Layman’s practical guide to patent, copyright and trademark law.
Foucault, M. (1979). What is an Author? Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post Structuralist Criticism. J. V. Harrison. Ithaca, USA, Cornell University Press: 141-160.
A seminal work that argues that by clinging to the notions of writing and ‘the work’, we perpetuate the false reality of an individual author.
Foundation for Endangered Languages (1996-). Ogmios. Bath.
Newsletter of the Foundation for Endangered Languages.
Foundation for Revitalisation of Local Health Traditions (1995). Beyond the Biodiversity Convention: Empowering the Eco-system People. Bangalore, Foundation for Revitalisation of Local Health Traditions.
Summary of discussions and decisions taken at Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, to establish a nationwide system of community biodiversity registers.
Four Directions Council (1991). Written Statement Submitted by the Four Directions Council. August. N. S. o. t. U. W. G. o. I. Populations. Geneva.
Demands the restitution of cultural property to indigenous peoples; describes the legal instruments available, including those under the umbrella of human rights, and lists recommendations for UNESCO, WIPO and the Centre for Human Rights; argues that ‘cultural property’ must be defined by indigenous peoples themselves.
Fourmile, H. (1989). “Who Owns the Past? Aborigines as Captives of the Archives.” Aboriginal History13(1-2): 1-8.
The author calls on Aboriginal people to reclaim their history. According to the author, the lack of a cultural policy has been disastrous for Aboriginal people. Depriving Aborigines of their cultural and historical resources is part of a deliberate strategy of assimilation. She argues that if the revitalisation and resurgence of Aboriginal culture are to fully take place, and so Aborigines can contribute their culture to the world heritage on their own terms, they must be able to control and enjoy cultural and historical resources housed in their own community facilities.
Fourmile, H. (1989). “Aboriginal Heritage Legislation and Self-determination.” Australian-Canadian Studies: A Journal for the Humanities and the Social Sciences7(1-2): 45-62.
All current Australian Aboriginal heritage legislation is defective. This paper offers a review of this body of legislation analysed according to a number of principles which are fundamental to Aboriginal existence: self-determination, self-management, and rights to be the owners and managers of their own cultural heritage. Aboriginal cultural heritage should benefit from the same kinds of provisions as those available for the protection and management of non-Aboriginal cultural heritage in Australia.
Fourmile, H. (1995). Protecting Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights in Biodiversity. Ecopolitics IX: Perspectives on Indigenous Peoples Management of Environment Resources. R. Sultan, P. Josif, C. Mackinolty and J. Mackinolty. Darwin, Northern Land Council: 37-42.
Aboriginal customary law as it relates to intellectual and cultural property rights is the longest surviving form of IPR law in existence today. From a global perspective indigenous peoples are asserting these rights and are demanding they be recognised and respected. Since the invasion and settlement of Australia, though, the Crown has asserted ownership over not only the land but all its natural resources as well. Conservation and native title laws should be amended to provide legislative recognition of indigenous peoples as the title owners of all the biological resources of the flora and fauna that are indigenous to the continent.
Fowler, C. and P. Mooney (1990). Shattering: Food, Politics and the Loss of Genetic Diversity. Tucson, University of Arizona Press.
Genetic erosion has very serious social effects, including mass starvation. Control over the gene pool is shifting from farmers to scientists and heads of industry, while political considerations determine agricultural policy with increasing frequency. The North is struggling with the South for control over plant genetic resources.
Fowler, C. S. (1993). “Intellectual Property Rights: Some Considerations for the AAA.” Anthropology Newsletter(32).
Observes absence of IPRs for traditional knowledge as well as rights to tangible cultural property. Argues for production of guidelines and a strategy for developing equitable partnerships. Complex issues are involved e.g. determining ownership, calculating just compensation, policy violations. IPRs for indigenous peoples force anthropologists to face some questions: what is intellectual property and who owns it? What is just compensation and to whom should it be paid? Can legal mechanisms be developed for policy violations that will work? What role should ethics play in all this? How far do IPRs extend?
