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
One Comment
Recent Posts
How Much Further Will Lawful Access Go?: Police Chief Tells Bill C-22 Hearing That Three Years of Metadata Retention Would Be “Ideal” 
Bill C-22’s Groundhog Day: Why the Government’s Dismissal of Signal, Apple and the U.S. Congress Concerns Runs Back the Disastrous Online News Act Playbook 
Slick Videos Won’t Save Lawful Access: Why The Government’s Bill C-22 Defence Avoids the Charter, Privacy and Security Concerns Raised By Critics 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 268: Sara Grimes on the Moral Panic Behind Banning Kids from Social Media and AI Chatbots 
U.S. Congressional Leaders Warn Canadian Lawful Access Plans Harm U.S. National Security and Economic Interests
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.