‧ 國 立 政 治 大 學 ‧ N a t i o n a l C h e n g c h i U n i v e r s i t y i 謝辭 本論文在許多幸運和關愛當中完成,最先要感謝的就是兩位指導老師。因為劉江 彬老師的宏觀遠見,鼓勵我在一開始選擇研究主題時,能夠堅定、大膽地選擇了此一 鮮少有人從事的題目,而非選擇另一個對就業較為有利,卻已論述氾濫之法律實用議 題,也因為朝著此一題目方向,以及許多和劉老師的相處互動當中,使我在研究所的 生涯裡,有機會開啟一個接一個的嶄新世界;而李仁芳老師充滿智慧與溫暖的教誨, 給予我論文上及人生上許多的指引與提醒,猶記得某次和李老師一起參加台中創意文 化園區的研討會,李老師因為巧遇我的訪談對象,不斷地撥打電話給正在外面喜孜孜 吃著午餐竟忽略來電的我,還跟我說:「MBA 學生要積極一點」,讓我趕緊趕回園區。 那一次關愛的斥責,以及和李老師同遊台南,老師對小桃李們一桌子阿霞飯店紅蟳大 餐的大方款待,至今難忘。另外還要謝謝兩位口試委員─徐小波教授和蔡明誠教授, 親切地接受我的口試邀請,並在氣溫接近四十度,冷氣卻出狀況的炎熱午後,還很有 耐心地給予我建議與叮嚀。 此外要致上千萬分感謝予在本論文登場的靈魂人物,包括:高雄市立美術館的曾 媚珍組長;野桐工坊的尤瑪‧達陸老師以及 Baunay 大哥;湛賞文化藝術工作坊的吳 秀梅老師、吳大偉顧問。因為有你們帶領我進入到原住民文化、藝術燦爛美麗的世界, 我才可以逐漸了解到原住民族人的世界觀、思想與感受。而曾組長的研究反骨、尤瑪 老師和 Baunay 大哥對於理想的堅持和實踐精神、吳秀梅老師的美麗與智慧、吳大偉 顧問的專業、熱情與體貼,以上種種特質,都在提供研究論文的學習之外,又為我上 了成功者典範的寶貴一課。 還要感謝在研究所就讀的日子裡,許多陪伴我學習的師長。第一位是去年此時我 在美國華府 Finnegan 實習時,對我照顧有加的 John Alison 恩師,從 John 的身上,我 體會到無私與奉獻的真諦,也重新思考了很多事物,包括本論文的某些觀點和議題。 而智財所的馮震宇所長、陳桂恆教授、王偉霖教授、李治安教授,以及商學院大家長 蘇瓜藤院長,都為智財所的學生付出了諸多心血,希望我們能夠出人頭地、成長茁壯。 此外,許多兼任的老師,也帶給我學習的喜悅,包括:周延鵬教授、吳豐祥教授、邱 仁鈿教授、宿文堂教授、熊誦梅法官、林國塘主任、 Heinz Goddar 教授、 Glenn W. Rhodes 教授,以及會計所的吳安妮教授等。還要特別感謝一位從大學以來就指引著我的人生 導師─曾有田教授,曾前大法官經常抽空和我們這些導生們晤談,關心我們的生活狀 況,令我感到家人一般的溫馨。
niv
niv
This research is focused on intelligence resources planning of
indigenous cultural
industry, especially in the field of knitting techniques. From
creation and protection of
intelligence resources perspective, legal discussion and
legislative movement for aboriginal
people’s cultural expressions seem to achieve slight success in
Taiwan, but there still exists
many unresolved issues, resulting in insufficient protection for
aboriginal people as before.
However, even in such legally ambiguous situation, the industry
still needs to find its way
out, looking for the best path to develop itself. In other words,
from management and
application of intelligence resources perspective, after trying
best efforts to set up the
foundation of intelligence resources, how the managers are devoting
to figure out the
suitable model for the business unit, by using original or adopting
resources, becomes the
first priority of concerns of whether the indigenous cultural
industry can be sustainable.
When the industry becomes more mature, the participants of the
industry may look back, to
propose their real needs for regulations, and at the same time,
these proposals may be very
valuable for the regulators.
