Search results

Intellectual Property (IP) law is expected to provide equitable protection for eligible kinds of works in virtually all industries; to achieve fair treatment of creator, user and societal interests; and to contribute to a country's efforts to achieve economic development. This is a tall order and debates pertaining to IP law tend to be heated and heavily contested due to the tensions caused by these high expectations. In an effort to move such debates forward, this paper advances a nuanced framework through which contested IP issues may be resolved and upon which national IP policy and legislation may be based.

"Examining the harmonisation of Intellectual Property policy, law and administration in Africa, this book evaluates the effectiveness of efforts to establish continental Intellectual Property institutions and frameworks. It also considers sub-regional initiatives led by the regional economic communities and the regional Intellectual Property organisations, focusing on relevant protocols and agreements that address Intellectual Property as well as the implementing institutions. The book assesses the progress of such initiatives with particular reference to the current socio-economic status of African states. It argues that that harmonisation initiatives need to be crafted in a way that is supportive of the developmental goals of African states and advocates for due consideration of individual states' unique conditions and aspirations. This book will be of great relevance to scholars and policy makers with an interest in Intellectual Property law and its harmonisation in Africa"--

Examining the harmonisation of Intellectual Property policy, law and administration in Africa, this book evaluates the effectiveness of efforts to establish continental Intellectual Property institutions and frameworks. It also considers sub-regional initiatives led by the regional economic communities and the regional Intellectual Property organisations, focusing on relevant protocols and agreements that address Intellectual Property as well as the implementing institutions. The book assesses the progress of such initiatives with particular reference to the current socio-economic status of African states. It argues that that harmonisation initiatives need to be crafted in a way that is supportive of the developmental goals of African states and advocates for due consideration of individual states' unique conditions and aspirations. This book will be of great relevance to scholars and policy makers with an interest in Intellectual Property law and its harmonisation in Africa.

This paper considers how an appropriate theoretical framework for Intellectual Property may be constructed. Such a framework would be the lens through which contested IP issues may be resolved and upon which national IP policy and legislation might be based. The paper begins by highlighting the inherent tensions in IP, which are caused by the various stakeholder interests that this body of law seeks to balance, and by the cross-cutting nature of IP. It contends that in order to more equitably balance the contesting rights of the creators and users, IP rights should be formulated and enforced so as to meet societal goals or serve public interest, be responsive to the economic environment, and take cognisance of the human rights claims of both creators and users. National socio-economic goals should inform such a framework in a way that ensures that IP is used as a means to achieve these goals and is not perceived as an end. This will require nuances in policy and legislation that meet the country's needs. In particular, as a developing country South Africa would do well to exploit available flexibilities in the various international IP agreements by which it is bound. Due regard also ought to be had to the users' need for affordable access to IP-protected goods in order that they may exercise the right to work and access to knowledge, as provided for by ss 22 and 16 of the Constitution respectively. Similarly, creators ought to be given due recognition, together with reasonable reward and remuneration for their efforts. This will be achieved through the creation of an IP system that provides protection that is compatible with the nature of the good being protected and the manner in which the creative process unfolds. Such protection should rely on registration systems are efficient, simplified and affordable. The accompanying enforcement system should be equally accessible, although the costs of enforcement would depend on the forum used to secure redress. Finally, the resulting IP regulatory framework should be both certain and clear.

The position that states take in the international sphere on health and intellectual property (IP) policy matters is influenced by their national experiences and positions. Similarly, the national arena is influenced by global health diplomacy. This paper seeks to examine how this iterative relationship has played out in South Africa in relation to patents, pharmaceuticals and access to medicines. It has been shown how the main African health diplomacy perspectives may be classified around the narratives of 'unity and ubuntu', 'liberation ethic and demands of nationhood' and 'development aid or development policy'. This paper focuses on how these narratives have found expression in national discourse. In particular, it considers a recent interchange between the Minister of Health and a pharmaceutical company association in relation to their views on the draft National Intellectual Property (IP) Policy's chapter on IP and public health, which commonly became known as "PharmaGate". The paper utilises discourse analysis methodology to consider this public discourse which was disseminated via radio stations and television, as well as print and digital media.

This paper considers how an appropriate theoretical framework for Intellectual Property may be constructed. Such a framework would be the lens through which contested IP issues may be resolved and upon which national IP policy and legislation might be based. The paper begins by highlighting the inherent tensions in IP, which are caused by the various stakeholder interests that this body of law seeks to balance, and by the cross-cutting nature of IP. It contends that in order to more equitably balance the contesting rights of the creators and users, IP rights should be formulated and enforced so as to meet societal goals or serve public interest, be responsive to the economic environment, and take cognisance of the human rights claims of both creators and users. National socio-economic goals should inform such a framework in a way that ensures that IP is used as a means to achieve these goals and is not perceived as an end. This will require nuances in policy and legislation that meet the country's needs. In particular, as a developing country South Africa would do well to exploit available flexibilities in the various international IP agreements by which it is bound. Due regard also ought to be had to the users' need for affordable access to IP-protected goods in order that they may exercise the right to work and access to knowledge, as provided for by ss 22 and 16 of the Constitution respectively. Similarly, creators ought to be given due recognition, together with reasonable reward and remuneration for their efforts. This will be achieved through the creation of an IP system that provides protection that is compatible with the nature of the good being protected and the manner in which the creative process unfolds. Such protection should rely on registration systems are efficient, simplified and affordable. The accompanying enforcement system should be equally accessible, although the costs of enforcement would depend on the forum used to secure redress. Finally, the resulting IP regulatory framework should be both certain and clear.

In general, the situation in both South Africa and Zimbabwe is very different from the 'Arab Spring' model, where mass uprisings used social media as advocacy and organizing tools followed by states switching off the internet or blocking access to it via mobile phones, as discussed in the chapter by Nagla Rizk. It is also quite different from the situation in China, were the target is public use of online media. In South Africa and Zimbabwe there are more incident-based instances of censorship, which pertain to specific media reports or information published online and to individual voices on social media platforms. Both countries have constitutional protection of freedom of expression, including press freedom. However, they both have legislation which has been used to secure the censorship of critical voices. It is not possible in a chapter of this length and type to engage in full-scale analysis of all relevant legislation. Therefore, the chapter only provides a snapshot of some of the relevant legislation. It aims to provide examples of the different types of censorship that have occurred in both countries in the last two years.