Abstract :

The present study investigates the defensive safeguarding of traditional knowledge within the framework of international patent law. The chosen research methodology is evaluative, employing secondary data sources. The primary emphasis of this study is on primary and secondary legal materials. The process of data analysis involves the utilisation of qualitative juridical analysis techniques. The findings suggest that traditional knowledge has distinct attributes intricately linked to traditional communal elements and spans diverse areas of human existence. The safeguarding of traditional knowledge is paramount to uphold principles of fairness, environmental preservation, cultural heritage, prevention of misappropriation, and the advancement of sustainable utilisation. In international patent law, there is a notable incongruity between traditional knowledge and patent systems that prioritise human ingenuity and originality. The efficacy of patent systems in protecting traditional information is limited by the inherent characteristics of traditional knowledge, which is often collective and transmitted orally. The safeguarding of traditional knowledge necessitates a harmonious integration of both legal and practical dimensions. These endeavours encompass the acknowledgement of pre-existing knowledge and inventions, the creation of organisations to oversee safeguarding, and the implementation of pragmatic strategies to guarantee availability and equitable utilisation. The ability to patent novel discoveries derived from traditional knowledge is possible; nevertheless, conflicts often occur due to disparities between patent regimes and the inherent characteristics of traditional knowledge. In the present situation, it is imperative to adopt a comprehensive and equitable strategy to safeguard traditional knowledge’s long-term viability within the intellectual property framework.

---

Keywords :

Defensive Protection, International Patent Law, Traditional Knowledge.

---

References :

1. Abbott, F. M. (2005). The WTO Medicines Decision: World Pharmaceutical Trade and the Protection of Public Health. The American Journal of International Law, 99(2), 317–358. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/1562501
2. Antweiler, C. (1998). Local Knowledge and Local Knowing. An Anthropological Analysis of Contested “Cultural Products’ in the Context of Development. Anthropos, 93(4/6), 469–494. JSTOR.
3. Caffrey, C., & Valentini, C. (2020). Applications of technology in the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) translation division of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Routledge New York.
4. Carpenter, K. A., & Riley, A. R. (2014). Indigenous Peoples and the Jurisgenerative Moment in Human Rights. California Law Review, 102(1), 173–234. JSTOR.
5. Correa, C. M., & Yusuf, A. A. (2016). Intellectual Property and International Trade: The TRIPS Agreement: The TRIPS Agreement. Kluwer Law International BV.
6. Curci, J. (Ed.). (2009). The defensive protection of traditional knowledge in international patent law. In The Protection of Biodiversity and Traditional Knowledge in International Law of Intellectual Property (pp. 131–274). Cambridge University Press; Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511770685.007
7. Dagne, T. W. (2010). Law and Policy on Intellectual Property, Traditional Knowledge and Development: Legally Protecting Creativity and Collective Rights in Traditional Knowledge-Based Agricultural Products Through Geographical Indications. Estey Centre Journal of International Law & Trade Policy, 11(1), 68–117.
8. Deshpande, G. (2022). Traditional Knowledge and TWAIL. Indonesian Journal of International Law, 19(3), 399–424.
9. Gadgil, M., Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (1993). Indigenous Knowledge for Biodiversity Conservation. Ambio, 22(2/3), 151–156. JSTOR.
10. Gebru, A. (2017). Intellectual Property, Traditional Knowledge, and Bioprospecting: Searching for Efficient Balance of Rights. University of Toronto.
11. Mauro, F., & Hardison, P. D. (2000). Traditional Knowledge of Indigenous and Local Communities: International Debate and Policy Initiatives. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1263–1269. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/2641281
12. Menezes, H. Z. D. (2018). South-South Collaboration for an Intellectual Property Rights Flexibilities Agenda. Contexto Internacional, 40(1), 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-8529.2017400100006
13. Meyer, C., & Naicker, K. (2023). Collective intellectual property of Indigenous peoples and local communities: Exploring power asymmetries in the rooibos geographical indication and industry-wide benefit-sharing agreement. Research Policy, 52(9), 104851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104851
14. Morgera, E., Buck, M., & Tsioumani, E. (2012). The 2010 Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing in Perspective: Implications for International Law and Implementation Challenges. Brill | Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004217201

15. Nemogá, G. R., Appasamy, A., & Romanow, C. A. (2022). Protecting Indigenous and Local Knowledge Through a Biocultural Diversity Framework. The Journal of Environment & Development, 31(3), 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/10704965221104781

16. Njatrijani, R. (2018). Defensive Protection Traditional Cultural Expresions (TCE) Masyarakat di Kabupaten Blora. Law, Development and Justice Review, 1(1), 39–68. https://doi.org/10.14710/ldjr.v1i1.3572
17. Plahe, J. K., & Nyland, C. (2003). The WTO and Patenting of Life Forms: Policy Options for Developing Countries. Third World Quarterly, 24(1), 29–45. JSTOR.
18. Reddy, P., & Lakshmikumaran, M. (2015). Protecting Traditional Knowledge Related to Biological Resources: Is Scientific Research Going to Become More Bureaucratized? Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine, 5(10), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a020974
19. Reid, J. (2009). Biopiracy: The Struggle for Traditional Knowledge Rights. American Indian Law Review, 34(1), 77–98. JSTOR.
20. Robinson, D., Raven, M., Makin, E., Kalfatak, D., Hickey, F., & Tari, T. (2021). Legal geographies of kava, kastom and indigenous knowledge: Next steps under the Nagoya Protocol. Geoforum, 118, 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.11.001

21. Romandini, R. (2016). Flexibilities Under TRIPS: An Analysis of the Proposal for Reforming Brazilian Patent Law. UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law, 15(2), 149–212.
22. Simon, B. S. (2005). Intellectual Property and Traditional Knowledge: A Psychological Approach to Conflicting Claims of Creativity in International Law. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 20(4), 1613–1684. JSTOR.
23. Sofyarto, K. (2018). Legal Protection of Intellectual Property Rights Over Traditional Knowledge Acquisition Against Economic Benefits. UNTAG Law Review, 2(1), 25–37. https://doi.org/10.56444/ulrev.v2i1.719
24. Stimac, Z. (2022). Indigenous Peoples through the Lens of UNESCO. Religions, 13(10), 957. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13100957

25. Subramanian, S. (2010). Traditional Knowledge in Policy and Practice: Approaches to Development and Human Well-being. UNU Press.
26. Téllez, V. M., & Johnsson, D. Z. (2014). Traditional Knowledge as a Source for Innovation. In D. Gervais (Ed.), Intellectual Property, Trade and Development (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684700.003.0012

27. Wesna, P. A. S. (2020). Doha Declaration sebagai Perlindungan Masyarakat atas Akses Obat Esensial di Negara Berkembang Pasca Trips Agreement. KERTHA WICAKSANA: Sarana Komunikasi Dosen dan Mahasiswa, 14(1), 56–62. https://doi.org/10.22225/kw.14.1.2020.56-62
28. Xia, N. (2023). Intellectual property protection for traditional medical knowledge in China’s context: A round peg in a square hole? Medical Law Review, 31(3), 358–390. https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwad006
29. (2021). The Protection of Traditional Knowledge Under Indonesian Patent Law: Between Opportunities and Challenges. Indonesian Journal of International Law, 18(2), 351–374.
30. Zheng, X. (2023). The Complementarity Between the Nagoya Protocol and Human Rights: Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. Springer Nature.