Seeing as Nas did a song called 'New York State of mind' sixteen years ago (in his debut album Illmatic - best hip-hop album of all time), why would they be issuing takedown orders for a concept that really isn't their original idea?
I also think that protectionism is a bad idea but I would take exception at the graphs used to illustrate that some companies' employment figures are increasing. I think the chart shows the proportion of total job postings that are posted by Google, Facebook and Twitter, which can't be assumed to imply a rapid increase in the number of tech jobs being created. It may mean that the total number of tech jobs are decreasing while the three companies' hiring numbers are holding steady, which would lend further credence to Alan's point.
My point is not that what our parliament is doing is right, but that what they were reacting to was Kenyans being denied the rights to use emblems found in their culture by IP claims by non-Kenyans. Personally I don't think such things should happen, but you cannot criticize the Kenyan government from moving to protect its citizens' cultural icons from being exploited by foreigners using foreign IP laws.
From what I read in our media, the government wasn't making the actions for their own sake, or to extract money from anyone, but just to ensure that the people whose culture actually makes the kikoi and kiondo cannot be prevented from selling their creations in international because someone else fraudulently obtained a trademark or patent on them.
Full disclosure, I'm a Kenyan, and I find a lot of problems with your blanket statement that: "It's blatant protectionism against foreign competition." Some people were trying to patent or copyright elements of Kenyan culture, and you want Kenya to just roll over and let them?
I don't understand your argument is it that when someone is trying to use IP protection to rip off another person's creation, the guy ripping off has more rights than the rightful owner, that the guy being ripped off cannot use that same IP protection system to fight back, or what?
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by horace.
That's Odd...
Seeing as Nas did a song called 'New York State of mind' sixteen years ago (in his debut album Illmatic - best hip-hop album of all time), why would they be issuing takedown orders for a concept that really isn't their original idea?
hockey stick growth
I also think that protectionism is a bad idea but I would take exception at the graphs used to illustrate that some companies' employment figures are increasing. I think the chart shows the proportion of total job postings that are posted by Google, Facebook and Twitter, which can't be assumed to imply a rapid increase in the number of tech jobs being created. It may mean that the total number of tech jobs are decreasing while the three companies' hiring numbers are holding steady, which would lend further credence to Alan's point.
"international markets", sorry.
Re: Patenting traditional designs
My point is not that what our parliament is doing is right, but that what they were reacting to was Kenyans being denied the rights to use emblems found in their culture by IP claims by non-Kenyans. Personally I don't think such things should happen, but you cannot criticize the Kenyan government from moving to protect its citizens' cultural icons from being exploited by foreigners using foreign IP laws. From what I read in our media, the government wasn't making the actions for their own sake, or to extract money from anyone, but just to ensure that the people whose culture actually makes the kikoi and kiondo cannot be prevented from selling their creations in international because someone else fraudulently obtained a trademark or patent on them.
Patenting traditional designs
Full disclosure, I'm a Kenyan, and I find a lot of problems with your blanket statement that: "It's blatant protectionism against foreign competition." Some people were trying to patent or copyright elements of Kenyan culture, and you want Kenya to just roll over and let them?
I don't understand your argument is it that when someone is trying to use IP protection to rip off another person's creation, the guy ripping off has more rights than the rightful owner, that the guy being ripped off cannot use that same IP protection system to fight back, or what?