I received an email yesterday morning with a link to the BBC Latin America News. I am always skeptical to open links due to virus (are you not?). On second thoughts, I read the link and it was clear that was a verified page and when I clicked there were some juice news for our blog 😊
The heading reads: “Ralph Lauren apologises after Mexico indigenous 'plagiarism' claim”. My reaction was, not again! It has become usual to see big business appropriating cultural designs. But I wonder whether this is due to social media and we, as a society, are more aware of it. The era of globalization surely has made us more aware of what is going on in every corner, but also may have brought in us an appetite for merchandise that is only available in certain regions, or cultures [would you agree?].
Back to the news.
The wife of the Mexican President wrote on Instagram below the photo of the claimed item
“Hey Ralph: we already realized that you really like Mexican designs, especially those that are elaborated by ancestral cultures that preserve textile tradition.
However, by copying these designs you incur in plagiarism, and as you know, plagiarism is illegal and immoral. At least acknowledge it. And hopefully you will compensate the damage to the original communities that do this work with love and not for millionaire profit.
@ralphlauren
(These designs are by Contla and Saltillo.)”
[translation, my own]
Let’s put our IP hat on: is this plagiarism? Is there an infringement?
Traditional cultural expression as such is not protected under the umbrella of IP. Yet, WIPO’s Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) on IP and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore is working on an international instrument for their protection. [for the drafts go to this page
here). The matter is that IP has a period of protection (full stop). That is the terrible reality that traditional knowledge in general suffers. Added to this, is the fact that even if it were protected by let’s say copyright, there is the argument of ‘inspiration’ that designers rely heavily on. However, there is a fine line between ‘inspiration’ and ‘copy’, and this has been reflected more in recent years (or at least we have become aware of it).
For instance, three months ago, we
brought to you the news of Mexico vs Shein, for a garment deemed to be copied by the latter which contained Mayan’s traditional culture. Two years ago, we also
posted about the Guna people in Panama vs Nike which contained a ‘mola’ design. I am sure there is not enough space to tell you all about this situation that seems to happen all over again, and again.
Back to the news
Ralph Lauren has apologised and noted that months ago they remove it and were surprised to see the final products on display.
This may be the end of the story, but not for the communities around the world. While waiting for the WIPO international instruments, there is nothing stopping governments to pass their own national laws protecting their traditional knowledge. Yet, this would be protection on their national territory, I am afraid, but at least, it is something.
The suspicious link sent
here.
