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 277: Kate Robertson on the Risks That Lie Behind Canada's Unexpected Signing of the UN Cybercrime Convention
byMichael Geist

June 22, 2026
Michael Geist
Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
From CCH to ChatGPT: How Canadian Copyright Law Played the Key Role in Deciding a Leading AI Training Data Case in India
Starting Over: Court Filing Confirms the CRTC’s Streamer Contribution Decisions Are Dead With a Full Online Streaming Act Reset to Come
The Name on the Window Was Enough: The Attacks on Kiva’s and the Normalization of Antisemitic Violence in Canada
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 277: Kate Robertson on the Risks That Lie Behind Canada’s Unexpected Signing of the UN Cybercrime Convention
A Surveillance Treaty in Disguise: The Trouble With Canada’s Quiet Decision to Sign the UN Cybercrime Convention

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.