3 ms·

I never got the emphasis on "native culture knew it existed first". Discovery by definition is an "adding to network" relative function based upon who is viewed

I never got the emphasis on "native culture knew it existed first". Discovery by definition is an "adding to network" relative function based upon who is viewed as "initating it" and recorded accordingly. If a hunter A of culture B meets prospecting C of culture D then culture B records "A discovered D while hunting" and culture D records "C discovered culture B while prospecting for natural resources".

AlotOfReading 6y ago
A lot of important things follow from "discovery", like IP rights. Is it acceptable for ethnopharmacology companies to get most/all of the money benefits from selling indigenous medical knowledge to others? Can those companies patent a plant, or chemical derived from one and prohibit the indigenous people from using it thereafter?
- DenisM 6y ago
  Most likely "no", you cannot patent a plant unless you have created it yourself. I don't know where those stories come from.
  - AlotOfReading 6y ago
    Probably from the fact that they happened. Here are some examples. [1] Enola bean, long produced in Mexico and exported to the US, was patented here on the basis of the inventor having been the first person to grow it in the US: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5894079A https://patents.google.com/patent/US5894079A [2] Buzy Lizzie, a hybrid vining ornamental was patented in the UK based on knowledge of wild African hybrids: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/sep/22/outlook.development https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/sep/22/outlook.develo... [3] To break from specifically plant patents, here's a different case of patenting the drug produced from a plant. The antimalarial Simalikalactone E was isolated and patented from Quassia amara after the plant was identified by Guianans. Here's an article on the controversy: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/french-institute-agrees-share-patent-benefits-after-biopiracy-accusations https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/french-institute-agr... Here's the patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/EP2443126B1 https://patents.google.com/patent/EP2443126B1
    - DenisM 6y ago
      The Enola patent was filed under pretext of it being a new organism produced by selective breeding. The pretext seems to have turned out to be false and the patent was invalidated. The fact it took so long is an atrocity but my point stand - patents for existing plants are not valid. https://patentlyo.com/patent/2009/07/mexican-yellow-bean-patent-finally-cooked.html https://patentlyo.com/patent/2009/07/mexican-yellow-bean-pat...
      - AlotOfReading 6y ago
        Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. I think the larger point that "discovery" can have implications for legal rights still stands, but I'll add an edit about the incorrect example.
jacobwilliamroy 6y ago
It's important to point such things out, because one of the primary justifications for the destruction of indigenous cultures is the erroneous belief that nothing of value to our modern society will be lost by doing so.

AlotOfReading 6y ago

A lot of important things follow from "discovery", like IP rights. Is it acceptable for ethnopharmacology companies to get most/all of the money benefits from selling indigenous medical knowledge to others? Can those companies patent a plant, or chemical derived from one and prohibit the indigenous people from using it thereafter?

DenisM 6y ago
Most likely "no", you cannot patent a plant unless you have created it yourself. I don't know where those stories come from.
- AlotOfReading 6y ago
  Probably from the fact that they happened. Here are some examples. [1] Enola bean, long produced in Mexico and exported to the US, was patented here on the basis of the inventor having been the first person to grow it in the US: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5894079A https://patents.google.com/patent/US5894079A [2] Buzy Lizzie, a hybrid vining ornamental was patented in the UK based on knowledge of wild African hybrids: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/sep/22/outlook.development https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/sep/22/outlook.develo... [3] To break from specifically plant patents, here's a different case of patenting the drug produced from a plant. The antimalarial Simalikalactone E was isolated and patented from Quassia amara after the plant was identified by Guianans. Here's an article on the controversy: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/french-institute-agrees-share-patent-benefits-after-biopiracy-accusations https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/02/french-institute-agr... Here's the patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/EP2443126B1 https://patents.google.com/patent/EP2443126B1
  - DenisM 6y ago
    The Enola patent was filed under pretext of it being a new organism produced by selective breeding. The pretext seems to have turned out to be false and the patent was invalidated. The fact it took so long is an atrocity but my point stand - patents for existing plants are not valid. https://patentlyo.com/patent/2009/07/mexican-yellow-bean-patent-finally-cooked.html https://patentlyo.com/patent/2009/07/mexican-yellow-bean-pat...
    - AlotOfReading 6y ago
      Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. I think the larger point that "discovery" can have implications for legal rights still stands, but I'll add an edit about the incorrect example.

jacobwilliamroy 6y ago

It's important to point such things out, because one of the primary justifications for the destruction of indigenous cultures is the erroneous belief that nothing of value to our modern society will be lost by doing so.