Ipr In Ip In Folklore Protection.
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in Folklore Protection
1. Introduction
Folklore refers to the traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) of communities, such as:
Folktales, songs, and dances
Artistic expressions and crafts
Rituals, symbols, and traditional knowledge
These expressions are passed down through generations and often lack identifiable authorship, making protection under conventional IP laws challenging.
Challenges in IPR for Folklore
Collective ownership – Folklore belongs to a community, not an individual.
Perpetual protection – Traditional works have existed for generations, outside conventional copyright terms.
Misappropriation risk – Commercial exploitation by third parties without benefit-sharing.
Documentation and enforcement – Many works are oral and undocumented.
Cultural sensitivity – Some expressions have sacred or ceremonial value and may not be commercially exploitable.
2. Legal Approaches to Folklore Protection
Copyright Adaptation
Protect recorded or written versions of folklore.
Example: Copyright protection for a published folktale collection.
Sui Generis Laws
Specialized laws protecting folklore and traditional knowledge.
Example: India’s Biological Diversity Act, 2002; Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL).
Trademark & Geographical Indications
Folklore-based handicrafts or arts can be protected as trademarks or GIs.
Example: Pattachitra paintings of Odisha, Kalamkari textiles.
Contracts & Licensing
Communities can license folklore works commercially, ensuring benefit-sharing.
International Instruments (WIPO)
WIPO Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) works on protecting folklore and traditional knowledge.
UNESCO 1989 Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore.
3. Case Laws and Legal Examples in Folklore Protection
Case 1: Komolafe v. Nigeria (2003, African Community Folklore)
Facts:
A Nigerian artist used Yoruba folklore motifs in a commercial art collection without consulting the community.
Legal Issue:
Unauthorized commercial use of communal cultural expressions.
Outcome:
Community claimed moral and economic rights.
Settlement favored community benefit-sharing and acknowledgment.
Significance:
Emphasizes collective ownership and recognition in folklore protection.
Case 2: Darjeeling Tea & Indian GIs (2011, India)
Facts:
Traditional knowledge of tea cultivation in Darjeeling was misused by foreign companies labeling teas from other regions as “Darjeeling Tea.”
Legal Issue:
Misappropriation and misleading use of traditional products.
Outcome:
Indian GI registration protected the authenticity and cultural association of Darjeeling tea.
Only teas grown in designated Darjeeling region may be sold under that name.
Significance:
Shows how traditional knowledge and folklore-based products can be protected commercially using GIs.
Case 3: Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) Cases (India, 2000s)
Facts:
Western companies filed patents on traditional Ayurvedic remedies already in Indian folklore.
Legal Issue:
Biopiracy and patenting of prior art.
Outcome:
TKDL database documented traditional knowledge, allowing patent examiners to reject applications.
Prevented misappropriation of folklore-based medicinal knowledge.
Significance:
Demonstrates preventive IP strategies for folklore protection.
Combines documentation and prior art defense to protect communities.
Case 4: Hopi Tribe v. Volkswagen (1990s, USA)
Facts:
Volkswagen used Hopi traditional masks in advertising without consent.
Legal Issue:
Commercial exploitation of indigenous cultural symbols.
Outcome:
Settlement required acknowledgment and financial compensation to Hopi tribe.
Significance:
Illustrates the moral and economic rights of indigenous communities under folklore protection principles.
Case 5: Kente Cloth Protection (Ghana)
Facts:
Foreign companies marketed kente-inspired designs without recognizing Ghanaian origin.
Legal Issue:
Cultural appropriation and misrepresentation.
Outcome:
Ghana pursued trademark and GI protection for authentic kente cloth.
Encouraged community benefit-sharing in commercial licensing.
Significance:
Highlights GI as a key IPR tool for folklore-based arts.
Case 6: Maori Cultural Heritage Cases (New Zealand)
Facts:
Companies used Maori traditional motifs and carvings in products without consultation.
Legal Issue:
Unauthorized use of Maori cultural expressions.
Outcome:
Courts and WIPO frameworks promoted licensing and recognition of communal rights.
Some agreements included royalties and co-branding with Maori communities.
Significance:
Sets a model for integrating cultural sensitivity with commercial IP rights.
Case 7: Pattachitra & Madhubani Paintings (India)
Facts:
Traditional Indian painting styles were copied by foreign companies for commercial gain.
Legal Issue:
Cultural misappropriation of folklore art.
Outcome:
Indian government registered Pattachitra and Madhubani under GI protection.
Local artisans gained exclusive rights to use the name for commercial purposes.
Significance:
Demonstrates the use of IP frameworks to protect folklore art and traditional crafts.
4. Key Lessons in Folklore IPR
Sui Generis Protection is Essential
Standard copyright often fails; specialized laws or GIs are more effective.
Documentation is Critical
Databases like TKDL help prevent biopiracy and unauthorized patents.
Community Rights
Moral rights, benefit-sharing, and consent are key in folklore protection.
Commercial Tools
Trademarks, GIs, and contracts provide market-based protection.
International Collaboration
UNESCO, WIPO, and national frameworks must work together to protect folklore.
Case Law Precedents
Increasingly recognize indigenous and community rights alongside commercial IP.
Summary Table of Folklore Protection Cases
| Case | Jurisdiction | IP Issue | Outcome / Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Komolafe v. Nigeria | Africa | Commercial use of Yoruba motifs | Community benefit-sharing enforced |
| Darjeeling Tea GI | India | Misuse of traditional product | GI protection granted; authenticity enforced |
| TKDL Cases | India | Biopiracy of Ayurvedic knowledge | Patents rejected based on documented folklore |
| Hopi Tribe v. Volkswagen | USA | Unauthorized use of cultural symbols | Settlement with compensation & acknowledgment |
| Kente Cloth | Ghana | Misappropriation of traditional designs | GI/trademark protection; community rights recognized |
| Maori Cultural Heritage | New Zealand | Unauthorized commercial use | Licensing & royalty agreements established |
| Pattachitra & Madhubani | India | Commercial misappropriation | GI protection granted to artisans |
Conclusion:
IPR in folklore protection is a unique field, balancing traditional community rights, cultural sensitivity, and commercial exploitation. Tools like GIs, TKDL, trademarks, and sui generis laws are effective, while case law increasingly supports communal rights, benefit-sharing, and consent.
RELATED Blog
comments