Epistemic communities and the "people without history": the contribution of intellectual property law to the "safeguarding" of intangible cultural heritage

Christoph Antons*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this chapter, I will discuss the possibilities for and limitations of intellectual property concepts in attempts at national and international level to safeguard and protect intangible cultural heritage. I will focus on the dichotomy between intellectual and cultural property and the relationship of TK/TCE to the wider heritage complex. I will argue that international lawyers and socio-legal scholars have begun to analyse this relationship, but that it is still important to pay closer attention to the multi-facetted environment in developing countries and to the context of economic development to understand the prospects and limitations for international law making. I will show how overlaps between IP and cultural property are now leading to disputes that create in fact serious frictions between neighbouring countries. I will further argue that such claims are based on a misunderstanding of the limitations of both intellectual and cultural property, but that these concepts develop their own life in the policy environment of developing nations.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationDiversity in Intellectual Property
Subtitle of host publicationidentities, interests, and intersections
EditorsIrene Calboli, Srividhya Ragavan
Place of PublicationNew York
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP)
Chapter21
Pages453-471
Number of pages19
ISBN (Electronic)9781107588479
ISBN (Print)9781107065529
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Epistemic communities and the "people without history": the contribution of intellectual property law to the "safeguarding" of intangible cultural heritage'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this