Intellectual property rights and traditional cultures: A report
Intellectual property rights and traditional cultures: A report
from the field
Ignatius Haryanto
Jakarta
In the last month The Jakarta Post published two interesting
articles related to the issue of Intellectual Property Rights
(IPR). First was an article by Mohamad Mova Al'Afghani, a
Jakarta-based lawyer and lecturer on Ulema edict on IPR could be
misleading (the Post August 9, 2005), and the second was Joseph
Stiglitz's article on Intellectual property rights and wrongs, to
accommodate whom? (published under Project Syndicate, and
republished by the Post on Aug. 18, 2005)
The following article looks at the broader issue of IPR based
on the findings of a field trip made to observe how traditional
cultures cope with the IPR issue, and whether IPR is healthy or
unhealthy for the promotion of traditional cultures.
A group of 10 Indonesian and international scholars, from the
U.S., UK, India and Australia, made a two-week trip to
Yogyakarta, Solo and Bali, organized by the Social Science
Research Bureau (SSRC) and supported by The Ford Foundation.
During our trip we met with batik makers in Solo, discussed the
IPR issue with some lecturers at Sekolah Tinggi Seni Indonesia
(STSI -- Indonesian School of the Arts), Surakarta branch, some
Javanese puppet masters and dance creators in Ubud, Bali.
Al'Afghani and Stiglitz pointed out that "Intellectual
Property is a concept developed in the West", and "Intellectual
Property is important, but the appropriate intellectual-property
regime for a developing country is different from that of an
advanced industrial country".
Most of the available literature agrees that IPR is a concept
born in the West, and it does not really fit the rest of the
world.
The basic idea of IPR is good -- to provide compensation to
creators, or innovators to foster further creativity. Although
the claim sounds good, we have to check how it really operates in
the field, in the globalized world, in developing countries, and
in the situation where "asymmetric information" -- as Stiglitz
opined -- exists.
In the long history of copyright law in UK or in the U.S., one
major point is the longer period for a creator, or innovator, to
hold a monopoly on the creation from the "public domain". One
assumption behind the IPR law is the creator and innovator is
granted a period of time that he/she can benefit from his/her
creation(s), by receiving royalties, which are deemed the
economic right of the creators.
Another right implemented in the IPR law is the moral right,
which points to the source of the creation. Citing Joseph
Stiglitz as the one who had the idea of "asymmetric information"
in a publication, from the moral right point view, is enough.
Stiglitz himself says in his last article on the subject, "I am
pleased when someone uses my ideas on asymmetric information --
though I do appreciate them giving me some credit."
The IPR regime comes from the individualistic and liberal
philosophical point of view, which differs from the belief held
by people in the developing countries. Many of our informants
during our trip shared their concern for the matter, and for them
one of the ultimate virtues that people should pursue is a
culture of sharing. Our informants, who practice traditional
culture, believe that traditional culture is given from
generation to generation in order to share their own values
Preserving traditional culture means that people in the
community still practice the culture -- in this sense; prayers,
dance, clothes, medicine, folklore, etc. -- and people outside
the community are allowed to practice it as long as they know the
value behind those rituals. If the outsiders want to practice the
same form of traditional culture elsewhere, it is not prohibited
-- except for sacred practices -- in which sometimes there is a
commercial interest involved.
To them, showing respect for their culture is more important
than thinking about the economic compensation for it. Although
this view is not representative of all the traditional
practitioners, there is a strong belief that sharing is one value
that everyone should note, and during our investigation, we never
heard of any concerns that the outsiders would use the culture
inappropriately or downgrade its value.
In this era of globalization, many types of traditional
knowledge and culture are at the crossroads; on the one side they
are pushed by global values, global forces, and at the same time
they are striving to preserve their rich traditional cultures. No
one can hide from the global flow of information, the global
force of using traditional cultures by the cultural and media
industries as a commodity.
This conflicting situation exists although some groups have
tried to provide a solution, but up to now, none have been able
to suggest a proposal that satisfies the many stakeholders in
this issue. As Stiglitz and Al'Afgani put it, the World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has tried to discuss
this issue further, and WIPO has come to the conclusion that the
IPR regime should look for more development-oriented programs.
And what should they be? This is still a big question, with no
sufficient answers until now.
We should sit together and think again about the pros and cons
of the IPR regime, how the regime really affects us, and how we
can cope with this regime in issues like access to knowledge for
developing countries, a healthy development of traditional
culture, promoting the richness of Indonesian culture in a
globalized world, a healthier situation in the drug businesses,
without avoiding social modalities that we already have. In a
culture of sharing, preserving traditional culture, the creators
-- especially those who practice traditional culture -- never
think of economic compensation in the first place, since
traditional cultures produce in line with community beliefs and
community engagement with others.
The writer is a researcher in LSPP, Jakarta, in 2004 attending
a summer school on Intellectual Property at Central European
University, Budapest. He can be reached at ignh@yahoo.com