# So wtf is cultural appropriation exactly? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 25, 2017, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423 "2017-05-25T17:26:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/221 "2017-06-10T01:17:22Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > . . . But if I can protect my intellectual property, and if a corporation can protect its intellectual property, then why can’t a tribe, or a culture? . . . Of course they can…but they have to work within the rules of copyright and trademark. The Hopi, for instance, could trademark certain kachina idols, and that means no one else can depict them. What they cannot do is put an overall restriction on anyone making a “Hopi-esque” kachina figure. You can’t do “blanket” trademark restrictions. Intellectual property must be specific. The Hopi have been very clever, and have “market kachina” figures, which they sell in gift shops, and they also have “sacred kacina” figures, which they protect and try to keep secure, essentially by keeping them secret. If I were to spy one out somehow, and mass-produce them for sale, well, that’d be kinda narsty, and you’d have every reason to lose respect for me for it…but there is absolutely no possible legal way to prevent it. (And…in my opinion…nor should there be.) ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/222 "2017-06-10T01:40:41Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Of course they can…but they have to work within the rules of copyright and trademark. …copyright and trademarks are a very poor mechanism for protecting tribal, cultural and indigenous rights. Take a look at the mess surrounding the Washington Redskins. Did trademarks protect the intellectual property rights of the Navajo, or of Dan Snyder? How much money has it cost to take this case to the supreme courts? > [@](#): > > The Hopi, for instance, could trademark certain kachina idols, and that means no one else can depict them. They could: but how many thousands of dollars would it cost to both set up the trademark and to enforce it? > [@](#): > > What they cannot do is put an overall restriction on anyone making a “Hopi-esque” kachina figure. You can’t do “blanket” trademark restrictions. Intellectual property must be specific. > > The Hopi have been very clever, and have “market kachina” figures, which they sell in gift shops, and they also have “sacred kacina” figures, which they protect and try to keep secure, essentially by keeping them secret. > > If I were to spy one out somehow, and mass-produce them for sale, well, that’d be kinda narsty, and you’d have every reason to lose respect for me for it…but there is absolutely no possible legal way to prevent it. > > (And…in my opinion…nor should there be.) You’ve just made my point for me. In western society there isn’t any practical way to protect their intellectual property apart from talking about it very loudly. I haven’t made a case that there **should** be a legal way to prevent it. I’ve simply stated that (in most cases) there isn’t a legal way to prevent it. So the Hopi or Maori or Navajo will use the only means available to them: to talk about it. Sometimes very loudly. We are talking about what cultural appropriation is. You don’t seem to be disagreeing with my definition. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/223 "2017-06-10T02:57:08Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Perhaps I [already did](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20249557&postcount=161). > > Words are weird. > > I have the massive personal failing of being something of a pedant, and hewing rather enthusiastically to what I believe are the accurate definitions of words. For one example that I’m sure one of these days will piss someone off, I’m of the opinion that agnosticism isn’t the space between theism and atheism. There _is_ no space between theism and a-theism. Which leads me to the possibly controversial conclusion that most self-identified agnostics are just atheists who don’t like the term “atheism”. (The rest, in case you’re curious, are theists who don’t wish to sound dogmatically overconfident.) > > So with that in mind, I am profoundly unimpressed by the claim we should preemptively abandon the term “cultural appropriation” to linguistic drift. Contrary to the protests of the heartless, there are certainly legitimate examples of situations that fit what I believe is the definition of the term “cultural appropriation”. It is of course up to each individual person how they want to react to these situations -wanting to correct the offense, glee at the fact people _were_ offended, stoic apathy, whatever- but these situations do occur and they do merit the term. Just because in some cases the term is misused does not strike me as reason to declare it verboten, just yet. If you can’t make your point without tons of ad hominem it might signal your point is weak. