[ykboo] Fwd: [Dipity] Fw: Protecting Information: Articles of Interest 011700

[peter webster]

>X-From_: owner-ykboo at holodoc.peak.org Tue Jan 18 02:48:00 2000
>Delivered-To: peterweb at teleport.com
>Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 18:47:47 -0800 (PST)
>From: Jon Schaefer <jkschae_98 at yahoo.com>
>Subject: [ykboo] Fwd: [Dipity] Fw: Protecting Information: Articles of
>Interest 011700
>To: ykboo <ykboo at peak.org>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Sender: owner-ykboo at peak.org
>Precedence: bulk
>
>If you know of any Indian ethnobiologists, or others
>interested, pass this along.
>
>Jon
>
>> Reply-to: Dipity at onelist.com
>> Subject: [Dipity] Fw: Protecting Information: Articles of
>> Interest 011700
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Protecting Knowledge
>> To: undisclosed-recipients:;
>> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000 2:24 PM
>> Subject: Protecting Information: Articles of Interest
>> 011700
>>
>>
>> Hadih All!
>> Please find the following information relating to the
>> theme of the
>> Protecting Knowledge: Traditional Resource Rights in the
>> New Millennium
>> conference.
>>
>> Hope the information helps.
>>
>> Don
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>> Subject:  7th INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF ETHNOBIOLOGY
>> Date:  Tue, 12 Jan 1999 23:25:58 -0600
>> From: "R. Stepp" <rstepp at uga.edu>
>> To: indknow at u.washington.edu
>>
>> Ethnobiology, Biocultural Diversity, and Benefits Sharing
>> 7th INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF ETHNOBIOLOGY
>>
>> 23-27 October 2000
>>
>> University of Georgia
>> Athens, Georgia, U.S.A.
>>
>> The International Society of Ethnobiology will hold its
>> 7th in Athens,
>> Georgia. The theme of the Congress,
>> symbolized by the turtle, is Earth in the next
>> century-specifically
>> ethnobiology's role in maintaining biocultural diversity
>> and ensuring
>> equitable benefits sharing and open dialogue with
>> traditional and indigenous
>> research collaborators.
>>
>> Since its founding in 1988 in Bel?m, Brazil, the ISE has
>> met every two
>> years. Subsequent congresses have been held in Kunming,
>> China (1990), Mexico
>> City (1992), Lucknow, India (1994), Nairobi, Kenya
>> (1996), and Whakatane,
>> New Zealand (1998). This is the first time that the ISE
>> will hold its
>> congress in the U.S. We expect a strong representation of
>> U.S. and Canadian
>> indigenous groups, as well as traditional peoples from
>> Mexico, Central and
>> Latin America, and around the world.
>>
>> CALL FOR SYMPOSIA AND PAPERS
>>
>> The ISE 7th Congress Planning Committee calls for
>> symposia and/or papers on:
>>
>> Ethnobiology of human health
>> Intellectual property rights and ethnobiological research
>> Conservation of biological and cultural diversity
>> Sustainable development of plant resources
>> Collaborative research protocols
>> Benefits sharing and drug discovery Initiatives by
>> indigenous, traditional,
>> and local communities, and scientists to conserve
>> biological diversity
>>
>> Following its traditional format, the 7th Congress will
>> be preceded by a
>> number of Pre-Congress Training Workshops, which focus on
>> topics relevant to
>> particular geographical areas or specialized interests.
>>
>> WORKSHOP TOPICS
>>
>> Prior informed consent
>> Ethnobotany and education
>> Balancing local preservation and global benefit sharing
>> People and plants: cultural perspectives on conservation
>> Ethnobiological knowledge and public health
>> Ecological change, cultural transition, and human health
>> and other
>> volunteered topics
>>
>> ABSTRACTS
>>
>> Please send your abstracts (no more than 500 words)
>> before March 1, 2000, by
>> e-mail (prefered) to rstepp at uga.edu or by mail to:
>> 7th International Congress of Ethnobiology c/o John R.
>> Stepp
>> Department of Anthropology The University of Georgia 250
>> Baldwin Hall Athens, GA 30602-1619
>>
>> For more information please check our website at
>>
>> http://guallart.dac.uga.edu/ISE
>>
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>> Subject: [BIO-IPR] Recent materials:Property rights
>> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 00:17:26 -0500
>> From: ishgooda at voyager.net
>> Reply-To: triballaw at niec.net
>> To: triballaw at niec.net
>>
>> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 11:01:51 +0800
>> To: bio-ipr at cuenet.com
>> From: GRAIN Los Banos <grain at baylink.mozcom.com>
>>
>> BIO-IPR resource pointer
>> ________________________________________________________
>>
>> Dwijen Rangnekar, "TRIPS and Biodiversity", Briefing
>> paper #4, Centre for
>> International Trade, Economics and the Environment,
>> Consumer Unity & Trust
>> Society, Jaipur, India, December 1999.
>> To order, please visit http://www.cuts-india.org or email
>> cutsjpr at jp1.dot.net.in
>>
>> Graham Dutfield, "Biopiracy: the slavery of the new
>> millennium? surely not",
>> Working Group on Traditional Resource Rights, Oxford, UK,
>> 13 December 1999.
