Sara Bannerman notes that Canada's decision to vote against the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples has an intellectual property law component as the government has indicated that it has concerns with the declaration's IP provision that grants indigenous peoples "the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions."
Canada Expresses Concern With IP Clauses in UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
September 14, 2007
Share this post
One Comment

Law Bytes
Episode 273: Rebroadcast of the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel on Canada’s First Steps Towards a Social Media Ban
byMichael Geist

June 22, 2026
Michael Geist
May 25, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
New Rights, New Powers, Long Delays: Bill C-36’s Seven-Step Process for Privacy Reform to Take Effect
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 273: Rebroadcast of the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel on Canada’s First Steps Towards a Social Media Ban
Midnight Madness: The Government Rushes Lawful Access Bill Through the House Without Debate or a Recorded Vote
One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: Bill C-36 Modernizes Canada’s Privacy Law, Then Delays It to 2030
Gary Anandasangaree’s Vic Toews Moment Shows the Government Has Lost Its Way on Lawful Access

I share Richard Stallman’s view that this term “intellectual property” is an overused and mis-used “catch-all” term to describe things like copyright law, patent law and trademark law which really don’t have much to do with each other.
While I understand the need to protect aboriginal people’s heritage and traditional knowledge from corporatization and exploitation, I’d like to see terminology other than “intellectual property” used.