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/224 "2017-06-10T02:58:43Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …copyright and trademarks are a very poor mechanism for protecting tribal, cultural and indigenous rights. Take a look at the mess surrounding the Washington Redskins. Did trademarks protect the intellectual property rights of the Navajo, or of Dan Snyder? How much money has it cost to take this case to the supreme courts? > > They could: but how many thousands of dollars would it cost to both set up the trademark and to enforce it? > > You’ve just made my point for me. In western society there isn’t any practical way to protect their intellectual property apart from talking about it very loudly. I haven’t made a case that there **should** be a legal way to prevent it. I’ve simply stated that (in most cases) there isn’t a legal way to prevent it. So the Hopi or Maori or Navajo will use the only means available to them: to talk about it. Sometimes very loudly. We are talking about what cultural appropriation is. You don’t seem to be disagreeing with my definition. What tribal, cultural, and indigenous rights are being violated with the Redskins? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/225 "2017-06-10T03:05:23Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > What tribal, cultural, and indigenous rights are being violated with the Redskins? …can I suggest you read my original post, which explains my position pretty comprehensively? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/226 "2017-06-10T04:00:34Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …can I suggest you read my original post, which explains my position pretty comprehensively? Why isn’t that class of intellectual property copyrightable or something? And do all cultures suffer their cultural dances or whatever being copied? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/227 "2017-06-10T04:24:39Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > Why isn’t that class of intellectual property copyrightable or something? …do you understand how copyright works? Do you understand what is and isn’t copyrightable, and how copyright protection works? My post lays out the basics. I can only suggest if that my previous post didn’t answer your question (and it was pretty comprehensive) then please feel free to do some more investigation into what copyright is and what it protects. A basic understanding of copyright would answer your question. A couple of links to help you out: > **[Copyright](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright)** > > A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives the creator of an original work, or another right holder, the exclusive and legally secured right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time. The creative work may be in a literary, artistic, educational, or musical form. Copyright is intended to protect the original expression of an idea in the form of a creative work, but not the idea itself. A copyright is subject Some jurisdictions... > **[Berne Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention)** > > The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, usually known as the Berne Convention, was an international assembly held in 1886 in the Swiss city of Berne by ten European countries with the goal of agreeing on a set of legal principles for the protection of original work. They drafted and adopted a multi-party contract containing agreements for a uniform, border-crossing system that became known under the same name. Its rules have been updated many times since then.\[ > **[Indigenous intellectual property](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_intellectual_property)** > > Indigenous intellectual property is a term used in national and international forums to describe intellectual property that is collectively owned by various Indigenous peoples, and by extension, their legal rights to protect specific such property. This property includes cultural knowledge of their groups and many aspects of their cultural heritage and knowledge, including that held in oral history. In Australia, the term Indigenous cultural and intellectual property, abbreviated as ICIP, is com... So essentially: no, this class of intellectual property isn’t “copyrightable or something.” Which was the entire point of my post. As to why it isn’t “copyrightable or something:” its because as intellectual property laws/treaties/conventions have been developed and have evolved, indigenous intellectual property rights were not given much thought, because indigenous people have never had a very big voice in creating those laws/treaties/conventions. > [@](#): > > And do all cultures suffer their cultural dances or whatever being copied? What do you mean by “suffer?” As a photographer, do I physically “suffer” if someone takes my photo off the internet and uses it in a manner I disapprove of? Wouldn’t it be natural for me to get upset if someone were to use my images to maybe promote a Nazi agenda? