I’m not too fussed about Hone’s family selling the Tino Rangatiratanga flag. Shops have been selling the New Zealand flag for years and someone makes a profit from it, so let’s not have double standards for the Maori flag.
I do object to the flag design being copyrighted or individuals/families having IP rights.
Here’s some thoughts:
- It was all about mana, not money.
- No one was told the series of flag consultation hui doubled as a taxpayer funded promotion for some whanau flag making business promotion.
- If someone can own the flag, it’s copyright and have intellectual property rights over it, does that mean they have authority over where and when it’s flown?
- Can the owners of the copyright then stop all production of the flag making them scarce and then drive the price of the flag up to maximise profits?
- Could someone else then buy the flag’s copyright off the owners and it becomes a tradeable commodity?
- If I bought the copyright and IP rights, could I then auction it on Trade Me?
- If a single whanau owns it, how can Maori then say it belongs to us all?
- Doesn’t putting a price on the flag actually cheapen it?
- Isn’t this more evidence that the consultation and selection process was a set up from the start?
- Would we accept the New Zealand flag being owned by one family?
- Have we all noticed how shocking the Maori unemployment figures are and that the Maori Party and National have done nothing to address this issue that really affects Maori families?
Not all were questions (and some were rhetorical), but here are some answers.
3. No. Just like someone who owns the copyright in a book can’t tell you where to read it.
5. Yes.
6. Yes.
7. Yes.
8. Same way the haka belongs to us all?
9. I’m not sure that’s what they’re doing, but it probably would, yes. If they’re just getting copyright so they can stop people making boxer shorts out the thing, like people do with the Union flag, that would probably enhance the thing.
10. Yep =)
11. Maybe. I imagine we accepted that the words to the National Anthem had an inherent copyright in them for a number of years. Hugh Kawharau’s semi-official translation of the Maori text of the treaty of Waitangi still does.
12. Probably not. Most people will only look at the headline figure…
Yes Kelvin, your distinction between making money from selling the flag and IP issues is probably correct – perhaps even spot on. However, I suspect that the prime minister has acted quite irresponsibly by chastising Hone Harawira publicly about the rights his family purportedly have over the flag. I say this because, and I’m guessing completely here, it’s likely the IP rights were registered / claimed at a time when it just could not have been envisaged the flag would take on such significance. It was, at that time, definitely a symbol of protest, and (possibly for the same reason) I don’t think anyone could’ve guessed how powerful that flag’s become and the significance it has now gathered. The fact we’re having the debates we’re currently having is ironically evidence of this. So, I’m guessing Key has made the comments he has without first discussing the IP issues with Hone and getting his views on them in light of the history of the flag’s rise to prominence. I wouldn’t be surprised if Hone would even agree that the way things have developed makes the IP protections inappropriate now, but Key has, I’m guessing, taken the opportunistic path of slagging him publicly first, and possibly leaving him with no choice but to defend himself. If this is the case, I hope Hone spells all of this out and doesn’t try to defend the continuation of the IP rights. (Having said that, Hone may well come back with quite reasonable grounds for IP rights remaining attached. Who am I?) There’s also of course the issue of whether the way the flag is currently being used triggers the beginning of IP rights lessening, even to the point of extinguishment. This would in my mind be welcomed, the greatest reason being that it would signal that the flag, regardless of its origins, is moving towards being something more than a symbol of protest and is able to lose the unfortunate label of representing divisiveness between Maori and pakeha. However much distain I have towards Key and those of his ilk, embracing the flag in the way he has can only be good. His motives of course are not – it’s clearly an inexpensive way of getting Maori Party support on bigger issues that actually hurt Maori, but I’d still be the first to slag him if he hadn’t embraced it in the way he has. (Yes, I’m damning him both ways, but that’s what he deserves for deceit and dishonesty.) These motives come from the same opportunistic place as his cheap and no doubt ill-informed pot-shots at Hone he’s been having over the flag in the last couple days, which he no doubt feels necessary to help keep people thinking he’s still the boss.
Do people think it was it right that a flag with intellectual property rights and copyright issues was taken around and promoted as a flag for all?
I never attended any of the flag consultation hui – was the IP/ copyright issue clearly explained to everyone before they voted or made submissions?
Did the TPK report make mention of the IP/ copyright issues? If not, why not?
Who knows, Kelvin? And as you say, you don’t either. If there wasn’t, does this give Key licence to go slagging Hone without discussing it with him first? Does this mean Key’s attacks were not opportunistic Hone-bashing? Joining Key’s rampage ain’t gonna help Labour, and will make Goff’s job of rebuilding links with Maori even more difficult, that’s if Goff’s remarks were genuine of course. Keep it up, keep it up, Kelvin, and see the derision your party will continue to receive.
