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 275: David Loukidelis on Why Stripping Privacy Enforcement from Canada’s Privacy Commissioner in Bill C-36 is Unnecessarily Risky Policy
byMichael Geist

June 22, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
Outdated Data and Dubious Comparisons: Digging into the Government’s AI Strategy Adoption Claims
Why Being Locked Out of Frontier AI is The Sovereignty Threat Canada Missed
Blocked Twice: How Bill C-34’s Kids’ Social Media Ban Would Compound the Online News Act’s Harm to Young Canadians’ News Access
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 275: David Loukidelis on Why Stripping Privacy Enforcement from Canada’s Privacy Commissioner in Bill C-36 is Unnecessarily Risky Policy
The Data on Australia’s Social Media Ban: The Better the Privacy Protection, The Less Effective the Ban

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.