Fowler, C. (1994). Unnatural Science: Technology, Politics and Plant Evolution. Yverdon, Gordon and Breach.
Seeds and planting materials are central to the agricultural industry that feeds us all. Yet, until recently, there has been little interest in analysing the legal and political processes through which IPRs are constructed for these biological materials. Concentrating on the US experience, this book offers a comprehensive history and sociological analysis of the struggle to own and control biological materials from the 1800s, to the first patent law covering plant varieties, to current international controversies.
Freedman, P. (1994). “Boundaries of Good Taste.” Geographical Magazine66(4): 12-14.
Evaluates the justifications for use of such IPRs as geographical indications, appellations of origin and certification trademarks in the protection and marketing of certain products such as French wines, Stilton cheese and Scotch Whisky. Whereas those in favour of such IPRs argue that there is a genuinely inextricable link between the soil, climate, traditional practices of local artisans and the end product, other might say that they are a form of covert protectionism, serving the needs of small producer cartels, inhibiting free trade and keeping prices high.
Freeman, M. M. R. and L. N. Carbyn (1988). Traditional Knowledge and Renewable Resource Management in Northern Regions. Edmonton, Alberta, Boreal Institute for Northern Studies and IUCN Commission on Ecology.
Ten papers, mostly from a wildlife management workshop held as part of the 1986 conference on “Knowing the North: Integrating Tradition, Science and Technology”. Includes case studies on Canadian Arctic Inuit, Cree of Canadian sub-Arctic, Athabaskans in Alaska and Saami of northern Norway. Also includes 246 item selected bibliography mainly concerned with Canadian resources.
Freese, C. H. (1997). Harvesting Wild Species: Implications for Biodiversity Conservation. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.
What role can economic incentives play in conservation efforts? Fifteen case studies, in areas ranging from fisheries and forestry to non-timber forest products and trophy hunting, show how planned, commercial use of wild species for human consumption may actually promote biodiversity conservation.
Friedman, J. (1993). “Report from Vienna: Indigenous Peoples at the World Conference on Human Rights.” Cultural Survival QuarterlyFall(1).
Reports on the UN Conference on Human Rights. In spite of the efforts of indigenous groups only two paragraphs in the Declaration addressed indigenous peoples. Nowhere is there mention of indigenous peoples’ demand for self-determination. However, there was support for a UN decade for indigenous peoples.
Friel, M. (1995). But One Part of a Whole Picture of Survival: Resource Management in Australia from an Urban Aboriginal Perspective. Indigenous Peoples, Environment and Development. Proceedings of the Conference. S. Buchi, C. Erni, L. Jurt and C. Ruegg. Copenhagen, IWGIA: 55-62.
Describes the indigenous experience of resource management from an urban Aboriginal perspective.
Friis-Hansen, E. and J. Kronik (1993). Financial Mechanisms and the Biodiversity Convention. January 26-29 1993. I. C. o. t. C. o. B. D. N. I. a. G. Imperatives. Nairobi, Kenya.
In view of the fact that the global flow of genetic resources will cause administrative and technical difficulties on enormous scale authors recommed a general levy on the use of genetic material. The CGIAR system of IARCs can play an important role in helping developing countries increase technological capacity.
Friis-Hansen, E. (1994). Conceptualising in situ Conservation of Landraces. Widening Perspectives on Biodiversity. A. F. Krattiger, J. A. McNeely, W. H. Lesseret al. Gland & Geneva, IUCN & IAE: 263-275.
Reviews past experiences in regard to in situ conservation of landraces and outlines perspectives for future activities. Suggests measures that would further the in situ conservation of landraces.
Friis-Hansen, E., J. Konin, et al. (1994). Financial Mechanisms and Biotechnology Transfer. Biodiplomacy. V. Sanchez and C. Juma. Nairobi, ACTS: 271-287.
Discusses important issues in the CBD concerning technology transfer and financial mechanisms and points out some of the difficulties ahead.
Frisvold, G. B. and P. T. Condon (1998). “The Convention on Biological Diversity and Agriculture: Implications and Unresolved Debates.” World Development26(4): 551-570.
