Slashdot Log In
Who Owns Your Culture?
Posted by
Hemos
on Fri Jun 01, 2001 03:32 PM
from the wow dept.
from the wow dept.
Galvatron writes "The Maori people of New Zealand are suing Lego for creating a polynesian-themed game without their permission, according to CNN. Ridiculous? You bet. But it's just one example of the kind of thing the Hague Convention could make possible."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Re:If the Maori are successful... (Score:2)
Disney's at least as good as 'Pravda' at reinventing history and truth for pragmatic reasons- and they are believed every bit as unquestioningly. This bears watching.
Senet (Score:2)
Dangerous Precedent (Score:5)
Let's carry this a bit further (Score:4)
Will Americans sue Mark Twain's heirs for not asking permission?
Will Jews sue Christians for Jewish heritage in the Bible?
How about anyone who has ever had a newspaper article written about them? Go sue the newspaper!
And my favorite: my name, my financial records, my address, all that info -- seems to be my IP, eh? Except of course my name, which is part my parents' IP, and grandparents, etc. And the street name, which is the heritage of not only the guy it was named after, but everybody else living on it. And the city name, state, country, etc.
I don't see how any of these are anything more than just the next step in pushing IP ownership. Pretty soon all info will be so tightly controlled, no one will be able to speak or write without violating somebody's IP, and in most cases, the true ownership will be so hard to pin down, there will be a zillion people suing each other as to who actually owns the IP! I imagine we will have to put royalties into escrow accounts until that's settled.
I say let's go for it, get IP rights so twisted they will have to be thrown out altogether.
--
Re:What's next? (Score:2)
I'm fairly sure the Slashdot crowd would be brothers-in-arms if the Maori were fighting Pfizer for ownership of their genes. What's the difference between that and fighting for their culture?
--
Japanese suing about 'All your base..' usage (Score:2)
--
Re:Here's why (Score:2)
--
SimPolynesia? (Score:4)
NEWS FLASH:Monty Python has been served notice that the heirs of King Arthur are going to sue them for creating an Arthurian-themed movie without the expressed consent of the family.
grub
Yes, I know Arthur was a legend :)
Re:Trademarking words = bad (Score:2)
Re:Ridiculous? Why? (Score:5)
You missed the point. It's ridiculous to think there could actually be a legal basis to such a suit.
In a way, it's rather sublime. It's intellectual property taken to the extreme. I almost wish this would happen, as it would provide a great example of what's wrong with IP laws.
Of course, I _almost_ wish it... with the way things have been going as of late, they might actually win...
Re:What's next? (Score:3)
This is nuts. (Score:5)
I'm sure that if the Lego were a Polynesian company, this wouldn't be an issue either.
What about Hawaii? (Score:2)
Godwin's Law (Score:2)
The moment someone mentions "Culture", and "Lawsuit" in the same sentence they should be taken out and whipped with a wet noodle. If a noodle isn't available then a plastic spork from Taco Bell will do the trick.
Why? Because there is no way to win, no point to make, and no facts to prove. In this case the Maori are stupid, Lego is stupid, the whole article is stupid.
More to the point though is that it is odd anybody should have found that the Maori suing Lego for Culteral Copyright Infringement should ever have made it into Slashdot in the first place. If the Maori had decided to sue John Deere would Slashdot have cared?
My two cents (Score:3)
I think a lot of what's being said here is pretty off-base. I think the Maori people have every right to complain about the misappropriation and commoditization of cultural symbols. Where they go wrong is in treating those symbols as intellectual property. It's not. Words and images etc. already in common use - in any language - are not copyrightable and that's that. You can't claim copyright retroactively.
IMO Lego should offer to donate some of the profits from sale of the game to charities that help Polynesian people - not just Maori, BTW. Suits like this are the stock in trade of a few opportunistic pricks who have spent years taking advantage of their brown skin to line their own pockets with extortionate lawsuits, ruining the NZ economy in the process and generally doing exactly nothing to preserve Maori culture or improve the lot of the average Maori on the street. By making an offer to contribute to legitimate Polynesian-indigene causes and organizations, Lego would both be performing a culturally sensitive humanitarian act and showing up the charlatans for what they are (when they refuse to accept such a settlement because it doesn't make them rich).
Read the Guardian Article! (Score:2)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,
Quote of note:
I'd side with the Maori if Lego is actually trying to obtain rights to Polynesian words and I'd side with Lego otherwise.