>> Available online at
>> http://users.ox.ac.uk/~wgtrr/slavery.htm
>>
>> Graham Dutfield, "Intellectual Property Rights, Trade and
>> Biodiversity:seeds
>> and plant varieties", Earthscan Books and IUCN, London,
>> 2000.
>> (ISBN:1-85383-692-3)
>> To order, please visit http://www.earthscan.co.uk or
>> email
>> earthinfo at earthscan.co.uk
>>
>> RAFI, Berne Declaration and Gene Campaign, "Update on
>> Basmati Rice Patent",
>> Geno-types, Rural Advancement Foundation International,
>> Winnipeg, Canada, 4
>> January 2000.
>> Available online at http://www.rafi.org or email
>> rafi at rafi.org
>>
>> "Defining the World's Public Property", special series of
>> articles in Le
>> Monde Diplomatique, Paris, France, January 2000.
>> Available online in English at
>> http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/en/2000/01/
>>
>> Donna O Perdue, "The Changing Landscape for Patenting
>> Transgenic Plants in
>> Europe", CASRIP Newsletter, Summer 1999, Vol 6, Issue 1,
>> Center for Advanced
>> Research and Study on Intellectual Property, University
>> of Washington School
>> of Law, Seattle, USA.
>> Available online at
>>
>http://www.law.washington.edu/Casrip/newsletter/newsv6i1Perdue.html
>> or write
>> casrip at law.washington.edu
>>
>> The Yurayaco Declaration of the Uni?n de M?dicos
>> Ind?genas Yageceros de la
>> Amazonia Colombiana (UMIYAC), Yurayaco, Colombia, June
>> 1999.  Available
>> online at
>>
>http://www.amazonteam.aa.psiweb.com/ethnobiology/declare.html
>>
>> The American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 was signed
>> into law in the USA
>> on 29 November. Section 705 of the Act calls for a study
>> to be completed
>> within six months on "potential risks to the United
>> States biotechnology
>> industry relating to biological deposits in support of
>> biotechnology
>> patents."
>> Available online at
>>
>http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ahrpa/opa/bulletin/hr1907ih.htm
>>
>> Andrea Carmen, Alberto Saldamando, Antonio Gonzales and
>> Carol Kalafatic,
>> "Can Intellectual Property be Theft?", article for the UN
>> Chronicle by
>> International Indian Treaty Council (IITC) staff members,
>> 1999.
>> Available online at http://www.iucnus.org/iitc.html
>>
>> Robert W Herdt, "Enclosing the Global Plant Genetic
>> Commons", paper prepared
>> for delivery at the China Center for Economic Research,
>> 24 May 1999,
>> Rockefeller Foundation, New York, USA.
>> Available online at
>>
>http://www.rockfound.org/rocktext/t_reports/t_proprights/t_paper1.html
>> or
>> write webinfo at rockfound.org
>>
>> Documentos del taller Iniciativa BIOTRADE COLOMBIA que se
>> realiz? en Villa
>> de Leyva, los d?as 23, 24 y 25 de marzo de 1999. //
>> Documents from the
>> BIOTRADE COLOMBIA workshop, held 23-25 March 1999 in
>> Villa de Leyva.
>> Available online in a mix of Spanish and English at
>> http://www.humboldt.org.co/documentos.htm
>>
>> Lakshmi Sarma, "Biopiracy: twentieth century imperialism
>> in the form of
>> international agreements", Temple International &
>> Comparative Law Journal,
>> Number 13, 1999, pp 107-136.
>> Available on request (Word 6, 106kb) from
>> grain at baylink.mozcom.com
>>
>> Darell A Posey (editor), "Cultural and Spiritual Values
>> of Biodiversity",
>> United Nations Environment Program and Intermediate
>> Technology Publications,
>> London, 1999. (ISBN: 1-85339-397-5 hardback or
>> 1-85339-394-0 paperback)
>> To order, please visit
>> http://www.oneworld.org/itdg/index.html or email
>> itdg at itdg.org.uk
>>
>> _________________________________________________________
>> ABOUT THIS LISTSERVER -- BIO-IPR is an irregular
>> listserver put out by
>> Genetic Resources Action International (GRAIN). Its
>> purpose is to circulate
>> information about recent developments in the field of
>> intellectual property
>> rights related to biodiversity & associated knowledge.
>> BIO-IPR is a strictly
>> non-commercial and educational service for nonprofit
>> organisations and
>> individuals active in the struggle against IPRs on life.
>> HOW TO PARTICIPATE -- To get on the mailing list, send
>> the word "subscribe"
>> (no quotes) as the subject of an email message to
>> <bio-ipr-request at cuenet.com>. To get off the list, send
>> the word
>> "unsubscribe" instead. To submit material to the list,
>> address your message
>> to <bio-ipr at cuenet.com>. A note with further details
>> about BIO-IPR is sent
>> to all subscribers.
