IP and Development
posted by Christine Farley
Greetings from Namibia! (Do I win the contest for posting from the most far flung place?) I am in Namibia (of Brad & Angelina fame) for a conference organized by IIPI on “IP Used in Support of Culture Based Industries.” The main question being addressed is whether IP (especially copyright & trademark) can help improve the markets for African art. The problem is that although the US is the major market for African art, US consumers are not willing to pay enough for the art in order to support the communities that create it. Beautiful, hand-crafted pieces made of indigenous materials using ancient techniques are sold at bargain prices that reflect tiny sums paid to the artisans that created them. We buy these pieces at places like World Market because they look nice, but we learn nothing about their origin and significance. If that’s all we value why not buy even cheaper versions made in China? These artisans are hopeful that they can stop that type of competition by asserting IP rights in the art. Many obstacles exist of course, including the current absence of appropriate legal mechanisms and the fact that much art is already in the public domain. 
But the audience and participants at this conference were optimistic and very creative. One idea: could certification marks be used to prevent others from appropriating the terms used to describe the places and techniques used to create the art? Of course that won’t prevent others from copying the works; it just prevents them from using the terminology. It’s a start, but it will only be effective where it is accompanied by an education campaign about the art. The hope is that consumers will come to value the authentic, once they know what it is.
November 18, 2006 at 5:37 am
Posted in: Consumer Protection Law, Culture, Intellectual Property
Print This Post
Responses (12)
Frank - November 18, 2006 at 12:28 pm
Fascinating, and very important work. Yes, there should definitely be more information out there on the provenance of works of art, and how buying decisions either advance or retard the conservation of existing artistic traditions.
I don’t know if I’d be in favor of, say, letting different cultural groups copyright their designs. But I definitely value a system that makes more transparent these goods’ origins.
Gerrie - November 18, 2006 at 4:45 pm
Although I am not quite sure how one would enforce the concept of Ip on these types of craft, I think it a good idea, if it can work. Many of these Africans create these works because of their artistic ability. Unfortunately, not many can make a sustainable income from this, and tend to stop creating these works. Very few of these people have an outlet where they can actually display and sell their work. Any means to enable them would be welcome.
Kate Litvak - November 18, 2006 at 11:49 pm
I didn’t understand anything. Are the Chinese now making African-looking crafts and selling them to Americans falsely claiming that those crafts were made in Africa? Or are the Chinese simply selling African-looking crafts for less than Africans do? Is the “problem” that Africans don’t like to compete with the Chinese, who can make things cheaper and better? So, we now need to convince Americans to buy a more expensive product, which Americans don’t perceive to be of a superior quality, because – ummm, why? Because Africans are more deserving trade partners than the Chinese? Why should we support African craftsmen at the expense of Chinese craftsmen?
Humans are astoundingly creative when they want to come up with an excuse for protectionism. But a whole conference on Clever Excuses for Protectionism? Wow. I wish I was there.
Christine Farley - November 19, 2006 at 10:44 am
Kate, I think you understand everything up to a point. One clarification: The Chinese are copying the African sculptures, but in resin, not wood, and they are mass producing them. What’s lost? Well, that’s the point. If we want more cheap, cool-looking things than all’s well. But if we want to sustain ancient artististic traditions and communities, than we need put a dollar on that somehow.
Kate Litvak - November 19, 2006 at 1:13 pm
Christine: How clever of you to compare “cheap-looking things” with “ancient traditions”. Why not compare apples with apples instead? Like, “if we want cheap, cool-looking things, let’s do X. If we want expensive, but (in the eyes of consumers) equally cool-looking things, let’s do Y”. Better yet, “if we want to lift people from dire poverty by reducing the costs of production, widening markets for their goods, and increasing trade, let’s do X. If we want to sustain artistic traditions by keeping the costs of production artificially high, dampening the demand, and restricting trade, let’s to Y”.
Recall that nobody is stopping Africans from making cheap, cool-looking things too. If they want to sacrifice prosperity in the name of artistic traditions, it’s all fine. What’s not fine is for them to demand that the Chinese do the same thing.
Ann Bartow - November 19, 2006 at 5:06 pm
Hi Christine,
I think your post is very interesting. The issues you describe push on definitions of “art” and “aunthenticity” and “counterfeit” in ways that are meaningful to IP law and policy. Hope to catch up with you soon and hear more about the conference.
Kate Litvak - November 19, 2006 at 8:09 pm
I sense that Ann disagrees with me on the subject of protectionism, but she isn’t quite sure how to express her feelings. Maybe through dance?
sls - November 20, 2006 at 5:20 pm
I think the idea is that there are a significant number of consumers who would be willing to pay more for an object that was made in the locality whose style it represents. Whether that’s a rational choice or not is not really for me to decide, but if some form of IP-like right could be used and enforced to guarantee that consumers get that information, then the marketplace can decide whether the premium on the place of origin is worth it.
I’d have thought that, for crafts that are produced on a larger scale than individual artworks, something like a geographical indication might be worth looking into.
Brett Sergay - November 22, 2006 at 10:47 am
So us I understand it Kate, you advocate a free for all, let everybody copy each others work? And look what that has done for the American manufacturing base for example?
Arguing that “Recall that nobody is stopping Africans from making cheap, cool-looking things too. If they want to sacrifice prosperity in the name of artistic traditions…” totally misses the point here. The informal African sector, which essentially encompasses craftsmen and artisans in Africa, is entirely different in structure to mass produced Chinese sweatshops that knock-off their work and cultural expression.
Matt - November 27, 2008 at 12:50 am
This is of particular interest to us as we receive a barrage of email at the ArtnetAfrica online gallery notifying us that a certain Chinese company can replicate any of the art that we offer for a fraction of the price.
Should we be reporting these companies, is there anything we can do about it?
Matt Owen - November 27, 2008 at 12:51 am
This is of particular interest to us as we receive a barrage of email at the ArtnetAfrica online gallery notifying us that a certain Chinese company can replicate any of the art that we offer for a fraction of the price.
Should we be reporting these companies, is there anything we can do about it?
Matt Owen - November 27, 2008 at 12:53 am
This is of particular interest to us as we receive a barrage of email at the ArtnetAfrica online gallery notifying us that a certain Chinese company can replicate any of the art that we offer for a fraction of the price.
Should we be reporting these companies, is there anything we can do about it?
Leave a Reply