- Journal Archives
- Volume 16
- Volume 15
- Volume 14
- Volume 13
- Volume 12
- Volume 11
- Volume 10
- Volume 9
- Volume 8
- Volume 7
- Volume 6
- Volume 5
- Volume 4
- Volume 3
- Volume 2
- Volume 1
Appropriation Without Representation? The Limited Role of Indigenous Groups in WIPO’s Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and Folklore
The World Intellectual Property Organization’s (WIPO) Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and Folklore (IGC) is currently engaged in text-based negotiations to develop an international legal instrument, or set of instruments, that will effectively protect traditional knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and genetic resources. Yet, the people who will arguably be most affected by the ultimate instrument(s)—indigenous peoples and local communities—are not able to fully participate in these negotiations. Instead, WIPO deems them “observers.” They cannot formally present proposals, amendments, or motions, and cannot vote at IGC sessions. Thus, their limited influence implicates questions of equity, sovereignty, and global justice. Claiming to recognize this dilemma, WIPO has created mechanisms to increase these groups’ attendance and participation. However, many argue that these mechanisms are insufficient and that WIPO’s final product will lack legitimacy if indigenous peoples and local communities do not play a genuine role inthe process. This Note explores how the IGC’s current organizational structure limits indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ influence and presents ways for the IGC to more fully incorporate these groups and their ideas while maintaining a member-based organizational structure.
Recent Blog Posts
- Obama’s Cybersecurity Executive Order: Private Sector Must Help Police the “Wild West”
- Qualcomm Settlement May Reconfigure the Smartphone Market in China
- Who Rightfully Owns the Village People’s YMCA?
- Internet Elections Regulation: Another Pie in the Partisan Food Fight?
- Great Artists Steal? A Music Theory Thought Experiment & a Worry about the Litigation of Popular Music
- What to Expect After Teva v. Sandoz?
Tagsadvertising antitrust Apple books career celebrities contracts copyright copyright infringement courts creative content criminal law entertainment Facebook FCC film/television financial First Amendment games Google government intellectual property internet JETLaw journalism lawsuits legislation media medicine Monday Morning JETLawg music NFL patents privacy progress publicity rights radio social networking sports Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) technology telecommunications trademarks Twitter U.S. Constitution