“Do people think it was it right that a flag with intellectual property rights and copyright issues was taken around and promoted as a flag for all?”
It’s not like Creative Commons licences existed when the flag was created, and copyright is automatic in New Zealand – I very much doubt there was any sort of deliberate plot! That doesn’t mean it would be ethically dubious to now attempt to assert control over the use of and/or profits from the flag on the grounds that it’s copyrighted. But it seems much more likely to me that no-one thought about it until recently. (Malice, incompetence, etcetera.)
It sounds like you’re trying to shut down discussion on this issue Anton. I want to hear people’s thought’s on the copyright/ IP of the flag. We’re entitled to ask questions, particularly if not all was revealed at the consultation hui. Did you attend any of those hui? Was it all made clear at the time about the copyright/ IP? If so, the 1000 (> 0.25% of all Maori) or so who submitted in favour of this flag are obviously fine with it all. Would they still have been fine with it if they had of known? If it wasn’t all made clear, why wasn’t it? Perfectly legitimate questions to ask. Derision? We are 38% support from Maori in the latest poll, up 12, equal with Maori Party who are down 12. The Maori Party is part of the government. A government is only as strong as an opposition who are prepared to ask the difficult questions.
The copyright in the Australian Aboriginal flag, which is officially recognised in the Flags Act 1953 (Cth) as a “flag of Australia”, is owned by its designer, Harold Thomas. His copyright was recognised in the case of Thomas v Brown and Tennant [1997] FCA 215. This doesn’t seem to have caused any problems in Australia – but it does mean that Mr Thomas can charge a fee for commercial uses of the flag, or prevent such uses, as he did recently when Google wanted to use the flag as part of the Google logo for Australia Day: see http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/oh-dear-google-flagged-over-logo-dispute-20100126-mvhd.html
No, not at all, Kelvin. My point was that Key’s attacks are likely to be premature, therefore opportunistic. As I say, I’m guessing completely, but given the likelihood of how all of this arose, as pointed out also by Lucy Stewart, it’s Key’s cheap shots at Hone without getting his views that took me. He needs the Maori Party but he still needs to make sure people know his views on where he believes the “rightful” place of Maori is, and this issue was an opportunity to do just that. Like I said, given the history of it all, I wouldn’t be surprised if Hone agreed that as the flag has arrimay well be grounds for letting IP protections slide, if some of them don’t disappear automatically as the flag’s significance increases. Ewan Morris makes an interesting point too. If IP rights do continue regardless of the flag’s status, then I think this must be seen as wrong and that when a particular point is reached in terms of official recognition then there must be a corresponding reduction in IP. Ewan’s point, however, begs the question about whether the Tino Rangatiratanga flag has actually reached that status to justify demanding IP rights to be waived or removed? Key’s pot-shots at Hone ironically must mean he’s saying we’ve reached that place of official recogition already, even without acknowledgement in our Flags Act!!! Great point, Ewan!!!
And about Maori support for Labour, can you provide the stats prior to the Seabed and Foreshore Act and the formation of the Maori Party? Labour may well have still been in government if it hadn’t been for this.
A flag is not a book or a painting or a logo. It has a meaning that attaches to it. I am not surprised no one considered copyright issues during consultation. That process was rushed and cursory at best (anyone think of consulting urban Maori?). But seems to me any flag is about mana. And to avoid problems we need rules about its use. This will likely take a law change.
Interesting to see a poll on yahoo news where 81% of 5500 people say the flag shouldn’t be copyrighted because “it belongs to New Zealand”. Wasn’t that long ago people were complaining because it was “a sign of protest and divisiveness”.
2. Good point. I suspect most people would be dismayed if that was the case/result.
7. Another good point – has been interesting hearing some of the other stories behind various flags that are out there. The United Tribes flag, particularly, seems to have a great deal of meaning and historical significance. I would have to say, rightly or wrongly, that I find the Tino Rangatiratanga more devisive than inclusive.
8. I guess it has to have a cost. Profiteering would be unfortunate however (and I am not accusing anyone of that).
9. No. Key did the right thing (and politically sensible). Representations were made about having a “Maori” flag fly and he gave it to the Maori Party to come back with a flag. Hone should have declared his interest from the start however.
10. No.
11. Bit early for the cheap shots – 9 long balance deleted
Into moderation troll Trevor