>> ABOUT GRAIN -- For general information about GRAIN,
>> kindly visit our wwwsite
>> http://www.grain.org or write us at
>> <grain at bcn.servicom.es>.
>>
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>> Subject: [BIO-IPR] Law to protect native intellectual
>> property
>> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 00:18:03 -0500
>> From: ishgooda at voyager.net
>> Reply-To: triballaw at niec.net
>> To: triballaw at niec.net
>>
>> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 11:33:10 +0800
>> To: bio-ipr at cuenet.com
>> From: GRAIN Los Banos <grain at baylink.mozcom.com>
>> Mime-Version: 1.0
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1";
>> format=flowed
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>>
>>
>>
>> BIO-IPR docserver
>> ________________________________________________________
>>
>> TITLE: Law to Protect Native Intellectual Property
>> AUTHOR: Abraham Lama
>> PUBLICATION: IPS News Bulletin
>> DATE: 12 January 2000
>> URL: http://www.ips.org
>> NOTE: See BIO-IPR of 29 October and 3 November 1999.
>> ________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>> LAW TO PROTECT NATIVE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
>>
>> By Abraham Lama
>>
>> LIMA, Jan 12 (IPS) - The Peruvian government is drafting
>> a law to protect
>> indigenous rights over their ancestral knowledge in an
>> attempt to prevent
>> the history of plundering native wealth from repeating
>> itself, as well as
>> controlling the international exploitation of Peru's
>> native plants.
>>
>> Indigenous communities will be the intellectual owners of
>> genetic resources
>> coming from plant species whose curative or nutritional
>> values form part of
>> their ancestral knowledge, according to the text of the
>> legal bill.
>>
>> ''Peru is one of the countries with greatest biodiversity
>> in the world and
>> must begin utilising the competitive advantage this
>> implies,'' commented
>> Jorge Caillaux, president of the Peruvian Environmental
>> Law Society, ''but
>> it must protect its natural resources as well as the
>> rights of its
>> population.''
>>
>> ''Researchers from transnational pharmaceutical firms
>> travel throughout the
>> country gathering information on the native pharmacopeia,
>> they search for a
>> species and take it back to their country to isolate its
>> components and then
>> produce them commercially,'' he added.
>>
>> The history of plundering Peru's native knowledge and
>> technology, as old as
>> the pillaging of its natural resources, began with the
>> arrival of the
>> Spanish colonisers.
>>
>> Nothing can be done now about genetic rights to quinine,
>> extracted from the
>> 'quina' bush, nor about the potato, sweet potato, corn,
>> rubber, or tobacco,
>> which long ago became part of world knowledge and
>> industrial use.
>>
>> And perhaps nothing can be done about more recent natural
>> products, such as
>> cat's-claw, a plant whose bark boost the human immune
>> system and is, as a
>> result, effective in treating cancer and AIDS, and has
>> been patented by
>> laboratories in several countries as their own product.
>>
>> ''The story of quinine is illustrative of the plundering
>> of indigenous
>> communities' ancestral knowledge: in 1636 an Incan healer
>> cured Spanish
>> viceroy's wife of her recurrent malaria fevers using bark
>> from the quina
>> bush,'' said Peruvian doctor Fernando Cabieses.
>>
>> Excited about the results, the Count of Chich?n's wife
>> distributed the
>> ''Countess's powder'' to the people of Lima who suffered
>> tertian fever.
>> Jesuit priests in Peru sent the remedy to Europe with the
>> name ''Jesuits
>> powder,'' and soon after, cardinal Lugo dispersed the
>> miraculous medication
>> under the name ''Cardinal's powder.''
>>
>> ''Rome in that era was the malaria capital of the
>> world,'' affirmed
>> Cabieses, director of the National Institute of
>> Traditional Medicine.
>>
>> ''Surrounded by marshes, its 'mal aire' (bad air) led to
>> the disease's name
>> 'malaria.' The unhealthy conditions of the Vatican meant
>> that the seat of
>> Christianity was nearly abandoned several times, after
>> killing various Popes
>> and dozens of cardinals,'' he added.
>>
>> By 1650, the mysterious remedy had become popular at the
>> Vatican and
>> awakened interest in other European capitals.
>>
>> In 1679, Britain's Robert Talbot had quina plants sent
>> from Peru and began
>> to market the powder derivative, which in 1820, French
>> chemists Pelletier
>> and Caventou perfected, isolating quinine, or
>> ''chinchonina,'' named in
>> honour of viceroy Chinch?n's wife.
>>
>> ''They honoured the countess, but nobody ever remembered
>> the Incan doctors
>> who discovered its curative properties, who genetically
>> developed the plant
>> and used it for many years,'' commented Cabieses.
>>
>> The doctor explained that when the new law is approved,
>> international
>> pharmaceutical laboratories that currently exploit Peru's
>> bio-genetic
>> resources free of charge will have to pay the native
>> communities for the
>> right to continue.
>>
>> Among those participating in drafting the legal bill are
>> representatives
>> from indigenous communities, non-governmental
>> organisations (NGOs) and
>> officials from the ministries of Health, Industry,
>> Agriculture and from the
>> National Institute in Defence of Intellectual Property
>> (Indecopi).