Based on the above thinking in accordance with both legal and
managerial logic, this
research makes observation to problems when dealing with aboriginal
people’s folklore
expressions in international society, in various countries and in
Taiwan, from the beginning
part of literature analysis to the latter parts; then, this
research makes sure that cultural
heritage and intellectual property both play parts on the focused
topics, while each has its
regulatory role as well as has impact on the other, and such nature
and connection becomes
the premise of the following several models respectively for
activation of cultural heritage
and creation of intellectual property at the same time in
indigenous cultural industry. These
models will be used as the analytic tools for the following case
study and as the referable
choices of business development for future participants in the
industry.
Furthermore, case study of this research reflects foregoing
categorical models. The first
case in Chapter 4 is commons-oriented Yuma Taru and Lihang Studio
case. The second case
in Chapter 5 is under complete company management, which is Siku
Sawmah Cultural Art
Workshop case. Both cases’ major revenue come from knitting
techniques, but the managers
niv
have different business goals, resulting in different business
models. This research tries to
reveal managerial issues when running workshop through these two
cases; this research will
also gives suggestion to them in relation to intelligence resources
planning.
In the final part of conclusion and suggestion, this research aims
at governmental
departments and participants in the industry, and for them it
rethinks solutions towards
existing problems regarding previously found issues and referable
cases. This research
expects the indigenous cultural industry in Taiwan to eventually
get on a more radiant stage
with the cooperation of all the researchers and participants.
KeywordsIndigenous Crafts, Indigenous Arts, Cultural Industry,
Folklore Expressions,
Protection Act for the Traditional Intellectual Creations of
Indigenous Peoples, Intellectual
Property, Cultural Heritage, Atayal, Sakizaya
niv
niv
niv
Indigenous People1
(Working Group on Indigenous Populations, WGIP)1993
2007 9 13 61
11 13
1 2007 11 5
http://dore.tacp.gov.tw/dorefile//00/00/bu.pdf2010 6 13 2 Article
11 “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize
their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to
maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future
manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and
historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and
visual and performing arts and literature. 2. States shall provide
redress through effective mechanisms, which may include
restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with
respect to their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual
property taken without their free, prior and informed consent or in
violation of their laws, traditions and
customs.”http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/drip.html
2010 6 13
niv
2.
(Model Provisions for National Laws on the Protection of Expression
of
Folklore Against Illicit Exploitation and Other Prejudicial
Actions)5
(WIPO)(UNESCO)
3 Article 12 “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to manifest,
practise, develop and teach their spiritual and religious
traditions, customs and ceremonies; the right to maintain, protect,
and have access in privacy to their religious and cultural sites;
the right to the use and control of their ceremonial objects; and
the right to the repatriation of their human remains. 2. States
shall seek to enable the access and/or repatriation of ceremonial
objects and human remains in their possession through fair,
transparent and effective mechanisms developed in conjunction with
indigenous peoples concerned.”
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/drip.html2010 6 13 4 Article
13”1. Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop
and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral
traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to
designate and retain their own names for communities, places and
persons. 2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that
this right is protected and also to ensure that indigenous peoples
can understand and be understood in political, legal and
administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision
of interpretation or by other appropriate means.”
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/drip.html2010 6 13 5
WIPO
http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/tk/en/documents/pdf/1982-folklore-model-provisions.pdf
niv
7
1
8
62002 7 32 7 WTO TRIPS
2003 11
120-130http://www.wtocenter.org.tw/SmartKMS/fileviewer?id=10252
2010 6 13 8 “Folklore is an important part of living cultural
heritage of nations” 9 “Dissemination of folklore can lead to
improper exploitation of cultural heritage, and any abuse or any
distortion of folklore prejudices the cultural and economic
interests nations ” 10 “Expressions of folklore manifesting
intellectual creativity deserve IP-type protection” 11 “Such
protection of expressions of folklore is indispensable for their
development, maintenance and dissemination” 12 “Protection is
provided for expressions of folklore against illicit exploitation
and other prejudicial actions” 13 “characteristic elements of
traditional artistic heritage developed and maintained by a
community, in particular, verbal expressions, (folk tales, folk
poetry, riddles); musical expressions (folk songs and instrumental
music); expressions by action (folk dances, plays and artistic
forms or rituals); and tangible expressions (productions of folk
art, drawings, paintings, carvings, sculptures, pottery,
terracotta, mosaic, woodwork, metalware, jewelry, basket-weaving,
needlework, textiles, carpets, costumes, musical instruments, and
[architectural forms.]”