Re:Commodification (Score:2)
Disney dosn't even stop with things which started life as fiction. e.g. "Pearl Harbour" contains a fair amount of rewritings of history.
They don't necessarily blatantly misrepresent something of cultural significance, but they remove many of the 'difficult points' to make it more accessible.
The Brother's Grimm fairy tales probably wouldn't make it past the censor in their original form
Unfortunately, when you do that you often remove a lot of the very subtle but highly important elements of it that you've overlooked in your 'popularization.'
Film makers don't just take things out they also like to add things. So you end up with films full of Hollywood stereotypes.
Re:Trademarking words = bad (Score:3)
--
Legos should do right by the Maori... (Score:2)
In seriousness, however, one wonders whether the motivation for "protecting their culture" derives from a sense that to merchandize the Maori traditions / icons / language / etc. actually cheapens the traditions (et al), or that only they, the Maori, should be allowed to merchandise and profit from their culture?
I suspect it is the latter. I visited New Zealand for my honeymoon, and certainly saw a lot of signs that they were comfortable profiting from the "curiousity trade" around their culture. I don't say this cynically or dismissively- they were quite gracious to tourists and more than hospitable. One is left to assume that at this point, their culture itself is one of the only things with which they are able to generate an economic return. They can choose to remain a part of the Maori tribal community, and generate decent livings by simply preserving their culture and allowing tourists to 1) pay to be a part of a giant Maori banquet 2) buy various handmade Maori crafts 3) etc... OR they can leave and join the New Zealand community (which many do) and get jobs in the service sector (cab drivers, hotel workers, retail, etc...)
Whatever the case, there may be a bright side to this whole thing. It would seem that perhaps there is a chance that this might ultimately result in a ban on Styx's 1978 album "Pieces of Eight [allmusic.com]", which featured the stone-faces of Easter Island prominently on the cover, and included a hokey-mystical-pseudo-prog-rock instrumental called "Aku Aku" at the end. In any case, it gratuitiously uses Maori symbols and words, to no coherent end. I find great joy in the hope that perhaps this Maori legal wrangling might ultimately result in the removal of this album from circulation, most particularly because it contains Dennis DeYoung's cornball classic of self-affirmation "I'm Okay". THAT deserves to be banned.
Then again, maybe banning that album wouldn't be such a good idea, since it might result in an INCREASE in the sales for "Kilroy Was Here [allmusic.com]", a concept album about a future in which albums are banned and rockers forced underground.
Clearly, there is a lot riding on the outcome of this issue. Don't let it end. I'm begging you. Don't let it end this way-hey-hayyyyyyy.
So when do American lawyers sue them? (Score:2)
Didn't American lawyers invent the cultural phenomenon of "suing anyone you can over anything at all"? Does this mean that the American Bar Association should be suing the Maori for violating their culture and traditions?
I want to trademark my name! (Score:2)
What about mentioning the fscking author ? (Score:2)
Not only in the US
In fact, what's really annoying is not their ripping-off of foreign cultures. After all, culture is meant to be shared. No, the really annoying thing is that they never, ever mention the origins of their "creations".
In other words, making a movie about Notre-Dame de Paris is okay, but not even citing Victor Hugo's name once is most definitely NOT ! -and that's what really pissed us about the Hunchback.
And I think it's pretty much the same thing with these Maori words: the Polynesians would be much happier with Lego's idea if the company had actually mentioned the Polynesian origin of these names. But they didn't. Take nice-souding words and just pretend they were born out of the genius of your marketing department.
You were talking about Disney movies; I wonder how many Americans think that Walt Disney actually invented Snow-White and Cinderella...
("What, you mean, he didn't ?")
Thomas Miconi
Britney spears sues Barbi (Score:2)
Ridiculous? Why? (Score:5)
-carl
Re:Here's why (Score:2)
We're not talking about impersonating police officers, or Maori. We're talking about a doll; a likeness. It's not illegal to make dolls of police officers, and nobody is talking about impersonating Maori.
Ignorance.
Fine; I'm ignorant and you've educated me well. It's been a while since I was last in NZ.
So you're telling me that the Maori have plenty of representation in the government, you're doing fine on the land confiscation issue, and the preservation of your culture through educating ignorant Pakeha like me, both locally and on the other side of the planet, is going well.