>>
>> The bill is at the stage of receiving comments and input
>> from native
>> communities and business organisations that will be
>> involved in overseeing
>> implementation. The draft of the final legal text is
>> expected to come under
>> debate in February.
>>
>> ''For the first time in the world, a government is
>> proposing to establish
>> protection for the collective knowledge of indigenous
>> peoples, a system to
>> regulate research, production and marketing of genetic
>> resources,'' said
>> Beatriz Boza, of Indecopi.
>>
>> The bill establishes regulations for access to genetic
>> resources. If passed,
>> it will make Peru the third nation in the world to
>> possess such legislation,
>> after the Philippines and Bolivia.
>>
>> But unlike the Bolivian and Philippine laws on access to
>> genetic resources,
>> the Peruvian bill recognises native communities'
>> ownership of the knowledge
>> they and their ancestors have developed.
>>
>> Brendan Tobin, of the non-governmental Association for
>> the Defence of
>> Natural Rights, said that ''when the law is applied, the
>> communities will be
>> able to grant pharmaceutical laboratories, via contracts,
>> the right to use
>> certain plants whose therapeutic value they have known
>> about for years.''
>>
>> Tobin, advisor to the jungle-dwelling Aguaruna community
>> in its negotiations
>> with the transnational firm Monsanto, expressed his
>> support for the
>> orientation and text of the proposed law.
>>
>> According to the bill, pharmaceutical companies must
>> earmark 0.5 percent of
>> their profits from native-origin products to the
>> Indigenous People's
>> Development Fund, in addition to the price they agree to
>> pay for the right
>> to use each product.
>>
>> ''The bill is an important step forward because it
>> establishes that money
>> from this fund is to be managed by the indigenous people
>> themselves,'' said
>> Tobin, ''Finally their rights are being recognised.''
>>
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>> Subject: IPR: Biopiracy news from Brazil, Guyana and
>> Mexico
>> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:39:13 -0800
>>
>> ________________________________________________________
>>
>> TITLE: Indians want patent: Chiefs prepare international
>> law suit against
>> scientist who registered indigenous knowledge
>> AUTHOR: Luiza Villamea and Max Pinto (photos), with the
>> collaboration of
>> Jo?o F?bio Caminoto in London
>> PUBLICATION: ISTO? magazine, No. 1581, S?o Paulo
>> DATE: 19 January 2000
>> SOURCE: English translation kindly provided by David
>> Hathaway
>> <hathaway at unisys.com.br>
>> URL:
>>
>http://www.zaz.com.br/istoe/brasileiros/2000/01/13/000.htm
>> ________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>> BIOPIRACY: INDIANS WANT PATENT CHIEFS PREPARE
>> INTERNATIONAL LAW SUIT AGAINST
>> SCIENTIST WHO REGISTERED INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE
>>
>> Luiza Villamea and Max Pinto (photos)
>>
>> Sand Creek, Guyana
>>
>> In her village in a far corner of Guyana known as Palm
>> Grove, the Wapishana
>> Indian Evelyn Gomes keeps a nut called tipir for health
>> emergencies.
>> According to her people's tradition, the grated tipir
>> stops hemorrhages and
>> prevents infections, in addition to being a
>> contraceptive. "The tipir is
>> also abortive. I learned its use from my mother, who
>> learned from her
>> mother," says Evelyn. On the other side of the border
>> with Brazil, the
>> Wapishana Leandro de Castro Pereira holds to the
>> knowledge of his ancestors
>> as he fishes with neither arrow or net. A resident of the
>> Malacacheta maloca
>> (or village), near Boa Vista (capital city of Roraima),
>> Leandro macerates
>> the leaves of a plant called cunani, forms it into a
>> little pie and throws
>> it into the water. "The fishes go crazy. They start to
>> jump, and after a
>> while, they die," he says. "Then, you just catch them and
>> eat them, like our
>> forebears. The cunani doesn't pollute the water or affect
>> the taste of the
>> fish."
>>
>> Following litigation between Brazil and Great Britain --
>> by which Guyana was
>> once colonized -- the Wapishana were divided by an
>> arbitrary border in 1904.
>> Because of tipir and cunani, now they are more united
>> than ever, as they
>> prepare for a battle in international courts. The
>> Wapishanas are challenging
>> British chemist Conrad Gorinsky, who registered the
>> property of those plants
>> as his findings, in European and United States patent
>> offices. The problem
>> is that, before isolating the plants components, Gorinsky
>> spent long periods
>> of time among the Wapishanas, doing research precisely on
>> medicinal plants.
>> "For many days and nights I was his guide in the jungle,"
>> recalls the
>> Wapishana Ashpur Spencer, 83 years old.