niv
WIPO14
http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_grtkf_ic_5/wipo_grtkf_ic_5_inf_3.pdfComparative
Table on Sui Generis Laws on Traditional Cultural
Expressions/Expressions of Folklore
http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/tk/en/laws/pdf/suigeneris_folklore.pdf2010
6
2003 11
120-130http://www.wtocenter.org.tw/SmartKMS/fileviewer?id=10252
2010 6 13 24 Tunis Model Law on Copyright for Developing Countries
http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/files/31318/11866635053tunis_model_law_en-web.pdf/tunis_model_law_e
n-web.pdf2010 6 13
niv
http://wildmic.npust.edu.tw/sasala/910311-01.doc2010 6 19 34 The
Mataatua Declaration on Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights
of Indigenous Peoples
niv
9
niv
Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Culture)
35
of the Pacific Community Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat
UNESCO Pacific Regional Office 2002
http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_grtkf_ic_5/wipo_grtkf_ic_5_inf_3.pdfComparative
Table on Sui Generis Laws on Traditional Cultural
Expressions/Expressions of Folklore
http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/tk/en/laws/pdf/suigeneris_folklore.pdf2010
6
13 382006 6 9 392006 6 65
niv
()
2010 6 18 72 Cheryl RobbinsStrategies for the Online Marketing of
Cultural Products2008 4
http://indigenous.pristine.net/events/2008/wsic/presentations/cheryl_robbins_paper.html2010
6 18
niv
(
86 New Zealand, Panama, Philippines, Republic of Azerbaijan
WIPO http://www.wipo.int/tk/en/laws/folklore.html2010 6 20 87
Algeria, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Chile, Colombia, Cote dIvoire,
Fiji, Ghana, Indonesia, Lithuania, Republic of Macedonia, Malawi,
Mexico, Republic of Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman,
Papua New Guinea, Peru, Samoa, Senegal, Tanzania, Tunisia, Ukraine,
United Kingdom, Vanuatu
WIPO http://www.wipo.int/tk/en/laws/folklore.html2010 6 20 88
Australia, Bolivia, Japan, Lithuania, Palau, Republic of Korea,
South Africa, Sudan, United States of AmericaWIPO
http://www.wipo.int/tk/en/laws/folklore.html2010
6 20 89 25 USC 305 IACB Indian Arts and Crafts Act of
1990http://www.iacb.doi.gov/act.html Indian Arts and Crafts
Enforcement Act of
2000http://www.doi.gov/iacb/pdf/2000act.pdf
2010 5 2 90 21
2008 12 12
niv
suggest)
(Native American)
Indian-styleIACA
Amendments Act of 2010
92 http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s151/show2010 6 16 93
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-7252010 6
16 94 Congressional Research Service Summary1/19/2010--Passed House
amended. Indian Arts and Crafts Amendments Act of 2010 - Amends the
Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 to expand the authority of the
Indian Arts and Crafts Board to bring criminal and civil actions
for offenses under such Act involving the sale of misrepresented
Indian-produced goods or products. Authorizes: (1) any federal law
enforcement officer to conduct an investigation of an alleged
violation of this Act occurring within the jurisdiction of the
United States; and (2) the Board to refer an alleged violation to
any such officer (currently, only to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation [FBI]) for investigation. Permits such an officer to
investigate an alleged violation regardless of whether such officer
receives such a referral from the Board. Requires the findings of
any investigation of an alleged violation to be submitted to a
federal or state prosecuting authority or the Board. Authorizes the
Board, upon receiving the findings of such an investigation, to:
(1) recommend to the Attorney General that criminal proceedings be
initiated (current law); (2) provide such support to the Attorney
General relating to the criminal proceedings as the Attorney
General determines to be appropriate; or (3) recommend, in lieu of
or in addition to any such criminal proceeding, that the Attorney
General initiate a civil action. Allows the Attorney General, an
Indian tribe, an Indian, or an Indian arts and crafts organization
to initiate a civil action under this Act. Amends the federal
criminal code to revise penalties for the sale of misrepresented
Indian-produced goods and
products.http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-725&tab=summary
niv
J.C. PenneyWal-MartIACA
2010 6 16 95 United States of America v. Nader Z. Pourhassan (148
F. Supp. 2d 1185, (D. Utah, 2001)) 96 William J. Hapiuk, Of Kitsch
and Kachinas: A Critical Analysis of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act
of 1990, STANFORD LAW REVIEW 1009, 1014, (2001).
