The Theft of Culture and Inauthentic Art and Craft: Australian Consumer Law and Indigenous Intellectual Property Stephanie Parkin LLB Submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Philosophy School of Law Faculty of Law Queensland University of Technology 2020 1 Abstract This thesis focuses on the 2017 House of Representatives Standing Committee (2017 Inquiry Committee) on Indigenous Affairs Parliamentary Inquiry into the ‘growing presence of inauthentic Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ‘style’ art and craft products and merchandise for sale across Australia’. In particular, this thesis explores and gives priority to the evidence submitted by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participants to the Inquiry (2017 Inquiry). In doing so, this thesis investigates a number of relevant fields of intellectual property law including copyright law and trade mark law and gives particular focus to the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). Such analysis considers and answers the research question: ‘How can the law protect Aboriginal cultural expression from exploitation?’ The geographical focus of this thesis is limited to Australia and reference to ‘2017 Inquiry’ is a reference to the above titled inquiry. Inauthentic Art and Craft has existed in the Australian marketplace for decades. The elements of Inauthentic Art and Craft consists of souvenir products that have the visual appearance of being in Aboriginal ‘style’, however they are entirely manufactured and sold without the consent or involvement of an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person. Over the years, Australian Courts have looked at the issue of the infringement of Aboriginal artworks and Inauthentic Art and Craft from an intellectual property law and consumer law perspective. The application of such laws has been with limited success in stopping Inauthentic Art and Craft. I explore the ways in which Courts have attempted to address Inauthentic Art and Craft through an examination of previous copyright law cases and ACCC investigations and proceedings, including the recent decision of Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Birubi Art Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1959 and the subsequent penalty judgment in Australian Competition and Commission Birubi Art Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 3) [2019] FCA 996. Such analysis is revealing about the strengths and limitations of consumer law when dealing with Inauthentic Art and Craft. In this thesis, I position Inauthentic Art and Craft as a product of colonial occupation and power. The evidence provided by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people throughout the 2017 Inquiry demonstrates a strong awareness of Inauthentic Art and Craft being part of the colonial conquest, continued exploitation of culture and denial of recognition of rights. 2 Drawing upon the theoretical works of Professor Irene Watson and Professor Olunfunmilayo Arewa, I argue that Inauthentic Art and Craft not only needs to be addressed from a legal standpoint, but also acknowledged as a reflection of Australia’s colonial foundation and relationship with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The work of Dr Lilla Watson in the development of Aboriginal Terms of Reference provides a framework for affirming Indigenous perspectives and definitions when addressing Inauthentic Art and Craft. In this thesis, I draw upon and examine the evidence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who have contributed to the 2017 Inquiry. I give particular prominence to their opinions on the importance of protecting Aboriginal cultural expression and how Inauthentic Art and Craft negatively impacts Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, particularly from a cultural perspective. The purpose of identifying such voices is to firstly acknowledge that they exist, and secondly to test whether the 2017 Inquiry Report recommendations actually reflect and incorporate the concerns of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people through the 2017 Inquiry. Overall, I find that the 2017 Inquiry Report recommendations do not reflect the clear messages provided by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people that Inauthentic Art and Craft should be prohibited. I also consider two separate bills proposed by Bob Katter MP and Senator Sarah Hanson-Young to amend the ACL to address Inauthentic Art and Craft. I find that one of the bills more accurately reflects the 2017 Inquiry evidence submitted by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. In the final Chapter of this thesis, I propose a multi-pronged approached to law reform to address Inauthentic Art and Craft. This includes amendments to the existing ACL and the introduction of standalone legislation to provide recognition and protection of Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) rights, in addition to non-legislative measures. Central to this thesis is the prominence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices in relation to the impacts of Inauthentic Art and Craft, in addition to ensuring that Aboriginal people and perspectives are at the heart of any proposals for reform. 3 Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Statement of Original Authorship .......................................................................................... 6 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 7 Chapter 1 .................................................................................................................................. 8 Inauthentic Art and Craft in Australia .................................................................................. 8 1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 11 Legal framework ............................................................................................................................. 11 Outline of Chapters ........................................................................................................................ 26 Chapter 2 ................................................................................................................................ 29 A History of Legal Responses to Inauthentic Art and Craft in Australia ........................ 29 2.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 29 2.2 Copyright law and the protection of Aboriginal cultural expression ........................... 31 2.3 Copyright law and Indigenous art ................................................................................... 32 2.4 Past government inquiries into Indigenous Intellectual Property ................................ 38 2.5 The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ......................... 40 2.7 Dreamtime Creations Case ...................................................................................................... 47 2.8 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 54 Chapter 3 ................................................................................................................................ 56 The Birubi Decision and the Birubi Penalty Case .............................................................. 56 3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 56 3.2 ACL breaches in the Birubi Decision ...................................................................................... 58 3.3 The representations made by Birubi in the Birubi Decision ................................................ 63 3.4 Birubi’s creation of Inauthentic Art and Craft...................................................................... 64 3.5 The Birubi Penalty Case .......................................................................................................... 66 3.7 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 71 Chapter 4 ................................................................................................................................ 75 The Issue of Authenticity: An Analysis of the 2017 Inquiry’s Terms of Reference and Evidence .................................................................................................................................. 75 4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 75 4.22 Terminology ............................................................................................................................ 75 4.3 Concerns about past and future efforts to address Inauthentic Art and Craft .................. 84 4.4 Consumer perspectives on Aboriginal cultural expression ................................................... 92 4.5 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander views on ‘authenticity’ ............................................ 99 4.6 Cultural authority ..................................................................................................................