>>
>> A health agent in Sand Creek, a village that is home to
>> 800 Wapishanas,
>> Louise Randhamil remembers Gorinsky well. "He used to
>> talk about sharing the
>> outcome of his research projects. What he has done is
>> absurd, because Picky
>> knows how much we need a refrigerator and solar energy to
>> store the
>> vaccines," she complains, referring to the scientist's
>> sister, who also used
>> to visit the region. Sand Creek's chief, Eugene Andrew,
>> is not interested in
>> asking for a specific donation from the scientist. He
>> demands justice. He
>> believes that it is fundamental to demonstrate that
>> Gorinsky would not have
>> isolated the plant's components or registered their
>> properties without the
>> help of his people. "He took the knowledge of our
>> ancestors and wants to
>> sell it to the industries as if he were the discoverer."
>>
>> Andrew hosted a delegation of four Brazilian Wapishana
>> chiefs who, in a
>> recent meeting, had called on their people to bring suit
>> against Gorinsky's
>> patents. "We are a united people and need to recover the
>> memory and the
>> knowledge of the elders," Norberto Cruz da Silva, the
>> delegation leader,
>> affirmed. "The difficulties we have to overcome just to
>> meet together are
>> nothing compared to what lies ahead," he said, referring
>> to the difficult
>> access to the village, which is reached by crossing the
>> wide and wild
>> Rupununi river, in a region with no bridges. They
>> communicate in their own
>> language, though the residents in Brazil also speak
>> Portuguese, and those
>> who live in Guyana speak English. Even the
>> English-speaking Wapishanas were
>> taken aback as they read copies of the patents. The
>> wording was obviously
>> inaccessible to these lay readers.
>>
>> The first patent granted to the scientist covers the
>> Greenheart tree (Ocotea
>> rodiaei), which produces tipir. According to his
>> description, the active
>> ingredient of the plant is an efficient antipyretic,
>> capable of preventing
>> come-back cases of diseases such as malaria, and also
>> useful in treating
>> tumors and even the AIDS virus. The substance was
>> baptized by Gorinsky as
>> rupununine, a reference to the region's main river. The
>> other active
>> ingredient registered by the chemist, polyacetylene, was
>> obtained from the
>> Cunani bush (Clibadium sylvestre). It is prescribed as a
>> powerful stimulant
>> of the central nervous system, as a neuromuscular agent
>> capable of reverting
>> cases of heart blockage.
>>
>> "Every single Wapishana needs to know what is happening,"
>> says Tony James,
>> coordinator of the Amerindian People's Association (APA),
>> in Georgetown,
>> Guyana's Capital. There are about 16 thousand Wapishanas,
>> 10 thousand of
>> whom live in Guyana. "Many started pushing for a law suit
>> after the
>> ayahuasca case," he added, referring to a medicinal drink
>> commonly used by
>> Amazonian peoples. At the request of indigenous peoples
>> from Ecuador and
>> Colombia, the United States Patents Office last November
>> revoked the
>> ayahuasca patent, which had been granted to an American
>> businessman.
>>
>> Together with the Brazilian chiefs who went to Guyana,
>> Tony James was one of
>> the signatories of a petition sent by the Wapishanas to
>> Senator Marina Silva
>> (PT-Acre), in which they asked her to help them challenge
>> the patents on
>> rupununines and polyacetylenes. Under the Convention on
>> Biological
>> Diversity, signed in 1992 by 144 Countries in Rio de
>> Janeiro, when products
>> are obtained from traditional knowledge, their origin
>> must be recognized,
>> and part of the royalties should be reserved for the
>> community which holds
>> the information. Since then, the Philippines, Costa Rica
>> and the countries
>> of the Andean Pact -- Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru
>> and Venezuela -- have
>> adopted laws to control access to genetic resources. In
>> Brazil, Senator
>> Marina Silva is the author of a bill that regulates the
>> matter. "We are an
>> auxiliary force, though we will collaborate as much as we
>> can to mobilize
>> institutional support," Marina assures.
>>
>> At least one institution has already responded to this
>> appeal: the Brazilian
>> Bar Association (OAB), represented in Sand Creek by
>> lawyer Gisela de
>> Alencar, an environmental law specialist. "This is a
>> model case, because
>> Gorinsky has stated in the text of both patents that the
>> Wapishanas used
>> those plants," Gisela affirms. Informed by ISTO? about
>> the suit to be filed,
>> Gorinsky, 63, insisted that rupununines and
>> polyacetylenes are his
>> discoveries. "I have dedicated my life to this work. I
>> have registered
>> specific components that had not been decoded. I have
>> made all the
>> intellectual effort, and spent thousands of dollars from
>> my own pocket.
>> Would the Indians ever invest in this?," reacted the
>> scientist, highlighting
>> that the substances have not yet been marketed. "But no
>> one can take a
>> patent away from the inventor. We can't talk about how to
>> share the pie if
>> there's no pie," adds Gorinsky, the son of a Polish
>> father who settled in
>> Guyana after meeting his mother, the daughter of Atorai
>> Indians.
>>
>> All the countries in which Gorinsky has taken out patents
>> are signatories to
>> the Biodiversity Convention except for the United States,
>> which has not yet
>> ratified the accord. Because of this, the law suit might
>> begin in Europe,
>> through Portugal, due to its cooperation treaties with
>> Brazil, to be judged
>> afterwards by the Court of Luxembourg, the European forum
>> responsible for
>> such issues.