21 2008 12 52 97 21
2008 12 53
niv
IACANavajo
Native American Arts, Inc. v. The Waldron Corp.
v. Hartford Casualty101WaldronWaldron
Repatriation Act)
1990
98 Jennie D. Woltz, The Economics of Cultural Misrepresentation How
should the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 Be Marketed?, 17
FORDHAM INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL,
Winter 443, 464-465, (2007).
21 2008 12 53 99 21
2008 12 53 100 399 F. 3d 871 (7th Cir. 2005) 101 435 F. 3d 729 (7th
Cir. 2006) 102 21
2008 12 54
niv
(funerary objects)(sacred objects)(objects
106
Yumbulul Anthony Wallis Aboriginal Artists Agency
Ltd. Morning Star Pole 10
niv
Yumbulul Anthony Wallis
Yumbulul Morning Star Pole
107 Colin GolvanAboriginal Art and the Protection of Indigenous
Cultural Rights
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AboriginalLB/1992/26.html2010
6 19 108 Leanne Wiseman, Protecting Indigenous Cultural Expression
in Australia: Rethinking the Public Domain 2010 1 16-17
niv
112
Bulun Bulun
Milpurrurru
held in trust fiduciary duty
110 Meghan Ruesch, Creating Culture: Protection of Traditional
Cultural Expressions and Folklore and the Impact on Creation and
Innovation in the Marketplace of Ideas, 35 SYRACUSE JOURNAL OF
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND COMMERCE 369, 377 (2008).
21 2008 12 59 111 21
2008 12 59 112 41 IPR 513 (1998) 113 Jane Anderson, The Politics of
Indigenous Knowledge: Australia’s Proposed Communal Moral Rights
Bill, 34 UNIVERSITY OF NSW LAW JOURNAL (2004),
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLJ/2004/34.html2010 6
19
21
2008 12 60
niv
Bulun Bulun Ganalbingu
AssociationNIAAA)
(Label of Authenticity)
Yandana Mckenzie
114
2010 1 16-17 107Terri Janke, Indigenous cultural and intellectual
property: the main issues for the indigenous arts industries in
2006,
http://www.australiacouncil.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/59745/ICIP.pdf2010
6 20
niv
115
http://www.australiacouncil.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/59745/ICIP.pdf
2010 6 20 116
2010 1 16-17 107Terri Janke, Indigenous cultural and intellectual
property: the main issues for the indigenous arts industries in
2006, p.143-144
http://www.australiacouncil.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/59745/ICIP.pdf
2010 6 20 117
2010 1 16-17 108Lenne Wiseman, The Protection of Indigenous Art and
Culture in Australia: The Labels of Authenticity, E.I.P.R.2001,
23(1),14-15 (2001)
niv
Art Commercial Code of Conduct)
118
2010 1 16-17 108 119
2010 1 16-17 108Matthew Rimmer, Australia Icons: Authenticity Marks
and Identity Politics, 3 Indigenous L.J. 139, 155-156 (2004)
120
2010 1 16-17 108 121 Draft Indigenous Australian Art Commercial
Code of Conduct
http://www.indigenousartcode.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/89698/code-of-conduct-sept09.pdf
2010 6 21 122
2010 1 16-17 111Eric Mackay, Indigenous Traditional knowledge,
Copyright and Art Shortcomings in Protection and Alternative
Approach? U.N.S.W.L.J. 1, 17-19 (2009) 123
2010 1 16-17 111
niv
(geographical indications)
()
) 10 1 22.3
TRIPS 24.4 1994 4 15
TRIPS
24.9
124
125
124 WTO 2009 3 269-271 125 Leanne Wiseman, Protecting Indigenous
Cultural Expression in Australia: Rethinking the Public Domain,
2010 1 16-17
247
247 Barbara Hilkert Andolsen, Trade in Indigenous Arts and Crafts:
Labels of Authenticity as a Starting Point for Protecting
Indigenous Cultural Expressions, Monmouth University, USA,
2008
niv
26. 2007
12
2009 9
29.