The CBD addresses two controversies that surround plant genetic resources. One debate has been over property rights governing PGRs and the distribution of benefits from their use. The second has been over the adequacy of measures to maintain crop genetic diversity. This paper examines how these debates are linked and reviews multilateral attempts to address them.
Frow, J. (1998). “Public Domain and Collective Rights in Culture.” Intellectual Property Journal13: 39-52.
Author explores a model of the communal control and authorisation fo cultural rights in indigenous societies in order to explore its relevance to the concept of public domain in Western IPR law. Concludes that this model cannot directly be applied to Western law, but that its analysis may help to clarify the presuppositions of each system.
Funder, J. (1999). “Rethinking Patents for Plant Innovation.” European Intellectual Property Review21(11): 551-577.
In a recent case, the European Patent Office again tackled the exclusion of plant varieties from biotechnology patents. This article presents and alternative approach to understanding the subject matter of patents in general and plant appropriation in particular. Some of the biological and legal factors relevant to the scope of property rights for living organisms are also explored.
Furze, B., T. De Lacy, et al. (1996). Culture, Conservation and Biodiversity: The Social Dimensions of Linking Local Development and Conservation through Protected Areas. Chichester, John Wiley.
Brings together the two major issues facing humanity in the 3rd millennium AD: providing development for an increasing world population while at the same time protecting the environment. The book uses case studies of local level involvement in development activities within the ecologically sensitive areas of Asia, the Americas, Africa, Europe and Australia to illustrate the process of sustainable environmental management for integrated environmental and economic goals.
Futrell, J. W. (1993). Legal Aspects of Technology Transfer for Sustainable Development. September 20. O. o. A. S. S. C. o. a. A. o. H. T. C. f. S. Development. Washington DC.
Provides suggestions for ways that governments can promote technology transfer. These are to: (i) promote the rule of law guaranteeing IPRs; (ii) sponsor technology aid programmes; and (iii) encourage people-to-people exchanges and training.
Gadgil, M. and K. C. Malhotra (1982). “Ecology of a Pastoral Caste: Gavli Dhangars of Peninsular India.” Human Ecology10(1): 107-143.
The Gavlis are a pastoral caste of the forested hill tracts of India’s Western Ghats region. This paper examined their shift under British colonial rule from buffalo keepers to goatherds to cultivators to cultivators of increasingly marginal hill tracts. If present trends continue all Gavlis will follow the same progression, eventually becoming landless migrants.
Gadgil, M. and V. M. Meher-Homji (1986). “Localities of Great Significance to Conservation of India’s Biological Diversity.” Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Science (Animal Science/Plant Science) Supplement(November): 165-180.
Provides estimates of the extent to which each of the 43 vegetation types of India still persist as forest formations and at various stages of degradation, as also the extent to which these are represented in the present day network of wildlife sanctuaries and national parks. Based on this analysis, the authors suggest a series of localities which should be accorded the highest priority in our attempts to conserve the whole spectrum of India’s biodiversity.
Gadgil, M. (1987). “Diversity: Cultural and Biological.” Tree2(12).
Early human populations possessed high levels of cultural diversity dependent on and supportive of high levels of biological diversity. This pattern changed drastically with technological innovations enabling certain human groups to break down territorial barriers and to usurp resources of other groups. Traditions of resource conservation can reemerge when the dominant cultures spread over the entire area and the innovations diffuse to other groups. This could change once again as genetically engineered organisms become an economically viable proposition with the accruing advantages concentrated in the hands of a few groups, a further drastic reduction in biocultural diversity may ensue.
Gadgil, M. and M. D. S. Chandran (1988). On the History of Uttara Kannada Forests. Changing Tropical Forests: Historical Perspectives on Today’s Challenges in Asia, Australasia and Oceania. Workshop Meeting, 16-18 May 1988. J. Dargavel, K. Dixon and N. Semple. Canberra, Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies: 47-58.