>>
>> In February, the Wapishanas will meet in Boa Vista to
>> discuss strategies for
>> action, at the General Assembly of the Indigenous Council
>> of Roraima (CIR).
>> "We will alert the other peoples about the need to
>> preserve their
>> knowledge," says Chief Norberto. Meanwhile, Chief Andrew
>> has revoked some
>> ancient rules of hospitality. The entry of researchers is
>> forbidden in Sand
>> Creek.
>>
>> Joao Fabio Caminoto contributed from London.
>>
>> ENGLISH TRANSLATION: David Hathaway
>>
>> <>   <>   <>   <>   <>   <>
>>
>> BIO-IPR docserver
>> ________________________________________________________
>>
>> TITLE: Mexican Bean Biopiracy: US-Mexico Legal Battle
>> Erupts over Patented
>> "Enola" Bean
>> AUTHOR: Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI)
>> PUBLICATION: Geno-Types
>> DATE: 17 January 2000
>> URL: http://www.rafi.org
>> NOTE: Please visit RAFI's website for the full and
>> referenced version of
>> this article, and to subscribe to their listserver.
>> ________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>> MEXICAN BEAN BIOPIRACY:  US-MEXICO LEGAL BATTLE ERUPTS
>> OVER PATENTED "ENOLA"
>> BEAN PLANT BREEDERS' WRONGS CONTINUES...
>>
>> RAFI - Geno-Types - 17 January 2000
>>
>> Summary: A US-based company, POD-NERS, L.L.C, is suing
>> Mexican bean
>> exporters, charging that the Mexican beans (Phaseolus
>> vulgaris) they are
>> selling in the US infringe POD-NERS' US patent on a
>> yellow-colored bean
>> variety. It's not surprising that the Mexican beans are
>> strikingly similar
>> to POD-NER's patented bean. That's because POD-NERS
>> proprietary bean,
>> "Enola" originates from the highly popular "Azufrado" or
>> "Mayocoba" bean
>> seeds the company's president purchased in Mexico in
>> 1994. The Mexican
>> yellow beans have been grown in Mexico for centuries,
>> developed by
>> generations of Mexican farmers and more recently by
>> Mexican plant breeders.
>> Last year RAFI released a report, Plant Breeders' Wrongs,
>> which documents
>> 147 suspected cases of institutional biopiracy. In RAFI's
>> opinion, the Enola
>> bean patent is a textbook case of biopiracy, and it
>> confirms -- once
>> again -- that the plant intellectual property system is
>> predatory on the
>> rights of indigenous peoples and farming communities.
>>
>> Background
>>
>> In 1994, Larry Proctor, the owner of a small seed company
>> and president of
>> POD-NERS, L.L.C., bought a bag of commercial bean seeds
>> in Sonora, Mexico
>> and took them back to the US. He picked out the
>> yellow-colored beans,
>> planted them and allowed them to self-pollinate. Proctor
>> selected yellow
>> seeds for several generations until he got what he
>> describes as a "uniform
>> and stable population" of yellow bean seeds. Proctor
>> applied for a US patent
>> on November 15, 1996, barely two years after he purchased
>> the yellow beans
>> in Mexico.
>>
>> o On April 13, 1999 Larry Proctor won US patent no.
>> 5,894,079 on the "Enola"
>> bean variety. The patent claims exclusive monopoly on any
>> Phaseolus vulgaris
>> (dry bean) having a seed color of a particular shade of
>> yellow. POD-NERS
>> claims that it is illegal for anyone to buy, sell, offer
>> for sale, make, use
>> for any purpose including dry edible or propagation, or
>> import yellow
>> Phaseolus vulgaris of that description. (To be granted a
>> patent, the
>> inventor must meet three standard criteria. The invention
>> must be new,
>> useful and non-obvious.
>>
>> o On May 28, 1999 Larry Proctor won a US Plant Variety
>> Protection
>> Certificate (No. 9700027) on the Enola bean variety. The
>> PVP certificate
>> states that the Enola dry bean variety "has distinctly
>> colored seed which is
>> unlike any dry bean currently being produced in the
>> United States..." (To
>> receive plant variety protection in the US, a variety
>> must be new, stable,
>> uniform and distinct.
>>
>> In late 1999, armed with a US patent and a breeders'
>> right certificate
>> (double IP protection), Proctor brought legal suit
>> against two companies
>> that sell Mexican beans in the US, charging that they
>> infringe his patent
>> monopoly. Proctor has initiated legal suits against two
>> companies that buy y
>> ellow beans from Mexican farmers and sell them in the US:
>> Tutuli Produce
>> (Nogales, Arizona, US) and Productos Verde Valle
>> (Guadalajara, Jalisco,
>> Mexico). Rebecca Gilliland, President of Tutuli Produce,
>> explains, "In the
>> beginning, I thought it was a joke. How could he
>> [Proctor] invent something
>> that Mexicans have been growing for centuries?" Tutuli
>> Produce is a major
>> buyer of two yellow bean varieties, "Peruano" and
>> "Mayocoba" produced by an
>> association of Mexican farmers, the Asociacion de
>> Agricultores de Rio
>> Fuerte.
