The idea behind the FABtalks is to host fresh fashion talks in an inspiring environment and connect them with business networking in a new, innovative way. The aim is to trigger interesting discussions about fashion and let experts respond to open questions. Ultimately, we want to build an interdisciplinary network and establish and implement projects together in the long run.
The 15th edition of the ABURY FABtalks was held on April 26, 2018, in the new ABURY showroom at Bikini Berlin. Andrea Bury hosted this event on Cultural Intellectual Property Day to raise awareness of the topic and discuss both opportunities and challenges. Together with cultural intellectual property lawyer Monica Moisin, who discussed the legal frameworks, Andrea used the date to launch the Cultural Intellectual Property Initiative, which aims to empower traditional artisans. Currently, artisan and indigenous communities around the world face cultural appropriation and the exploitation of their cultural heritage because there are no laws or copyrights recognizing this specific matter.
The event began with traditional Japanese music by Josh Chuang, who played a Tsugaru Shamisen, a three-stringed Japanese instrument used for Eastern-style jazz. Andrea Bury briefly introduced the guests and reminded the audience why she had chosen that specific date: "Fashion Revolution," a movement that emerged after a disastrous sweatshop accident in Bangladesh five years ago that caused the death of over 1,000 people. Its main goal is to make the supply and production chains of fashion brands visible and to hold brands that produce under unfair conditions accountable for their practices.
Summary of the Presentations:
Monica Moisin
The lawyer stressed that, unlike Josh introducing the audience to the origin of his instrument and music, most players in the fashion industry do not provide their customers with any information or context regarding the origins of their influences and designs. These may stem from cultural backgrounds and have evolved as part of a cultural identity over hundreds of years within different cultures. Some of these traditions are even religious. Using these traditions commercially without context or their true meaning only destroys their value. Explaining where certain patterns or designs come from means paying respect to cultural intellectual property. Otherwise, it is simply theft, in the same way we recognize copyright infringement.
This was illustrated by some of the examples provided by the lawyer: the haute couture house Louis Vuitton commercially exploited the Maasai tribe's intellectual property without paying royalties or giving credit. The same happened when Dior copied traditional Romanian styles from the Bihor region. There have been numerous similar cases around the globe in which powerful Western businesses have commercially exploited mostly less privileged indigenous communities. The main problem is that these indigenous communities are vulnerable to globalized markets and often lack the networks or legal aid to support their cause.
The problem is that it is unfair, even if it is legal. There is no legal protection as we know it from copyrights or trademarks, which only apply to brands or products, not to shared traditions with unknown authors. Most of it is collective property. So how can copyrights be applied to these assets? In general, there is a time limit of 70 years to ensure the process of innovation. A different set of rules must be established because these traditions are passed down through generations, some for hundreds of years. According to Moisin, CIP must now ensure these traditions can be passed on for generations to come. A further step toward appropriate behavior would be not only understanding cultural backgrounds but also transforming business models to share benefits and reinvest in communities based on cultural property rights.
As mentioned before, the current legal situation provides no regulations so far. UNESCO is aware of this and acts as an advocate. They suggest new laws but cannot implement them. The only thing achieved is a convention that businesses can sign. Therefore, in the event of a violation, UNESCO can point out the infringement and ask for reparations for the communities and a public apology. However, this convention has existed for a long time without significant impact because progress or change is driven by business, not by conventions. Thus, the main approach should be to raise awareness and implement these ideas within business models themselves.
You can find further information at https://www.culturalintellectualproperty.com.
Andrea Bury
Following Monica’s overview of legal matters, Andrea spoke about her experiences running a social business like ABURY. Ten years ago, she moved to Marrakesh and was surprised that the cultural capital of traditional craftsmanship was not being utilized or even acknowledged by the local people. Consequently, there was no need for copyright laws at that time. More recently, traditional crafts have become more important and are being used more extensively by fashion brands. Because of this, the value of cultural capital has increased and it is worth protecting. ABURY tries to pay tribute to these cultural heritages and give a fair share to all parties involved. Furthermore, the idea is applicable to all indigenous communities around the world with similarly rich crafting heritages. And that is where ABURY stands now: building a network with artisan communities in Morocco, Ethiopia, Romania, Ecuador, and Chile.
At this point, the talk turned into an open discussion with active participation. The first idea mentioned was to create an app that brings artisans and designers from everywhere together to create smaller networks and collaborations. This would result in small but transparent globalized markets and would cut costs for middlemen who are profiting too much from the process.
Another problem is the lack of technology in artisan communities to promote and distribute products in globalized markets. An app would work better in this case, as smartphones are more common than computers. There also needs to be some form of quality management to ensure that logistics and the like work correctly. There could be a rating system to ensure fair treatment and wages for the communities on one hand, and the quality of goods on the other.
The platform must also have guidelines regarding cultural intellectual property, as the new designs are mostly rooted in traditional crafts and patterns. In ABURY’s case, the issue is handled by contracts between all parties involved. The communities agree to exclusively produce the specific design for ABURY, and ABURY agrees to produce the design only with that community and not with third parties. Another topic is the production chain. Sourcing should be local if possible so that the communities are able to create a production chain on their own, allowing for later business without ABURY’s involvement or network, but rather with the local industry.
Towards the end, the discussion touched on more general thoughts regarding cultural intellectual property. There is a power imbalance between Western, mostly white, privileged individuals and indigenous communities in less developed countries. Most people who are not familiar with critical whiteness or post-colonial studies will not realize these privileges. Thus, awareness and sensitivity should be increased to prevent the exploitation of these minorities. The best-case scenario is giving back to communities if profits are made from cultural intellectual property. A higher level of sensitivity makes it easier to decide whether it is appropriate to use a foreign culture’s heritage, rather than reproducing the mechanisms of exploitation seen in colonial times. This is important because cultures or communities may differ in their decisions on what is appropriate and what is not. For one of the guests with a Syrian background, providing credit for the origin would be enough for the use of certain traditions. Other sacred traditions should be off-limits, as in the unfortunate case of Victoria’s Secret using Native American headdresses. A dialogue is therefore essential in the first place. This case raises the question of who to ask. Who has the authority to decide such things? There may not even be common ground within a single community. If you are trying to do business with artisans, there might be hesitation at first. In order to establish a business partnership, trust must be built first, which may be a long process.
To conclude the discussion, a statement was made to remind everyone present of their responsibility to raise awareness of the topics discussed. It is the responsibility of privileged people with education, connections to businesses, and the resources to travel to change these imbalances and work in favor of fair cultural exchange, because the majority of people around the globe do not have these privileges.
We thank everyone who joined the event and our partner, ProChile!
SEE YOU NEXT TIME!
Share: