gia vang hom nay , seo uy tin , bao ve viet nam , cong ty bao ve viet nam , dich vu bao ve viet nam , thoi trang viet nam , thoi trang viet nam , tin tuc moi viet nam , tin moi viet nam , chia se mon ngon , phim viet nam , ung dung game , tin giai tri , tin cong nghe , khach san da lat , anh showbiz , my pham trang da , bao da ipad , op lung iphone , bao ipad , tap chi sao , kem duong da , may tinh bang , samsung , dien thoai sky , iphone , smartphone gia re , phim club , bao cong nghe , ipad , iphone 5s , thoi trang , Game Mobile , game mobile , meo vat , me va be , OpenCart Themes , flash card

Author Archives: Tanveer Jeewa

Empowering Rural Craft Women Through Social Entrepreneurship and Open Inclusive Innovation

My Engagement with the Hillcrest Aids Centre Trust in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

As part of my on-going project as a Queen Elizabeth Scholar (QEScholar) with Open AIR, I have spent the past three months on a research placement with the Hillcrest Aids Centre Trust (HACT). This placement has significantly reshaped the focus of my research, investigating the economically empowering and impactful work being undertaken by the HACT for poor, rural Zulu women artisans.

Continue reading

Multilateral Matters #3: Copyrighting Culture? Challenges and opportunities regarding the international protection of traditional cultural expressions

Photo September 28 2019-2

by Wend Wendland, Adjunct Professor, Department of Commercial Law, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town,, @WendWendland

Multilateral Matters

An occasional blog on international developments related to intellectual property, innovation, development and public policy


Key points

The term “traditional cultural expressions” (TCEs)[1] refers to the intangible elements of an Indigenous People’s or local community’s cultural heritage, such as music, art, symbols, narratives and performances.

For reasons well documented elsewhere[2], TCEs as such are treated as “public domain” and not fully protected by the conventional intellectual property (IP) system.

There are divergent views as to whether or not TCEs as such should receive IP-similar protection and, if so, to what extent.

To some degree, contemporary versions and adaptations of TCEs can be protected using existing IP systems. Depending on one’s policy objectives, these protections might be adequate.

Most countries believe, however, that a new “sui generis”[3] system is needed.

Multilateral negotiations underway at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) are aimed at reaching agreement on an international legal instrument that would provide balanced and effective protection for TCEs.

The quest for the international protection of TCEs is significant. However, these negotiations are complex and slow-moving.

The TCEs puzzle is emblematic of the providential IP question: how to regulate the production, ownership and sharing of knowledge in ways that balances control and access, excluding and sharing, and competing and collaborating.[4]

In strikingly similar ways to the very newest of technologies such as artificial intelligence, TCEs interrogate long-held understandings of core copyright concepts such as “authorship”, “originality” and “public domain”.

In the face of greater prioritization in IP policymaking of open access, exceptions and limitations, and a more expansive and resilient public domain, one may ask whether TCEs protection is an idea whose time has passed.

Hopefully not: international agreement that TCEs deserve some form of IP protection would be eye-openingly significant for Indigenous Peoples and local communities and for international IP policymaking. With political will and flexibility on all sides, pragmatic and win-win outcomes are possible.


The trademarking by Disney of the Swahili phrase “hakuna matata[5], the copying of Australian Aboriginal art[6], the adaptation by Simon and Garfunkel of the folk song El Condor Pasa[7], and the copying by Louis Vuitton of Basotho blanket designs[8], are a sampling of the cases cited when conversations turn towards the misappropriation of TCEs.

Indeed, the appropriations in each of these cases seem intestinally wrong (if not unlawful, surely?).

As a result, there have been efforts over many decades to agree on international rules for the protection of TCEs.

But these efforts are proving complicated, because the cultural, economic, trade and technological issues at stake are sensitive, inter-related and impactful.

Most of this work takes place within the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and WIPO. UNESCO’s focus is, however, different to that of WIPO: while UNESCO addresses preservation and safeguarding (such as combatting the erosion of intangible heritage over time and reviving disappearing cultural traditions and practices), WIPO addresses legal protection, which is the protection of intangible cultural heritage against unauthorized copying, adaptation and commercial use, in other words, IP-like protection.