>>
>> POD-NERS is demanding royalties of six cents per pound on
>> the yellow beans
>> entering the US from Mexico. According to Gilliland,
>> because of the patent
>> infringement charges, US customs officials are now
>> inspecting Mexican beans
>> at the US-Mexico border, taking samples from every
>> shipment, at additional
>> cost to her company. And because of the lawsuit,
>> Gilliland says her company
>> is already losing customers -- which are important
>> markets for Mexican
>> farmers.
>>
>> Mexico Defends its Bean Heritage
>>
>> Beans are the principal source of vegetable protein
>> consumed by Mexicans,
>> and one of Mexico's basic food staples. Yellow "Azufrado"
>> beans are
>> especially popular in the Northwest region of Mexico
>> where 98% of surveyed
>> Mexicans eat them.
>>
>> Outraged by the appropriation of Mexican germplasm and
>> legal attempts to
>> block Mexican bean exports to the US, the Mexican
>> government announced in
>> early January that it will challenge the US patent on the
>> "Enola" bean
>> variety. "We will do everything necessary, anything it
>> takes, because the
>> defense of our beans is a matter of national interest,"
>> declared Jose
>> Antonio Mendoza Zazueta, under-secretary of Mexican rural
>> development. The
>> patent challenge will cost at least US$200,000 in legal
>> fees.
>>
>> Mexico's National Research Institute for Agriculture,
>> Forestry and Livestock
>> (INIFAP) recently conducted a DNA analysis of POD-NERS'
>> patented bean. The
>> results indicate that the Enola variety is genetically
>> identical to Mexico's
>> "Azufrado" bean.
>>
>> Nothing New
>>
>> Larry Proctor, the "inventor" of the Enola variety,
>> readily admits that his
>> Enola bean is of Mexican origin. On his application to
>> the PVP office,
>> Proctor wrote, "The yellow bean, 'Enola' variety is most
>> likely a landrace
>> from the azufrado-type varieties." In his patent
>> application, Proctor
>> explains that he bought a bag of commercial beans in
>> Mexico, planted them in
>> Colorado (US), and did several years of selection. But
>> Proctor claims that
>> the Enola variety he developed is unique because of its
>> distinctive yellow
>> color and also because it was not grown previously in the
>> US.
>>
>> Plant breeding experts disagree. Professor James Kelly, a
>> bean breeder at
>> Michigan State University and President of the Bean
>> Improvement Cooperative,
>> believes that the Enola patent is "inappropriate, unjust
>> and is not based on
>> the scientific evidence or facts."
>>
>> Kelly writes: "This yellow color described in the patent
>> is typical of the
>> yellow beans that have been grown for centuries in
>> Mexico. The yellow beans
>> in Mexico are widely grown and known under the names of
>> Mayocoba, Azufrado
>> or Sulfur, Peruano, Canaria and Canario, names that are
>> all suggestive of
>> the yellow color."
>>
>> There is ample documentation in genebank databases that
>> bean varieties
>> commonly known as Azufrado, Canario and Peruano are
>> farmers' varieties
>> collected in Mexico. RAFI's initial database search
>> reveals that scores of
>> Mexican bean varieties identified by those names are held
>> by the
>> International Center for Tropical Agriculture (Cali,
>> Colombia), and
>> virtually all of them are designated "in-trust"
>> materials. Under the terms
>> of the 1994 agreement between the Consultative Group on
>> International
>> Agricultural Research and the UN Food and Agriculture
>> Organization, "in
>> trust" germplasm is maintained in the public domain and
>> is not allowed to be
>> included in any intellectual property claim.
>>
>> Professor James Kelly dismisses the implication that the
>> patented yellow
>> color bean was not known, grown or recognized in the US
>> prior to 1994. Kelly
>> provides documented evidence that yellow beans (of
>> Mexican origin) similar
>> to Enola were grown and consumed in the US as far back as
>> the 1930s.
>>
>> Kelly also questions the technical validity of the
>> breeding and selection
>> work described in the Enola patent:
>>
>> "On a scientific level, I would challenge the procedure
>> they used as not
>> being unique since beans are highly self-pollinating and
>> they (inventors)
>> simply grew pure homozygous seed of yellow beans from a
>> seed mixture which
>> self pollinated to reproduce itself. Nothing unique was
>> invented, and this
>> is a routine procedure used by bean breeders to maintain
>> purity of genetic
>> stocks and varieties. The inventors state 'a segregating
>> population of
>> plants resulted.' This is incorrect. They simply observed
>> different plant
>> and seed types since they planted a mixture of different
>> beans that
>> exhibited morphological, phenological and seed color
>> differences. This is
>> not a segregating population which must result from a
>> cross pollination.
>> Simply growing and selfing a specific seed color type
>> hardly implies novelty
>> or invention."
>>
>> "All he [Proctor] did," Kelly told RAFI, "was multiply
>> something that
>> already existed. It's nothing unique in any sense of the
>> word. To patent a
>> color is absolute heresy."
