LAWS1111 Study Guide - Final Guide: Convention On Biological Diversity, Dreamtime
"The British valued the wheel, but they did not value its connection to the
tree. The invention of the wheel is tied inexorably to the progress of Western
civilization, but at the heart of the wheel, was the death of the tree . . . the
spiritually rich nature of Aboriginal cultures, where knowledge and
relationships between people, country and all living things are highly prized,
went unappreciated [by the British] because they could not see beyond the
missing wheel to the living tree. What they valued was the resources and
material wealth the land could provide, with no understanding of, or care for,
the deeper story."
For this reason, the Aboriginal people would be opposed to creating the drug
made from spinifex grass, because the manufacturers would be killing the spinifex
(the wealth the land could provide).
"The land, and how we treat it, is what determines our human-ness. Because
land is sacred and must be looked after, the relation between people and
land becomes the template for society and social relations. Therefore all
meaning comes from land."
Land is the law
Strong kinship system
Relationships between everything
Time isn't linear; there are patterns - no beginning and end, no past and future
Everything happens in cycles
Moving of rock art
Conception of time:
Westerners think rock is irrelevant because It is old, however
Indigenous people don’t see it as the past.
○
•
Land is the Law:
Taking rocks away takes law away.
○
•
Can only study something in the time and place it is originally in. by putting it
in a museum you are studying it in the wrong context.
•
Everything in Indigenous culture is based on place and context. •
Aboriginal Heritage Act - 1972 - archaic and not many protections.
Damage/alteration to a site must be approved by a minister, and
ministers decision cant be appealed.
○
•
Commonwealth Legislation too ^ •
Native Title
Hard because you have to prove a connection to the land.
○
•
Not a lot of protection in Australian law.•
Reproducing Dreamtime Story
Story told in South West of WA; they're making it for the North West.•
Truth of their stories is only relevant to their place/context.•
Even though the stories are different, they're both equally valid.•
Western View - only one truth.•
Indigenous - many different truths, and all equally as valid. •
Custodians of their own story - fact that they're telling the story on their
website doesn't show they understand.
•
Could look to Copyright - hard to qualify for first element (material form)
2nd - identifiable author - no author for dreamtime story.
○
Copyright doesn’t really protect Indigenous Australians
○
The Carpets case - Milpurrurru v Indofern
○
Example of where someone tried to take an Aboriginal painting and
use it as a carpet print.
○
•
Grass
Aboriginal people wont be able to •
Constituents have to get permission from the community•
Have to also get permission from grass itself - has its own spirit.•
Kingspark has a 'strong spirit' and has protected itself from being used for
development.
•
Taking away part of their laws.•
Patent Laws
Novelty - need to prove its different to something that's been
published. No published evidence for Indigenous Australians.
○
Utility
○
Inventiveness
○
•
Argue - by producing medicine using spinifex grass isn't novel because its
being used for something specific in the Indigenous culture.
•
Biodiversity convention - respect Indigenous peoples knowledge.•
We haven't ratified/implemented everything in that convention.•
Tutorial 6
Monday, 9 April 2018
5:44 pm