2010 1
30.
2009 9
31. 32 2009
2
8 12 2004
33. 2007
6
34. 2 2007 12
35.
2000 10
36. 2008 5
1. Barbara Hilkert Andolsen, Trade in Indigenous Arts and Crafts:
Labels of Authenticity
as a Starting Point for Protecting Indigenous Cultural Expressions,
Monmouth
University, USA, (2008)
2. Cheryl Robbins, Strategies for the Online Marketing of Cultural
Products, 2008 4
3. Eric Mackay, Indigenous Traditional knowledge, Copyright and Art
Shortcomings in
niv
Protection and Alternative Approach? U.N.S.W.L.J. 1, 17-19
(2009)
4. Gerard A. Persoon, Songs from the uma Bringing the indigenous
musical tradition of
Siberut Insland (Indonesia) into the public domain
2010 1
5. Jane Anderson, The Politics of Indigenous Knowledge: Australia’s
Proposed
Communal Moral Rights Bill, 34 UNIVERSITY OF NSW LAW JOURNAL
(2004)
6. Jennie D. Woltz, The Economics of Cultural Misrepresentation How
should the
Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 Be Marketed?, 17 FORDHAM
INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY, MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT LAW JOURNAL, Winter 443,
464-465, (2007)
the Public Domain2010
1
8. Lenne Wiseman, The Protection of Indigenous Art and Culture in
Australia: The Labels
of Authenticity, E.I.P.R.2001, 23(1),14-15 (2001)
9. Matthew Rimmer, Australia Icons: Authenticity Marks and Identity
Politics, 3
Indigenous L.J. 139, 155-156 (2004)
10. Meghan Ruesch, Creating Culture: Protection of Traditional
Cultural Expressions and
Folklore and the Impact on Creation and Innovation in the
Marketplace of Ideas, 35
SYRACUSE JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND COMMERCE 369, 377
(2008)
11. William J. Hapiuk, Of Kitsch and Kachinas: A Critical Analysis
of the Indian Arts and
Crafts Act of 1990, STANFORD LAW REVIEW 1009, 1014, (2001)
1. Porter
2006 6
2. 2006
niv
10.
2009 7
1. http://www.tipp.org.tw/formosan/index.jspx
Countries
http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/files/31318/11866635053tunis_model_
law_en-web.pdf/tunis_model_law_en-web.pdf
13. Indian Arts and Crafts Enforcement Act of
2000http://www.doi.gov/iacb/pdf/2000act.pdf
14. Draft Indigenous Australian Art Commercial Code of
Conduct
http://www.indigenousartcode.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/89698/code-of-con
niv
139
18. The Mataatua Declaration on Cultural and Intellectual Property
Rights of Indigenous
Peopleshttp://www.ankn.uaf.edu/IKS/mataatua.html
19.
24. Licensing International
Expo.http://www.licensingexpo.com/
25. Colin GolvanAboriginal Art and the Protection of Indigenous
Cultural Rights
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AboriginalLB/1992/26.html
26. Terri Janke, Indigenous cultural and intellectual property: the
main issues for the
indigenous arts industries in 2006,
http://www.australiacouncil.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/59745/ICIP.pdf
27. J. KimballThe Indian Arts and Crafts ActTrademark Misfit or
Just Missing the Mark?
http://www.kentlaw.edu/honorsscholars/2006students/writings/Kimball_paper.htm
28. United States of America v. Nader Z. Pourhassan (148 F. Supp.
2d 1185, (D. Utah,
2001))
31. 30 IPR 209 (1994)
32. 41 IPR 513 (1998)
33. 6 2010 5 12
(United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous PeopleP0F
P)
(Model Provisions for National Laws on the Protection of Expression
of Folklore Against Illicit Exploitation and Other Prejudicial
Actions)P4F
WIPO-UNESCO
(The Model Law for the Protection of Traditional Knowledge and
Expressions of Culture)
2003
2005