>>
>> The Bottom Line: RAFI Commentary
>>
>> The Enola bean patent is technically and morally
>> unacceptable. It is tragic
>> that Mexico is now forced to devote scarce financial
>> resources to challenge
>> a patent that should never have been granted. It's
>> difficult to decide who
>> is more at fault: Is it the patent owner who claims that
>> Mexican beans are
>> infringing his US monopoly patent on seeds of Mexican
>> origin? Or is it the
>> US patent examiners who determined that Proctor was
>> eligible to win an
>> exclusive monopoly patent?
>>
>> It is tempting to dismiss the Enola bean patent as an
>> "aberration", as
>> nothing more than an absurdly ridiculous patent.
>> Unfortunately, the patent
>> demonstrates more than the fallibility of a single patent
>> examiner. Last
>> year RAFI released a report, "Plant Breeders' Wrongs"
>> which documents 147
>> suspected cases of institutional biopiracy. Industry and
>> Plant Breeders'
>> Rights officials from Canberra to Geneva dismissed the
>> charges, asserting
>> that plant intellectual property abuses are remote and
>> isolated cases.. The
>> reality is that the Enola patent is only the most recent
>> example of a long
>> line of abuses -- of "systemic biopiracy." Mexican beans,
>> South Asian
>> basmati, Bolivian quinoa, Amazonian ayahuasca, Indian
>> chickpeas -- all have
>> been subject to intellectual property claims that are
>> predatory on the
>> knowledge and genetic resources of indigenous peoples and
>> farming
>> communities.
>>
>> The Enola controversy starkly illustrates the danger of
>> life patenting and
>> the power of exclusive monopoly patents to block
>> agricultural imports, to
>> disrupt or destroy export markets for Third World
>> farmers, and to legally
>> appropriate staple food crops or sacred medicinal plants
>> that represent the
>> cultural heritage of millennia. Hopefully, the Enola
>> patent will be easily
>> challenged and promptly abandoned. But next time, it may
>> not be so simple.
>> The patent owner could be a corporate powerhouse with
>> deeper pockets and a
>> fleet of lawyers.
>>
>> Mexico and other nations of the South should bear in mind
>> that the Enola
>> patent is the product of precisely the same intellectual
>> property regime
>> that the US government aggressively promotes as a model
>> for the rest of the
>> world, through bilateral and multilateral channels. At
>> the World Trade
>> Organization, the US consistently pushes for stronger IP
>> protection for
>> plant varieties under the Trade-Related Intellectual
>> Property (TRIPs)
>> agreement. It is a tragic irony if Mexico and other
>> governments react to
>> biopiracy by rushing to patent and PBR every plant
>> variety in sight. In
>> doing so, they will put in place the very same predatory
>> IP regimes that
>> undercut the rights of farmers to save seeds, promote
>> genetic uniformity,
>> and threaten food security.
>>
>> Action Needed
>>
>> o US Patent 5,894,079 should be legally challenged and
>> revoked.
>>
>> o US Patent 5,894,079 and US PVP # 9700027 may involve
>> "in trust" germplasm.
>> Under the terms of the 1994 agreement between the
>> Consultative Group on
>> International Agricultural Research and the UN Food and
>> Agriculture
>> Organization, "in trust" germplasm is maintained in the
>> public domain and is
>> not allowed to be included in any intellectual property
>> claim. To insure the
>> integrity of designated germplasm, FAO and CGIAR should
>> take immediate steps
>> to investigate, and, if necessary, to offer legal and
>> financial support to
>> defend the in-trust germplasm.
>>
>> o The long-overdue review of WTO TRIPs Article 27.3(b) is
>> ultimately the
>> most important forum for halting predatory practices.
>> Governments should
>> rescind the current requirement under Article 27.3(b) to
>> permit intellectual
>> property protection for plants and microorganisms on the
>> grounds that WIPO
>> and UPOV regimes are predatory upon the knowledge of
>> farming communities and
>> indigenous peoples and upon the sovereignty of states
>> over their living
>> resources.
>>
>> o Governments, civil society organizations and other
>> stakeholders convening
>> at the Global Forum on Agricultural Research in Dresden
>> in May should
>> urgently review the impact of plant intellectual property
>> on plant breeding
>> and innovation, farming communities and biological
>> diversity.
>>
>>
>> For further information, please contact:
>>
>> Hope Shand, Research Director
>> RAFI
>> 118 E. Main St., Rm. 211
>> Carrboro, NC 27510 USA
>> Tel: (1-919) 960-5223
>> Fax: (1-919) 960-5224
>> Email: hope at rafi.org
>> Web: http://www.rafi.org
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> This is an email distributed through the Protecting
>> Knowledge conference
>> email distribution list.  If you would like to be added
>> to this list, please
>> send an email to <research at ubcic.bc.ca> with the words
>> "Subscribe Protect"
>> in the Subject line.  If you would like to be taken off
>> this list, please
>> send an email to <research at ubcic.bc.ca> with the words
>> "Unsubscribe Protect"
>> in the Subject line.
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> researc???ä
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
>http://im.yahoo.com
>

peter