Neo‐Colonial Aspects of Global Intellectual Property Protection

Abstract

An essential instrument in the process of neo-colonialism by economic means is the establishment of a legal framework of international trade that confers legally enforceable rights that support and safeguard economic penetration and control. This includes, in a similar way as in colonial times, the guarantee of protection of foreign property rights in dependent regions. Today, intellectual property rights fulfil this colonizing role to a large extent. It will be shown that the implementation of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights is one major device that drives such an economic neocolonialism forward. This is reflected in the history of the making of this treaty, as well as in the methods of enforcement of intellectual property rights, which will be demonstrated in the example of China. Besides this international expansion of Western-style intellectual property rights, there is another, seemingly contrasting and alternative non-proprietarian, legislative project, which nevertheless has neo-colonial effects: the protection of traditional cultural expressions in the context of ''traditional'' arts. The article discusses that, despite presumably good intentions, this measure reflects colonial features, such as the concept of indirect rule, and invites segregationist legislation.

Politics as a function of trademark: A new perspective from the historical development of trademark law in colonial and socialist Vietnam

“…More severely, because of different reasons, authors and practitioners from other regions buy these sold theories easily without much critical thinking and putting these theories into their countries' own conditions. A phenomenon is depicted as neo‐colonisation (Rahmatian, 2009). This bias has hindered our academic inquiry to “better understand legal processes or reasons for a rule that otherwise might seem obscure” (Iii, 1997), making us unable to consider a “theoretical angle that has escaped us, or assess the advantages and disadvantages of legal approaches” (M. Birnhack, 2018).…”

IP Regulation in South Africa – Evolution, Current Status and comparison with SADC region countries

“…In particular, there has been a sense that the world has failed to pay enough attention to meeting the medical needs of Africans, such as the provision of antiretrovirals, 29 and that the global IP system has some regrettable neo-colonial aspects. 30 trips bears the brunt of such critiques, as it is the primary articulation of the global IP system. These findings contend that an underlying attitude of "othering" pervades all discussions about what the law should and should not be to address access to medicines for hiv/aids of various categories of States.…”

Evolution of Africa’s Intellectual Property Treaty Ratification Landscape

“…As a result, most newly independent countries declared membership in the international IP regime shortly after gaining independence. Commentators point out that these attempts to stabilise international IP law were a form of neo-colonialism (Lazar, 1969;Peukert, 2016, p. 51;Rahmatian, 2009). Treaty membership imposed the same legal obligations as under colonial control, guaranteeing foreign ownership rights.…”