The focus of this blog is on the IP issues, and not on questions of safeguarding and preservation. Nor does it directly address the IP issues associated with the restitution of cultural properties[9] or “cultural appropriation”.[10]

Continue reading

CopyrightX:UCT applications now open!

copyxThe IP Unit is pleased to again present a CopyrightX affiliated course in 2019. CopyrightX:UCT will be administered by UCT Law@Work: Professional Development Project of the Faculty of Law, UCT.

CopyrightX:UCT is a member of the growing CopyrightX Community, a network of affiliated courses offered by several universities and other institutions between January and April of each year. Participants in these courses examine and assess the ways in which law seeks to stimulate and regulate creative expression. CopyrightX was developed by Professor William Fisher at Harvard Law School; it is hosted and supported by the HarvardX distance-learning initiative and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society. A list of the other participating organisations and additional information concerning this educational initiative is available at

CopyrightX:UCT consists of the Harvard pre-recorded lectures, accompanied by reading materials relating to U.S. and South African copyright law. Eight contact sessions will take place on Wednesdays between 13 February 2019 and 1 May 2019. The classroom seminars will discuss the pre-recorded lectures and will more closely analyse South African Copyright law and the issues faced. In 2019, we are planning to simultaneously deliver lectures online as webinars. Those who cannot attend the contact sessions in person, but want to participate in these webinars are invited to also register, subject to confirmation of online content delivery in early 2019. The seminars will be taught by Dr. Tobias Schonwetter.

The course is free of charge. Applicants must provide a motivation of approximately 400 words stating why they want to participate in CopyrightX:UCT, and how they plan on utilising their knowledge afterwards. Furthermore, applicants must make a commitment to actively participate in the course and attend the weekly seminars at the University of Cape Town.

Applications are open between now and 25 January 2019.  Successful applicants will be notified by 1 February 2019.

For more info and to apply click here.

Promoting Education Rights In South African Copyright Reform

Image from iOS

(by Eve Gray and Desmond Oriakhogba – first published for Intellectual Property Watch under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.)

The publishing industry is making a mad dash to defeat South Africa’s adoption of a fair use rights in Parliament on Wednesday. Their latest effort includes an alarmist petition being circulated among authors.  It is interesting to note that, while one of the most persistent and loud complaints in these protests has been that the drafting of the new legislation was badly handled, our perception, along with a number of experienced observers in the process, has been that the level of discussion and debate; the degree of participation and engagement of government representatives; and the consensus on the needs to be addressed, was of a higher standard and the debate much better informed than in previous such attempts at reform over the past decades.  It should also be noted that, while it is true that international publishers might have much to lose in the new law, local publishers, authors and students have much to gain. It is time to lower the heat and concentrate on the facts and context of what is before Parliament.

As for the persistent complaints about the proposal to adopt a fair use regime, rather than persisting with Fair Dealing, it needs to be noted that in a digital age, this is increasingly becoming the default position internationally, as digital media demand flexibility and openness to new developments.

Continue reading

Multilateral Matters #1: Achieving Positive Outcomes in International Intellectual Property Negotiations

Photo September 28 2019-2
by Wend Wendland, Adjunct Professor, Department of Commercial Law, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town,

The Multilateral Matters is an occasional blog on international developments related to intellectual property, innovation, development and public policy.

Multilateral institutions matter because that is where international rule-making takes place. And, multilateral institutions are useful, especially for smaller and less powerful developing countries, because they are rules-based and every state, no matter its size, has a voice.

However, in reality, it is profoundly challenging for developing countries to engage effectively in international negotiations and achieve their preferred policy outcomes.

How effective a state, or group of states (such as the African Group) is in participating in multilateral negotiations depends on a number of factors, such as, clearly, the issues at stake and each individual country’s interests, priorities, resources, and capacity, but also the role of regional organizations, the potential for coalitions and, what Nelson refers to as the relevant “institutional system(s)” – meaning the number and nature of the multilateral institutions that are active in relation to the issue at stake.

Continue reading

In a globalised and networked world, what is the unique value a university can bring? Introducing Open Knowledge Institutions


By Lucy Montgomery and Cameron Neylon

(This article was first published by LSE Impact Blog)

Eve Gray, a researcher at the IP Unit, has contributed to the writing of the book Open Knowledge Institutions. A group of researchers met earlier this year and a first draft of the book was published within a week – a remarkable feat to say the least.