The largely-forest district of Uttara Kannada on the west coast of India is among the last to be colonised by agriculture and industry, and is famous for its forest produce. The history of the region is characterised by a gradual transformation of resource use from foraging for subsistence to processing of commodities. After a period of resource exhaustion greater attention is now being paid to fulfilment of the biomass needs of the communities and more sustainable use of the resource base.
Gadgil, M. (1989). Husbanding India’s Natural Resources: The Tradition and the Prospects. Contemporary Indian Traditions. C. M. Bonden. Washington & London, Smithsonian Institution Press: 323-331.
Explains the religious, cultural and conservation aspects of the sacred groves of the Western Ghats, India.
Gadgil, M. and P. Iyer (1989). On the Diversification of Common-Property Resource Use by Indian Society. Common Property Resources: Ecology and Community-Based Sustainable Development. F. Berkes. London, UK, Belhaven Press.
The different endogamous groups of Indian caste society have so diversified their patterms of resource use that many specialised resources were, and often still are, the monopoly of one particular group in any given locality. Other more commonly used resources, such as fuelwood, were controlled by small multi-caste village communities in which the different caste groups were linked to each other in a web of reciprocity. This organisation had favoured sustainable use of common-property resources under communal management by the Indian society. Colonialism disrupted communal organisation, but pockets of good community controlled resource management have persisted which now serve as models.
Gadgil, M. and R. Thapar (1990). “Human Ecology in India: Some Historical Perspectives.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews15(3): 209-223.
A historical ecological analyses of India from the initial spread of extensive settled cultivation during the Neolithic revolution to the colonial period and the present day.
Gadgil, M. and V. M. Meher-Homji (1990). Ecological Diversity. Conservation in Developing Countries: Problems and Prospects. Centenary Seminar of the Bombay Natural History Society. J. C. Daniel and J. S. Serrao. Bombay, Bombay Natural History Society and Oxford University Press: 175-198.
Reviews the condition of the natural environment of India. Conservation must rely on two strategies to render productive the vast tract of barren land to bring employment to the rural poor; to protect the remaining particles of natural ecosystems through a well thought out programme of biosphere reserves.
The Western view that humans are entitled to dominate and utilise nature at will, recognised no limits to the exploration and modification of ecosystems. This view has changed gradually since the mid-19th century. Nevertheless, the science-based techniques of resource management that have since been developed are applicable almost entirely to single species populations in highly simplified ecosystems. On the other hand, a diversity of traditional cultures has elaborated management systems more consistent with the ecosystem view and current ecological theory. This paper explores the synthesis of traditional and scientific ecology.
Gadgil, M. (1991). “Restoring India’s Forest Wealth.” Nature And Resources27(2): 12-20.
Proposes changes in patterns of forest use that would simultaneously enhance environmental services and benefit the weaker segments of India’s tribal and rural populations.
Gadgil, M. (1992). “Conserving Biodiversity as if People Matter: A Case Study from India.” Ambio21(3): 266-270.
India has rich traditions of nature conservation as well as a vigorous official programme of protection of nature reserves developed over the last 40 years. However the official programme suffers form total reliance on authoritarian management arrangement in which decisions are made centrally and coercion used to implement them. The interests of conservation would be better served by an approach that withdraws the subsidies to the elite so that a much more efficient sustainable and equitable pattern of resource use can be instituted. In conjunction with this the larger society should involve local people in working out detailed plans for conservation including appropriate incentives.
Gadgil, M. (1993). “Biodiversity and India’s Degraded Lands.” Ambio22(2-3): 167-172.
Because ‘ecosystem people’ have a genuine stake in biodiversity maintenance in their immediate surroundings, conservation efforts should include maintenance and restoration of certain levels of biodiversity in the Third World. In India this may be achieved by production of NTFPs; organising community-based management systems; encouraging a switchover from shifting cultivation to horticulture; supporting traditional practices of growing a variety of plant species; and promoting tree farming on private lands to fulfil commercial needs.
Gadgil, M., F. Berkes, et al. (1993). “Indigenous Knowledge for Biodiversity Conservation.” Ambio22(2-3): 151-156.