Sounds like you're doing great, overall. I'm truly happy to hear that, no sarcasm. Remind me, then, what exactly the problem is with a toy company making dolls and toys with a Polynesian likeness and theme?
TomatoMan
Here's why (Score:5)
I know I feel pretty commodified by the Ken doll.
OK, I'm being facetious, and since I'm at the top of fhe food chain, I can only say so much. But this whole thing is patently ridiculous and I'm not the slightest bit worried about it becoming a reality. Once you start down that slippery slope, where do you stop? Are we allowed to TALK about Maoris without infringing on their culture? Write about them? Where's the line? It's absurd. It's a short step from here to banning black Barbies. Why? What is gained by doing that?
Your identity is not compromised when someone makes a doll that looks like you. Surely Maoris have more important battles to fight than this one. How about seeking more representation in the NZ parliament? How about addressing questions of land confiscation? How about preserving Maori language and culture through sharing and outreach, rather than trying to establish a stamp of unenforceable "ownership" over whatever incredibly vague notion of "likeness" they're trying to tie this thing to?
TomatoMan
Re:What's next? (Score:2)
Whoa. When did this happen? I thought everybody used a 3D virtual reality interface when connecting to a foreign computer with an entirely different architecture over a dialup connection . .
What's next? (Score:5)
Re:If this works I'm suing Slashdot! (Score:2)
Make sure that you also get an apology for The Net and Hackers, and for the technical abomination known as Mission Impossible. 686 RISC chip powered Apple laptop my ass.
Trademarking words = bad (Score:3)
All the blather about colonial exploitation aside, wouldn't you be pissed if someone tried to trademark a word or idiom from your culture?
"Now introducing 'Dude'(tm), the linguistic innovation from Microsoft, the company that also brought you 'Buddy'(tm), 'Radical'(tm), and 'Gnarly'(tm)!!! Don't worry, you can still use these words in your head, in dreams or other thoughts, but if you use them in any written or oral form, you'll have to pay us a small usage fee."
Re:What's next? (Score:3)
Ridiculous? Maybe so, but it doesn't make it right (Score:2)
The article presents the information as though it is equally invasive of some "generic" Polynesian culture. I'd like to point out that I'm from New Zealand, and most of the words quoted in the article are actually specific Maori words. The Easter Islanders share a very similar language despite massive geographic difference, as they share a probably-similar expansion point from the ancestral central Polynesian point, believed to be the Marquesas Islands by most scholars.
What I'm pointing out here is that, at best, a few cultures have been ripped off. At worst, one has been completely. I don't really believe that the Maori or Easter Islanders have any more right to restitution from the Danes than do the people of Scotland for what the Americans have done with Braveheart or Rob Roy, but I do believe that at least some measure of homage is warranted in all these cases. Presumably local economies benefit when films are made in their areas* which would do alot to quell protests in most Hollywood productions. One wonders how the American Indians feel about the wholesale ripoffs of their culture that have been going on for a hundred years, however.
*Though I don't know where the Scottish films were made
"considering suing" != "are suing" (Score:5)
Re:"considering suing" != "are suing" (Score:2)
Re:No Stupid (Score:2)
Where did you read this? The article mentions nothing about it. The case is even more ludicrous when you realize that the Maori's threatened suit rests almost entirely on these similar words. Take a look at bionicle.com [bionicle.com]: the game is about an island "at some distant point in the future", populated by what look like some sort of mutant, mask-wearing cyborgs. So the law-suit is about Lego's taking particular elements of maori culture? The estate of J.R.R. Tolkien is screwed (theft from Norse and Anglo-Saxon traditions), then, as is National Geographic (theft from pretty much everybody to sell their nifty magazine).
Of course, the sad thing is, there seems to be enough precedent. "Senet", the name of an ancient Egyptian board-game, is a registered trademark of some gaming company ('course, they don't have to worry about lawsuits....).
Absurd! This is Absurd!
So what you're saying... (Score:2)
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
More lawsuit trolling... (Score:3)
Again this is just a few lawyers trolling using the court system.
Remember you can file just about any suit you want. It's not getting it laughed out of court that's the hard part.
Culture is the quintessence of "public domain". This will go nowhere fast, unless LEGO decides the 'bad publicity' is more costly than just giving in.
