Dear Editor,
The controversial piracy of text books issue that dominated the headlines in the past weeks following the rather intemperate statement by a senior government official fizzled out after much heat with no light at the end of the discourse. However, the copyright issue that was at the heart of the dispute is an integral part of the broad metrics of intellectual property rights (IPR) that was not discussed in its full dimension. Violation of copyrights and trademarks in Guyana has been practiced at different levels in the past, famous among them has been the pirating of movies by local television channels in the 80’s by owners that were well connected to powerful political elites of the day. This action led to the closure of most cinemas as a form of family entertainment as the law of the jungle prevailed unchecked. It is noteworthy that the issue of copyright will once again surface given the intended investment by Caribbean Movie Theatres in Turkeyen. But the issue of IPR goes beyond simple piracy and strikes at the heart of economic development.
Inventors, artists and institutions are awarded the exclusive rights to produce, copy, distribute and licence goods and technology within a country via trademark, patents, copyrights etc.
Intellectual property rights became mandatory for members of the World Trade Organization who signed on to the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). This agreement set out the minimum standard most countries must follow and contrary to popular perception is not a universal system. Many developing countries felt shortchanged by the entire process especially after the experience of an AIDS activist in South Africa limiting their right to access generic drugs, or farmers in India that found to their surprise the trade mark for Basmati rice was held by a Western Multinational, or the case of our own Demerara Sugar trade mark held by a foreign company. Despite these negatives the Economist (23/06/01) argued that IPR is good for developing countries since it encourages domestic industry, boosts foreign investment, and improves access to new technologies.
Professor John Barton of Stanford University who chaired an expert commission on IPR convened by DFID argued that both rich and poor countries should think of IPR as a developmental tool. He argued that developing countries should craft IPR to suit their needs and avoid committing themselves to rich world systems unless it is beneficial to their needs. The commission report issued in September 2002 reckoned that copyright as it pertains to education will be problematic in the future since unauthorized copying for fair use or personal consumption are too limited and that copyright may hamper access to textbooks and other education material in poor countries (Economist 14/09/02). The argument cited above shows that experts on IPR were not indifferent to the challenges faced by developing nations but this should be handled judiciously.
It is my considered view that small open economies can ignore IPR but at their own peril since trade in services had been accelerating at an exponential rate compared to trade in goods in the last decade. Developing countries now account for more than half of the growth in the export of services and if India is included it is almost two thirds. Artisan craft production is now a major economic force in many developing nations, the protection against pirating of folklore and preventing of counterfeited craft design by multinationals is now a priority for developing countries. Further, countries in East Asia were able to attract higher Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in new technology transfers, research and development and cross border technology licensing by adhering to higher IPR standards. Today India, Chile, Mexico, Brazil and a number of countries are following suit and that is leading to rapid development.
Finally it is impossible to expound fully the merits and demerits of strong IPR in a simple letter, however, one is left to wonder why an arcane law on copyright from the UK in the middle of the last century as emphasized by the Sunday Stabroek Editorial 16/09/12 is the authority in Guyana in this the digital and internet age. Protecting the traditional knowledge base has not been the priority of the region in its bilateral trade treaties and as such the Caribbean has been left behind. In the heights of the textbook controversy the Stabroek News letter column 26/09/12 carried a complaint by Lee Darrel that despite being registered by the US copyright office and copyright organization in Trinidad and Tobago he was denied payment of royalty on his music. The New Partnership for Africa’s Development administered by the AU places traditional knowledge as their competitive edge in their export of services that has been growing to facilitate its economic development. In conclusion, IPR is very much a development challenge that many nations took on successfully not in a piecemeal manner but as part of an overall strategy in the export of services.
Yours faithfully,
Rajendra Rampersaud