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/228 "2017-06-10T05:56:07Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …do you understand how copyright works? Do you understand what is and isn’t copyrightable, and how copyright protection works? > > My post lays out the basics. I can only suggest if that my previous post didn’t answer your question (and it was pretty comprehensive) then please feel free to do some more investigation into what copyright is and what it protects. A basic understanding of copyright would answer your question. A couple of links to help you out: > > [Copyright - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright) > [Berne Convention - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention) > [Indigenous intellectual property - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_intellectual_property) > > So essentially: no, this class of intellectual property isn’t “copyrightable or something.” Which was the entire point of my post. As to why it isn’t “copyrightable or something:” its because as intellectual property laws/treaties/conventions have been developed and have evolved, indigenous intellectual property rights were not given much thought, because indigenous people have never had a very big voice in creating those laws/treaties/conventions. > > What do you mean by “suffer?” As a photographer, do I physically “suffer” if someone takes my photo off the internet and uses it in a manner I disapprove of? Wouldn’t it be natural for me to get upset if someone were to use my images to maybe promote a Nazi agenda? Thanks for the links. Suffer “experience or be subjected to (something bad or unpleasant).” But with regards to suffering if no dance or other non-copyrightable cultural expression is protected doesn’t that mean everybody has an equal opportunity to poach from each other culture as they wish? So it seems to me that society doesn’t really have an interest in forcibly segregating cultural differences. Each person can decide to borrow what’s in the public domain be it a recipe, a dance, or a manner of speaking. Very specific and recent implementations have been deemed to be copyrightable and that’s a trade off. Now are you telling me that a specific poem by an indigenous person can’t be copyrighted if it was written in the past 100 or so years? Of course it can. So it seems like there is equal protection. If a Nazi used your photo without permission wouldn’t that be a copyright infringement? Now if your photo was 200 or however many years Disney can push Congress to protect copyright it would be in the public domain and your wishes would be irrelevant. I don’t see the problem with that. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/229 "2017-06-10T07:14:41Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > But with regards to suffering if no dance or other non-copyrightable cultural expression is protected doesn’t that mean everybody has an equal opportunity to poach from each other culture as they wish? …yes it does. This is pretty much how things exist today. Hadn’t you noticed? People do “poach.” And sometimes when people “poach” they get told to “stop poaching” and people do stop poaching. > [@](#): > > So it seems to me that society doesn’t really have an interest in forcibly segregating cultural differences. Each person can decide to borrow what’s in the public domain be it a recipe, a dance, or a manner of speaking. Which society are you talking about? Do you view copyright as the process of forcibly segregating creative expression? Do you believe “society” has no interest in forcibly segregating creative ideas? Do you see a problem that indigenous intellectual property just happens to be in the public domain simply by default? > [@](#): > > Very specific and recent implementations have been deemed to be copyrightable and that’s a trade off. Specific implementations of what? Trade off with what? > [@](#): > > Now are you telling me that a specific poem by an indigenous person can’t be copyrighted if it was written in the past 100 or so years? Nope. I’m not telling you that at all. Did you actually read my posts? > [@](#): > > So it seems like there is equal protection. What do you mean, “equal protection?” You are comparing the “intellectual property rights” of a culture to the “intellectual property rights” of a person. There is clearly no equal measure of protection. > [@](#): > > If a Nazi used your photo without permission wouldn’t that be a copyright infringement? Yes it would be. And I can take legal steps to rectify that. Thats my point. I’m glad that you are slowly coming to understand my point. My work is protected. I may not physically “suffer” if someone uses my work in a way I don’t want them to use it. Just like Ngāti Toa doesn’t physically suffer if somebody appropriates Ka Mate. But even though I wouldn’t be physically hurt: I would still get pissed off. So why would it surprise you that Ngāti Toa would get pissed off as well? The difference is that I have legal recourse. Ngāti Toa does not. I can send a cease and desist, I can send a DMCA takedown, I could send them an invoice. Ngāti Toa can ask them to stop and if they choose not to, then the only other recourse is to take to twitter or to facebook. This is why you often see stories about cultural appropriation go “viral.” Because without the possibility of using the mechanisms of law then the only thing left is freedom of speech. > [@](#): > > Now if your photo was 200 or however many years Disney can push Congress to protect copyright it would be in the public domain and your wishes would be irrelevant. I don’t see the problem with that. And in a free world you are free to not see a problem with absolutely anything. Thanks for expressing your opinion. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 7:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/230 "2017-06-10T07:36:08Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …yes it does. This is pretty much how things exist today. Hadn’t you noticed? People do “poach.” And sometimes when people “poach” they get told to “stop poaching” and people do stop poaching. > > Which society are you talking about? Do you view copyright as the process of forcibly segregating creative expression? Do you believe “society” has no interest in forcibly segregating creative ideas? Do you see a problem that indigenous intellectual property just happens to be in the public domain simply by default? I read your posts. I just don’t see how different groups being treated differently is a good thing. Ancient practices aren’t protected. Well, indigenous folks and non-indigenous folk all benefit from that do they not? Indigenous folks don’t benefit from non-indigenous law concepts? Medical technology? The number 0? Etc. Yeah, someone outside their group may adopt a ornamentation they’ve used for 1000 years but that to me is a fair trade off. Now modern stuff is protected. So if indigenous folks innovate something now they get equal protection from the law do they not? If they don’t I admit that’s a problem. So yeah, if all indigenous intellectual property, modern and ancient were treated as public domain I’d see a problem. > [@](#): > > Specific implementations of what? Trade off with what? To answer your question about specific implementation and trade off. Can you copyright the word potato? Can you copyright a A#? No. But you can copyright a specific implementation of the usage of public domain words or notes such as a play or a symphony. > [@](#): > > What do you mean, “equal protection?” You are comparing the “intellectual property rights” of a culture to the “intellectual property rights” of a person. There is clearly no equal measure of protection. I don’t think cultures have intellectual property rights. > [@](#): > > Yes it would be. And I can take legal steps to rectify that. Thats my point. I’m glad that you are slowly coming to understand my point. My work is protected. I may not physically “suffer” if someone uses my work in a way I don’t want them to use it. Just like Ngāti Toa doesn’t physically suffer if somebody appropriates Ka Mate. But even though I wouldn’t be physically hurt: I would still get pissed off. So why would it surprise you that Ngāti Toa would get pissed off as well? > > The difference is that I have legal recourse. Ngāti Toa does not. I can send a cease and desist, I can send a DMCA takedown, I could send them an invoice. Ngāti Toa can ask them to stop and if they choose not to, then the only other recourse is to take to twitter or to facebook. This is why you often see stories about cultural appropriation go “viral.” Because without the possibility of using the mechanisms of law then the only thing left is freedom of speech. Ngāti Toa doesn’t have rights in whatever country he or she dwells in? If this person were living in the USA and he or she composed something it would be as protected as your photo would it not? And I’ve understood your point. I just don’t see why we should be paying royalties to Pythagoras’s estate for using A^2 + B^2 = C^2. I don’t see why the whole world can benefit from that concept and the dissemination of that ancient knowledge and not use a medicinal herb that a tribe in the Andes uses or an ancient ceremonial tattoo that a tribe in the Pacific uses. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 10:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/231 "2017-06-10T10:14:08Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > I just don’t see how different groups being treated differently is a good thing. Ancient practices aren’t protected. Well, indigenous folks and non-indigenous folk all benefit from that do they not? …different groups are treated differently all the time. Indigenous people have been pretty much treated like shit for a very long time: and the [incarceration](http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/04/15/national-crisis-indigenous-incarceration-rates-worse-25-years)rates, the health [statistics](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/why-is-canada-ignoring-the-health-of-aboriginal-peoples/article23856403/)prove that very point. I’d love for indigenous folks and non-indigenous folks to all be treated the same. So when indigenous and non-indigenous folks start dying at approximately the same rate in jail then you might just have a point. > [@](#): > > Indigenous folks don’t benefit from non-indigenous law concepts? Medical technology? The number 0? Etc. Yeah, someone outside their group may adopt a ornamentation they’ve used for 1000 years but that to me is a fair trade off. A fair trade off for whom? Indigenous folks have had their land taken from them, they’ve been had their ancestors [body parts and literally shipped over-seas](http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11638270). They’ve been marginalised in society, their culture have been appropriated without permission since colonization. They aren’t asking for a lot. Mostly, all they are asking is that you ask permission before using aspects of their culture. Isn’t granting them that simple request more than a fair trade off? > [@](#): > > Now modern stuff is protected. So if indigenous folks innovate something now they get equal protection from the law do they not? If they