No Stupid (Score:5)
If this works I'm suing Slashdot! (Score:4)
I'll sue this website on the basis they have created a geek-theme website without my permission. As a geek I should be consulted and compensated.
I will also sue major hollywood studios for the portrayal of geeks in film, because it infringes on my intellectual property rights to geek language and culture.
If we can't sue Jon Katz (Score:2)
---
Re:Here's why (Score:3)
The "indians" of north america felt the same when bundled up, have money thrown at them and in general forgottern by the invaders from Europe(Funny, I had relatives on the Mayflower). Owww.. what? Did I say invader? Yeah invader, I mean it. Look up invasion in a dictionary, sounds a bit like colonisation doesn't it? That's how we feel sometimes.
Your identity is not compromised when someone makes a doll that looks like you.
That's not the Maori take on things. Those tats on their face are almost like rank marks. A person does not dress up like a police officer and walk down the street, that's most likely to be illegal where you live (It sure is here). Why? If everyone did it, we wouldn't know a real cop from a fake one. They are marks ARE our culture. The stories are our culture. It's seeping away, and we want to protect it. Some children don't even know a few Maori myths or traditions and the language is faltering. Lego toys arn't the way to educate a child about culture. They are, however, excellent creative outlets, I have heaps of the stuff from when I was younger
Surely Maoris have more important battles to fight than this one.
Yeah, ignorance. The word is "Maori", not "Maoris", there is no word "Maoris", the plural of "Maori" is "Maori".
How about seeking more representation in the NZ parliament?
Ignorance. The Maori are currently over represented in Parliament. The Maori are granted special dispensation. And the proportional voting system also helps. It is slightly un-democratic, but hey, looking after those at bottom of the pile has kinda been the way for a long time now. The Maori seats have existed since god knows when in the NZ parliament. BTW - Don't tell a Kiwi how to run a representational democracy, we have been doing it longer and in my opinion, better, than anybody else.
How about addressing questions of land confiscation?
Ignorance. We have been doing this better than anybody else for quite some time now, see the Waitangi Tribunal website [knowledge-basket.co.nz]
How about preserving Maori language and culture through sharing and outreach, rather than trying to establish a stamp of unenforceable "ownership" over whatever incredibly vague notion of "likeness" they're trying to tie this thing to?
I support the introduction of compulsory teaching of Te Reo (The Maori language) at school. I hope this becomes law, it probably will in the next few years. I welcome it because I never really had the opportunity to learn. I could learn it now that I am at university, but I'm up to my eyeballs in Biology.. You might want to see This document [knowledge-basket.co.nz] concerning how we feel about protecting our culture, in this case, a recommendation was made that Te Reo was made an official language of New Zealand. It has been an huge boost to the culture.
Re:Ridiculous? Why? (Score:5)
The point I'm trying to get to is that some Maori tribes have got into a habit of making claims on property not because they were cheated out of it by colonists but because that property is now comercially valuable. In the Lego case three tribes from the northern part of NZ are making these claims and if I were feeling cynical I'd say it's because they think they can get some money out of Lego. AFAICS Lego are not stealing or commodifying anyone's identity, they are just using a couple of Maori/Polynesian words (nothing specific to the Maori language at all) in a ficitional game. Here [smh.com.au] is an article from the Sydney Morning Herald which has specific details of the usage of the words in the game.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0106/01/text/world13.ht ml
If the Maori are successful... (Score:3)
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
Re:Ridiculous? Maybe so, but it doesn't make it ri (Score:4)
Ground zero: Las Vegas (Score:3)
Well obviously (Score:3)
All your culture are belong to use
Thank you for your time.
--
Re:Ridiculous? Why? (Score:3)
Yeah, but Lego's lawyers are taken apart each night to be stored in large Tupperware(tm) containers. Hard to win against that kind of thing.
UH oH. (Score:4)
And in other news... (Score:5)
Their suit, Korg contends, stems not from the repeated use of the phrase "Ooga-Chaka", but from the tens of thousands of hours of airplay afforded to "Hooked on a Feeling? one of the worst songs ever recorded. The Cro-Magnon claim that this threat to human survival affects their 70,000-year-old culture the most, and is amplified by their innate susceptibility to the introductory refrain. They concluded that the effect is deliberate, according to the release.
Also named in the suit are several hundred radio stations, '70s-night disco bars, and Cher ("just for the hell of it", said Korg).
--Blair
Commodification (Score:5)