Indigenous knowledge consisting of ‘diachronic’ observations can be of great value and complement the ‘synchronic’ observations on which Western science is based. Indigenous groups are well aware of the importance of biodiversity. Their knowledge base is indefinite and their implementation of conservation involves an intimate relationship with the belief system. Such knowledge is difficult for western science to understand. However, it is vital that indigenous knowledge is conserved. This should be accomplished through promoting indigenous peoples’ community-based resource-management systems.
Gadgil, M. and P. Devasia (1995). Intellectual Property Rights and Biological Resources: Specifying Geographical Origins and Prior Knowledge of Uses. Current Science. 69: 637-9.
Proposes a kind of certificates of origin system so that patent applications must fully disclose geographical origins and any prior use in the case of inventions related to biological material and/or derived from traditional knowledge.
Gadgil, M. and R. Guha (1995). Ecology and Equity: The Use and Abuse of Nature in Contemporary India. London, Routledge.
Explores a society that is, in ecological terms, the most complex in the world. India’s people range from technocrats to hunter-gatherers and its environments from dense forest to wasteland. The book provides an analytical and empirically grounded study of environmental conflict in India. It presents an original theoretical framework which combines political economy with ecology, emphasising a forward-looking agenda for environmental reform in the Third World.
Gadgil, M. and P. R. Seshagiri Rao (1995). Designing Incentives to Conserve India’s Biodiversity. Property Rights in a Social and Ecological Context: Case Studies and Design Applications. S. Hanna and M. Munasinghe. Washington, DC, Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics & The World Bank: 53-62.
India has vibrant folk traditions of nature conservation, as well as a vigorous state-sponsored programme of protected areas. However, there are signs that the current centralised, sectoral, bureaucratic regulatory approach to conservation is facing serious difficulties. It is suggested that it would be far more eficient and equitable to replace it with an approach based on positive incentives to local communities. This would entail local commuities being conferred: (a) greater control over public lands and waters in appropriately defined territories, (b) enhanced capacities to add value to local biodiversity; and (c) specific financial rewards linked to conservation value of elements making up biological communities within their territories.
Gadgil, M., P. R. S. Rao, et al. (2000). “New meanings for old knowledge: the People’s Biodiversity Registers Program.” Ecological Applications10(5).
Folk ecological knowledge and wisdom are eroding fast, yet they are of great value in many contexts. They must be supported through creating more formal institutions for their maintenance, and by creating new contexts for their continued practice. The People’s Biodiversity Registers programme is such an attempt. It documents folk ecological knowledge and wisdom through decentralised institutions of governance, and with the help of local level educational institutions. The programme also seeks to create new meaning for folk knowledge and wisdom by making them an important basis of monitoring and conservation of biodiversity and of benefit sharing with local communities.
Gaia Foundation (1997). Raiding the Future: Patent Truth or Patent Lies. London, Gaia Foundation.
Comprehensive collection of documents critical of the patenting of life-forms.
Gaia Foundation and Genetic Resources Action International (1998). TRIPS versus CBD: Conflicts Between the WTO Regime of Intellectual Property Rights and Sustainable Biodiversity Management. London & Barcelona, Gaia Foundation & GRAIN.
Because TRIPS and the CBD embody and promote conflicting objectives, systems of rights and obligations, many states are questioning which treaty takes precedence over the other. It is argued that CBD has primacy over the WTO in the areas of biodiversity and traditional knowledge, that the review of TRIPS allows states to exclude all life forms and related knowledge from IPR systems, and that the a priori collective rights of indigenous peoples and local communities over their biodiversity and related knowledge must be recognised.
Gaia Foundation and Genetic Resources Action International (1998). Ten Reasons Not To Join UPOV. London & Barcelona, Gaia Foundation & GRAIN.
Provides ten reasons why joining UPOV is contrary to the interests of developing countries and traditional communities.
Gamez, R., A. Piva, et al. (1993). Costa Rica’s Conservation Program and National Biodiversity Institute (INBio). Biodiversity Prospecting. W. V. Reid, S. A. Laird, C. A. Meyeret al, WRI, INBio, Rainforest Alliance, ACTS