Digital ubiquity has disrupted the traditional university model. The internet has shifted the balance of a tension between control and disorder in knowledge production, with many of the opportunities the web brings leading directly to many of the challenges we now need to address. Lucy Montgomery and Cameron Neylon advocate for the idea of universities as Open Knowledge Institutions, which would support and provide spaces for the world’s creative diversity to contribute to a common stock of global knowledge. This means reinventing some of our ideas about what university is, or should be, while also recognising that this change has to be an evolution, not a revolution.

Continue reading

Data Series: Encryption – The Protection of Data by Technological Means

by Bram Van Wiele


This blogpost is the second in a series on the protection of data and databases. The previous blog post provides a broad discussion on the intellectual property protection of data and data bases in South Africa. The present article looks at the issue of protection of data from a different angle and examines data protection by technological means, in particular through encryption.

Encryption is the process of encoding any type of data in such a way that only parties with access to a decryption key can access its readable content. It does not prevent interception and interference of the encoded data but prevents access to the intelligible content. Encryption is a particular feature of the digital environment. For example, popular messaging service WhatsApp started protecting messages sent via its platform through end-to-end encryption in 2016, preventing third parties from accessing the intelligible content of the messages while being transferred. Encryptions are becoming increasingly difficult to hack, and this has incited a debate over whether privacy should trump security.

Continue reading

IP Unit presentations on Human Rights, Innovation, Big Data and equitable and socially-just research processes

Dl61-NnWsAAxDwXAt the end of August, the UCT IP Unit participated in UCT Law Faculty’ Research Week. This initiative was presented for researchers and research units to engage with each other’s work and potentially work together. Various members of the IP Unit presented on the intersections of intellectual property rights with, amongst other things, human rights, big data and innovation.

Student research assistant, Tanveer Jeewa, presented on the nexus between intellectual property rights and human rights, based on work carried out under our ASK Justice project. She started by recounting the history of the two fields of law and how they eventually merged. This discussion is expanded on in an early blog post entitled: Intellectual Property Rights and Human Rights Law: A Difficult Relationship. Through various examples that showed the impact of IP on human rights, she demonstrated the need for projects like ASK Justice. ASK Justice contributes to positive policy change – specifically, informing and influencing current and future IP law and policy reform processes, from a human rights perspective – with regard to increasing access to knowledge and access to medicines in four Southern and East African countries: Botswana, Kenya, South Africa and Uganda. The project sought to achieve this using a multipronged approach involving networking and collaboration, teaching and research, capacity-building, and contributing to public understanding, discourse and debate.

Continue reading

Postdoctoral Research Fellowship: DST/NRF SARChI Research Chair: Intellectual Property, Innovation & Development



Deadline: 2018-10-15

The DST/NRF funded South African Research Chair in Intellectual Property Innovation and Development, at the Department of Commercial Law, University of Cape Town has one post-doctoral fellowship available for 2019, for which applications are invited. The successful candidate must be capable of participating in the Chair’s research focus areas of intellectual property and innovation, within the context of South Africa’s National Development Plan Fellowships are awarded on a competitive basis, taking into account the applicant’s academic achievements and researcher potential. The applicant’s research outputs contribute significantly to his/her selection for an award. Applicants should ensure that a full list of their research outputs, including publication records, are included in their CV.

Continue reading

Zimbabwe Launches National IP Policy and Implementation Strategy

by Charlene Musiza

charleneZimbabwe launched its National Intellectual Property Policy and Implementation Strategy on 28 June 2018, just a few weeks after the South African Cabinet approved South Africa’s IP Policy, Phase 1. Zimbabwe joins Mozambique which adopted a National Intellectual Property Strategy (2008-2018). Zimbabwe’s IP Policy, produced by the Ministry of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, is the result of technical assistance from WIPO under the framework of the WIPO Development Agenda [] and various stakeholder consultations beginning with the first draft IP Policy compiled by the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Intellectual Property back in 2014. The IP Policy is a cross cutting document aimed to enhance economic, social and cultural development.

The overall objective of the IP Policy is to ensure that the IP governance framework leverages the country’s IP potential for inclusive and sustainable economic growth and development. It outlines specific objectives which, among others, include: raising and consolidating IP awareness; enhancing IP knowledge and professional skills capacities; protecting and enforcing IP; and encouraging and facilitating IP commercialisation.

Continue reading