don’t I admit that’s a problem. > > So yeah, if all indigenous intellectual property, modern and ancient were treated as public domain I’d see a problem. Are you still not seeing the difference between individual intellectual property rights, and collective (tribal/cultural) intellectual property rights? > [@](#): > > To answer your question about specific implementation and trade off. Which question did I ask that asked that question? > [@](#): > > Can you copyright the word potato? Can you copyright a A#? No. But you can copyright a specific implementation of the usage of public domain words or notes such as a play or a symphony. Considering I had to provide you with a link to the wiki page on copyright, do you really think I need a lesson on how copyright works? > [@](#): > > I don’t think cultures have intellectual property rights. Isn’t that exactly what we are discussing? Have you not read my posts? > [@](#): > > Ngāti Toa doesn’t have rights in whatever country he or she dwells in? > > If this person were living in the USA and he or she composed something it would be as protected as your photo would it not? In the exact same specific circumstances as Ngāti Toa and Ka Mate? Nope. They would not. Ngāti Toa isn’t a person. Its an Iwi. > [@](#): > > And I’ve understood your point. I don’t think you do. > [@](#): > > I just don’t see why we should be paying royalties to Pythagoras’s estate for using A^2 + B^2 = C^2. I don’t see why the whole world can benefit from that concept and the dissemination of that ancient knowledge and not use a medicinal herb that a tribe in the Andes uses or an ancient ceremonial tattoo that a tribe in the Pacific uses. And this response makes it clear you do not understand my point. This is a strawman. Who is asking for royalties? Who is asking for a change in the system? I’ve merely pointed out what cultural appropriation is. Stop trying to argue a point that I haven’t been making in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/232 "2017-06-10T15:39:18Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > . . . You’ve just made my point for me. In western society there isn’t any practical way to protect their intellectual property apart from talking about it very loudly. I haven’t made a case that there **should** be a legal way to prevent it. I’ve simply stated that (in most cases) there isn’t a legal way to prevent it. So the Hopi or Maori or Navajo will use the only means available to them: to talk about it. Sometimes very loudly. We are talking about what cultural appropriation is. You don’t seem to be disagreeing with my definition. If that actually is your point, then I’m fine with it. There is – and should not be – any way to enforce tribal/cultural/social imagery from imitation. I disagree with your use of the word “property” to describe these things: they aren’t. They do not belong to anyone, and – as you and I appear to agree – there are no legal protections for them. Yes, the answer to speech is more speech: total agreement. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/233 "2017-06-10T21:54:49Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > If that actually is your point, then I’m fine with it. …why would the point that I made not be my point? The problem isn’t my words: its what you read into my words and the assumptions you made. > [@](#): > > I disagree with your use of the word “property” to describe these things: they aren’t. They do not belong to anyone, and – as you and I appear to agree – there are no legal protections for them. Do you disagree with the concept of [intellectual property](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property)? It isn’t my usage of the word: its the accepted usage of the word. And there do happen to be some legal protections in my country. (and I’ve cited an example.) They just can’t be enforced worldwide due to the lack of international agreement. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/234 "2017-06-11T00:30:31Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …why would the point that I made not be my point? The problem isn’t my words: its what you read into my words and the assumptions you made. Well, part of the problem is that you are not always expressing yourself in a clear fashion. > [@](#): > > Do you disagree with the concept of [intellectual property](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property)? It isn’t my usage of the word: its the accepted usage of the word. I disagree that certain cultural images and concepts, such as the notion of the Hopi kachina, or the feathered warbonnet, or the teepee, or wampum beads, etc., are “property.” They aren’t; they aren’t “owned” by anyone. “Harry Potter” is trademarked; “Boy wizard” is not. The former is property; the latter is not. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/235 "2017-06-11T01:27:18Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Well, part of the problem is that you are not always expressing yourself in a clear fashion. …what part was unclear? You simply assumed arguments I never presented. > [@](#): > > I disagree that certain cultural images and concepts, such as the notion of the Hopi kachina, or the feathered warbonnet, or the teepee, or wampum beads, etc., are “property.” They aren’t; they aren’t “owned” by anyone. That wasn’t the question I asked you. Do you disagree with the concept of intellectual property? If you agree with the general principal, why do you not extend that agreement to [indigenous intellectual property](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_intellectual_property)? > [@](#): > > “Harry Potter” is trademarked; “Boy wizard” is not. The former is property; the latter is not. So you do believe in the concept of intellectual property then? Is Ka Mate intellectual property? If not: then why not? ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/236 "2017-06-11T10:49:19Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > That wasn’t the question I asked you. Do you disagree with the concept of intellectual property? If you agree with the general principal, why do you not extend that agreement to [indigenous intellectual property](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_intellectual_property)? The strongest case for intellectual property is to protect the creative works of individuals to promote the benefit of humanity as a whole. When this is not the case, there is usually pushback against the enforcement of IP, for instance, the perpetual copyright of creative works owned by corporations, patent trolls, and abandonware. IIP to me has shades of perpetual copyright to me in that the people benefiting from it are not the ones who created or discovered it. Many of the examples in the linked article seem to go too far in that they should be tried in the court of public opinion rather than the court of law. There’s no reason I should own the use of a traditional word any more than there’s a reason that I should be a multi-millionaire because my grandfather was born over an oil patch. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/237 "2017-06-11T15:06:37Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > The strongest case for intellectual property is to protect the creative works of individuals to promote the benefit of humanity as a whole. When this is not the case, there is usually pushback against the enforcement of IP, for instance, the perpetual copyright of creative works owned by corporations, patent trolls, and abandonware. …do you not think there is a case for intellectual property to protect the cultural works of a tribe, an iwi, or a hapu, to benefit the culture and society as as whole? What in your opinion provides more benefit to humanity: Ka Mate, or [Kickstarted in the Butt by Chuck Tingle?](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/703752115/kickstarted-in-the-butt-a-chuck-tingle-digital-adv) > [@](#): > > IIP to me has shades of perpetual copyright to me in that the people benefiting from it are not the ones who created or discovered it. This is a very western-centric view. In New Zealand for example [Whakapapa](http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/whakapapa-genealogy/page-1)is central to Maori belief. "Tamarau Waiari of Ngāti Koura recited 1,400 names before a 1890s Native Land Court hearing, in a dense interwoven genealogy including all living persons descended from a single ancestor about 20 generations earlier. These individual experts had contemporaries in their whānau, hapū and iwi, with other traditional knowledge, meaning that the overall collective genealogical memory of tribes was much larger than these impressive individual examples." [From my good friend Egan](http://www.hearingvoices.org.nz/index.php/different-perspectives/maori-perspective/32-the-importance-of-whakapapa-an-explanation-by-egan-bidois) (I didn’t know he had written this until I found it on google, which was pretty cool. ) “Whakapapa is identity. Whakapapa is collective. Whakapapa is also duty. We are born of others. So too were they born of others. As such we inherit not only the physical characteristics but in many ways the spiritual characteristics also.” Whakapapa is about connections to your tribe, to your people. Can you imagine being able to do what Tamarau Waiari was able to do? Would you tell Tamarau that the haka for his iwi, created by ancestors that he could personally name, did not belong to his iwi because a group of white men got together and arbitrarily decided on a set of rules for intellectual property ownership that didn’t take his point of view into account? Maori culture is about the collective, not the individual. In America people are encouraged to leave the home as soon as possible in displays of rugged individualism. There is strength in being able to look after yourself. But in Maori culture, things are reversed. There is strength in whanau, or family. So framing a discussion on indigenous intellectual property around “shades of perpetual copyright” really misses the point. Fundamentally we are talking about different concepts. What benefit does an iwi get from protecting their intellectual property when in most cases all they want is to be asked permission before the “property” is used, and when that “property” is used that is is used properly? > [@](#): > > Many of the examples in the linked article seem to go too far in that they should be tried in the court of public opinion rather than the court of law. There’s no reason I should own the use of a traditional word any more than there’s a reason that I should be a multi-millionaire because my grandfather was born over an oil patch. Well I think this is a different discussion. If you accept the concept of indigenous intellectual property, then its just a matter of quibbling over the details. If you don’t accept the concept, then what more is there to discuss? Do you now understand wtf cultural appropriation means now? Do you accept that the term isn’t only used when someone takes offense but can’t find anything else to support that feeling, but it is often used by people who have what they consider genuine concern? As I’ve pointed out several times in this thread: the court of public opinion is the prevailing court, and that isn’t likely to change any time soon. So you don’t have anything to worry about. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/238 "2017-06-11T15:22:10Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …do you not think there is a case for intellectual property to protect the cultural works of a tribe, an iwi, or a hapu, to benefit the culture and society as as whole? What in your opinion provides more benefit to humanity: Ka Mate, or [Kickstarted in the Butt by Chuck Tingle?](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/703752115/kickstarted-in-the-butt-a-chuck-tingle-digital-adv) > [@](#): > > This is a very western-centric view. In New Zealand for example [Whakapapa](http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/whakapapa-genealogy/page-1)is central to Maori belief. I don’t see what this has to do with cultural appropriation. It looks to be a traditional form of lineage tracing. If it is supposed to be secret, then any violation of this is a violation of privacy, not cultural appropriation. There is of course sometimes value to traditional knowledge, but not as often as there is to written knowledge. And at any rate, I do not think that either non-Western or Western culture has a monopoly on cultural jealousy. Those who think that some portion of their culture can only be fully utilized by someone from their culture remind me in attitude of Western islamophobes and anti-(non-white-Anglo)-immigrationers, albeit without as much practical influence. > [@](#): > > As I’ve pointed out several times in this thread: the court of public opinion is the prevailing court, and that isn’t likely to change any time soon. So you don’t have anything to worry about. i was responding to the article you linked, where there were several examples of legal arguments. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/239 "2017-06-11T15:27:00Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > . . . That wasn’t the question I asked you. Do you disagree with the concept of intellectual property? If you agree with the general principal, why do you not extend that agreement to [indigenous intellectual property](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_intellectual_property)? . . . Obviously, yes, I believe in the current state of the law. And the current state of the law does not permit anyone to claim blanket ideas, without rigid definitions – such as “feathered headdress” – as property. This one specific photo you took of a man in a feathered headdress? Property. The overall concept of a feathered headdress? Not property. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423/240 "2017-06-11T15:38:56Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > I don’t see what this has to do with cultural appropriation. …that doesn’t surprise me. > [@](#): > > It looks to be a traditional form of lineage tracing. If it is supposed to be secret, then any violation of this is a violation of privacy, not cultural appropriation. There is of course sometimes value to traditional knowledge, but not as often as there is to written knowledge. It isn’t supposed to be secret. Why would you think it was supposed to be secret? To paraphrase from the OP: WTF are you talking about? > [@](#): > > And at any rate, I do not think that either non-Western or Western culture has a monopoly on cultural jealousy. And WTF is cultural jealousy? > [@](#): > > Those who think that some portion of their culture can only be fully utilized by someone from their culture remind me in attitude of Western islamophobes and anti-(non-white-Anglo)-immigrationers, albeit without as much practical influence. Who has made that argument? I just finished saying “in most cases all they want is to be asked permission before the “property” is used, and when that “property” is used that is is used properly?” Implicit in that statement is that some portion of their culture \*\*can \*\*be fully utilized by someone from outside of that culture. The complete opposite of what you have just said. Are you wanting to understand the issue or not? If you do: then at least make an effort to understand what I’m saying. > [@](#): > > i was responding to the article you linked, where there were several examples of legal arguments. The wiki article was full of many different things. The question I asked was “Do you disagree with the concept of intellectual property? If you agree with the general principal, why do you not extend that agreement to indigenous intellectual property?” I linked to the wiki article as a primer on what indigenous intellectual property is. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-wtf-is-cultural-appropriation-exactly/787423.md?page=13)