Pyramids- property?

When the developed world pushed the developing countries to recognize their Intellectual Property rights, there was a come-back. The developing countries began thinking of propertyzing traditional knowledge or indigenous knowledge. Basically, they said, 'Ok, if we cannot produce generic drugs because of the TRIPs agreement, then we will also not allow you to use our traditional knowledge without paying.' So, in that spirit, now Egypt wants to copyright the pyramids. For a full story here.

Egypt has been a member of the WTO (World Trade Organization) since June 30, 1995. The TRIPs agreement that purports to regulate IP rights, specifically Article 12 on Terms of Protection for Copyright says here:

Whenever the term of protection of a work, other than a photographic work or a work of applied art, is calculated on a basis other than the life of a natural person, such term shall be no less than 50 years from the end of the calendar year of authorized publication, or, failing such authorized publication within 50 years from the making of the work, 50 years from the end of the calendar year of making.

I am not sure how this provision would affect Egypt's attempts to copyright the pyramids that really are classified as 'world wonders' and belong to the world, while also being a national treasure for that country. Would Egypt be in violation of the TRIPs? I am not an expert and would not know. But really this is the dilemma in IP. Where do you draw the line? Propertyzing everything would result in shrinking of the public domain. How do you define the borders of IP rights internationally and limit pirating of traditional and other knowledge. But are certain things simply not subject to 'propertization'?

For more on these issues see the work of Professor Madhavi Sunder.

Globalization: a panacea?

I asked one of the Russian students in San Diego, "Why is Russia not joining the WTO?" He looked at me and said, "What will Russia get out of it?" I did not have a quick response to that but it made me think... Many ask similar questions that have as its source the dissatisfaction with 'internationalization' and globalization. In the 90s the rate of globalization was very speedy and disorganized. It left many countries and cultures marginalized, because its blessings were not shared with by many. Joseph Stiglitz captured the picture excellently in his famous "Globalization and its Discontents." Today, however, many have realized that globalization is not a choice but a reality. But why is it that people view globalization and one of its by-products-- growth and development of international organizations with such illusory expectations. Nobody promised that 'internationalization' would be panacea for all our troubles. Joining international organizations like the WTO entails not only benefits, but first of all obligations that often are difficult to carry out. For India it meant a fundamental restructuring of its manufacturing of generic drugs, due to the TRIPS agreement (Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights). Just like a citizen of the civil society has obligations before the law and the society, a member of the international community also has heightened obligations before the world. So then what are the benefits? Going back to the question posed to me by the Russian student, the benefits are not quantifiable or ascertainable because 'internationalization' involves a process to direct domestic resources for the benefit not only of one's country but also at least not to the detriment of other countries. Perhaps, one can argue that only international cooperation can alleviate the problems in the world, etc. But once again globalization was never supposed to be a curing medicine to our wounds and of course, like every medicine it has its side effects... People should not view international organizations or the law for that matter from the perspective of a utilitarian, especially when the human rights law is concerned... Therefore, the question should not be 'what I would get out of it?' but 'how I can meet my obligations and be a team player with the international community.' Read Professor Anupam Chander's "Globalization and Distrust" for a compelling analysis of these issues.