of giving effect to the wishes of the severing joint tenant, especially in situations of discord or a breakdown in relations with their fellow co-owners. However, unilateral severance also has serious implications for the non-severing joint tenant(s) who expected to inherit property through survivorship, and can impact significantly on ownership of the home and other family property. This article looks at unilateral severance as a means of subverting the right of survivorship. The focus is on personal and inter-family relationships, and the various legal issues and policy considerations associated with unilateral severance across the common law jurisdictions of Britain, Ireland, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. It assesses the various methods of effecting unilateral severance and proposes specific measures, as well as considering novel arguments for preventing unilateral severance based on contractual agreements to the contrary and proprietary estoppel.

Possession Taken by Theft and the Original Acquisition of Personal Property Rights

This paper queries the soundness of the view that wrongful possession (eg a thief’s possession of goods he has stolen) should be protected by the standard actions for interference with goods. It uses close historical analysis of the development of the relevant concepts through the cases to argue that this is not a proposition that is compelled on the authorities, nor one demanded as a matter of principle. It then abstracts to consider the implications of this argument at a theoretical level, exposing great need for development in the common law’s basic principles of possessory protection. It argues innovatively that the objects of the law might be better served by the creation of a more limited form of possessory protection, achieved through the possessor’s acquisition of a personal right, and correlatively that the values that underpin and justify our basic rules of possessory protection entail a more nuanced response to matters of property acquisition.

The right to health, the TRIPS agreement and the public health safeguards to encourage the universal access to essential medicines

The privileges arising from patent protection on pharmaceutical products often prevent the full realization of the right to health, especially in developing countries with scarce resources. This thesis first identifies the international agreements that have established the right to health in international law, obligations and violations associated with it, the problems encountered in the implementation of human rights on the field, compared with the implementation and sanctions associated with economic rights from the World Trade Organization regulatory framework. A comparative study of the legislative frameworks of both developed and developing countries will reveal to what extent Canada, the United States, the European Union, Brazil, India, and South Africa conformed with patent protection exceptions arising from international patent law to protect public health. Finally, the author identifies the crucial indicators that need to be considered in order to assess the conformity of a given approach with the right to health, before he underscores the temporary character of the relevant WTO measures, and the future stakes concerning an increased access to essential medicines.

The human right to water - normative foundations and ethical implications

La présente contribution examine les fondements normatifs ainsi que les implications éthiques du droit à l’eau, tel qu’il fut reconnu en 2002 par le comité onusien des droits économiques, sociaux et culturels. Il sera défendu que le droit à l’eau potable peut être justifié en tant que droit moral fondamental, de par son caractère indispensable en vue de la garantie des conditions basiques de survie. Cet état de fait, cependant, s’avère moins évident au vue d’un droit à l’eau d’usage non-domestique. Ici, la discussion se rapproche des débats accompagnant le concept beaucoup plus complexe des droits sociaux et économiques. Par rapport à ce groupe de droits, la question de l’allocation est des plus controversées: à qui incombe-t-il de garantir leur respect? Dans le but d’éviter cette problématique d’allocation, le présent essai soulèvera la question de savoir, si la limitation de l’accès à l’eau peut être conçue comme une violation d’autres droits moraux: bien qu’il y ait des cas où des entreprises transnationales déploient des activités nuisibles à l’égard des populations pauvres en polluant sciemment leurs ressources en eau ou en initiant et en exécutant des stratégies de privatisation les privant de leurs droits, la crise globale de l’eau ne saura être rattachée uniquement aux effets de la mondialisation. Plutôt, l’on reconnaîtra la nécessité d’efforts positifs et soutenus de la part des pays développés en vue de la réalisation d’un approvisionnement suffisant en eau pour tous.

Socioterritorials forms of appropiation of living and right to the differencial space

The aim of this work is to recover Henri Lefèbvre's methodological contributions for (re)thinking the right to the city, based on the need to know the appropriation of space´s dialectical triad. Empirically, it refers to the urban genesis of Mar del Plata (Argentina), an intermediate Latin American city, and its heterogeneous socio-territorial forms of appropriating inhabitance, or different forms of appropriating goods of use, that lead to think about opening to the transformation of the capitalist social order, and of its urban order, naturalized after the fetischism of private property.

UK commercial property lease structures: Landlord and tenant mismatch

UK commercial property lease structures have come under considerable scrutiny during the past decade since the property crash of the early 1990s. In particular, tenants complained that the system was unfair and that it has blocked business change. Government is committed, through its 2001 election manifesto, to promote flexibility and choice in the commercial property lettings market and a new voluntary Commercial Leases Code of Practice was launched in April 2002. This paper investigates whether occupiers are being offered the leases they require or whether there is a mismatch between occupier requirements and actual leases in the market. It draws together the substantial data now available on the actual terms of leases in the UK and surveys of corporate occupiers' attitude to their occupation requirements. Although the data indicated that UK leases have become shorter and more diverse since 1990, this is still not sufficient to meet the current requirements of many corporate occupiers. It is clear that the inability to manage entry and exit strategies is a major concern to occupiers. Lease length is the primary concern of tenants and a number of respondents comment on the mismatch between lease length in the UK and business planning horizons. The right to break and other problems with alienation clauses also pose serious difficulties for occupiers, thus reinforcing the mismatch. Other issues include repairing and insuring clauses and the type of review clause. There are differences in opinion between types of occupier. In particular, international corporate occupiers are significantly more concerned about the length of lease and the incidence of break clauses than national occupiers and private-sector tenants are significantly more concerned about leasing in general than public-sector occupiers. Proposed solutions by tenants are predictable and include shorter leases, more frequent breaks and relaxation of restrictions concerning alienation and other clauses. A significant number specify that they would pay more for shorter leases and other improved terms. Short leases would make many of the other terms more acceptable and this is why they are the main concern of corporate occupiers. Overall, the evidence suggests that there continues to be a gap between occupiers' lease requirements and those currently offered by the market. There are underlying structural factors that act as an inertial force on landlords and inhibit the changes which occupiers appear to want. Nevertheless, the findings raise future research questions concerning whether UK lease structures are a constraining factor on UK competitiveness.

Precisely wrong or roughly right? An evaluation of development viability appraisal modelling

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of choices of model structure and scale in development viability appraisal. The paper addresses two questions concerning the application of development appraisal techniques to viability modelling within the UK planning system. The first relates to the extent to which, given intrinsic input uncertainty, the choice of model structure significantly affects model outputs. The second concerns the extent to which, given intrinsic input uncertainty, the level of model complexity significantly affects model outputs. Design/methodology/approach – Monte Carlo simulation procedures are applied to a hypothetical development scheme in order to measure the effects of model aggregation and structure on model output variance. Findings – It is concluded that, given the particular scheme modelled and unavoidably subjective assumptions of input variance, that simple and simplistic models may produce similar outputs to more robust and disaggregated models. Evidence is found of equifinality in the outputs of a simple, aggregated model of development viability relative to more complex, disaggregated models. Originality/value – Development viability appraisal has become increasingly important in the planning system. Consequently, the theory, application and outputs from development appraisal are under intense scrutiny from a wide range of users. However, there has been very little published evaluation of viability models. This paper contributes to the limited literature in this area.