American University

Blog, Centre News, Traditional Knowledge

A Paradigm Shift with an Uncertain Future: Prof Wend Wendland on the WIPO Treaty on Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge

On 25 September 2025, Professor Wend Wendland, delivered the 14th Peter Jaszi Distinguished Lecture at American University in Washington D.C.. The event was hosted by the Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property. For over 25 years at WIPO, Prof. Wendland played a critical role in the area of traditional knowledge, including as the Director of the Traditional Knowledge Division and Secretary of the Intergovernmental Committee (IGC). His lecture, titled “Beyond Adoption: Why it Matters and What’s Next for the WIPO Treaty on IP, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge?”, celebrated the recent adoption of this landmark agreement. In his lecture, Professor Wendland described the Treaty as a ‘historic’ event and a ‘paradigm shift’ in intellectual property. He highlighted that it is the first international IP treaty championed by developing countries and Indigenous Peoples, making them policy-makers rather than policy-takers. The Treaty’s core feature is a new mandatory requirement for patent applicants to disclose the origin of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. This aims to combat biopiracy and reconcile innovation with biodiversity conservation and equitable benefit-sharing. This transparency is expected to improve the patent system’s quality and efficacy, while also contributing to environmental, economic, and social justice by acknowledging the role of Indigenous Peoples as stewards of biodiversity. Despite his enthusiasm, Wendland acknowledged the Treaty’s limitations, noting that it does not create new rights in traditional knowledge, and does not directly ensure compensation for provider countries and Indigenous Peoples. It represents what could be agreed upon by consensus after a 25-year struggle, demonstrating strategic pragmatism. The adoption itself is significant, marking a step forward in the evolution of the IP system and providing a platform for a more inclusive conversation about the future of IP. However, Wendland cautioned that the treaty’s adoption alone is not enough; its true significance will depend on its practical implementation and effectiveness. Finally, Wendland discussed the path forward, stressing the immediate need for the Treaty to come into force, which requires ratification by 15 countries. He expressed concern that this process might be slower than hoped, with some major countries like the USA, Japan, and the Republic of Korea opposing the treaty, and others like India and China not yet signing it. Potential hurdles for ratification include political reluctance to recognise Indigenous Peoples, conflicts with existing national laws, and pressure from trading partners. Wendland concluded by urging policymakers, patent offices, and the international community to work towards bringing the Treaty to life, ensuring its paradigm-shifting potential is realised in practice. Watch the full presentation here.

Blog

25 Sept 2025: Beyond Adoption: Why it Matters and What is Next for Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge

On 25 September, former Director of the Traditional Knowledge Division at the World Intellectual Property Organization Wend Wendland will deliver a lecture on the landmark World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge, which was adopted in May 2024. He will address the treaty’s significance in policy making and knowledge governance. The talk is part of the Peter A. Jaszi Distinguished Lecture on Intellectual Property series, hosted by the Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property at American University (PIJIP). The reception after the event will feature an announcement of the newly launched Geneva Centre on Knowledge Governance (see below, in PDF).

Blog

Ethical Data Scraping for Research – Expert Workshop held in Amsterdam

A unique, expert-led workshop on ethical data scraping was organized by Professor Niva Elkin-Koren and Dr. Maayan Perel and hosted by the Shamgar Center of Digital Law and Innovation, Tel Aviv University. The workshop was made possible by the generous support of the Right to Research in International Copyright Law coalition at the American University, especially Professor Sean Flynn, the Director of the Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property (PIJIP). An interdisciplinary group of information law experts gathered in Amsterdam’s beautiful Volks hotel on July 2, 2025, to discuss data scraping for research and innovation and its ethical boundaries. The event aligned with the agenda of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR), which promotes public interest strategies, coordinated action, and research, and seeks to inform public policy on legal exceptions and limitations for researchers. Data scraping is an essential research tool for academics and scientists across a wide range of disciplines. It is also critical for training artificial intelligence (AI) models and developing innovative research methodologies. The legal boundaries of data scraping attract considerable attention, not only from academics but also from policymakers, governments, courts, technology companies, and data providers worldwide. The boundaries of ethical data scraping— often dependent on the type of data being scraped, the technologies being used, the purpose of scraping, and the applicable legal framework—remain unclear. Consequently, researchers are left to navigate the potential legal risks and changing technological barriers set by tech giants, such as Cloudflare (recently adopting a permission-based approach to data scraping). As a result, researchers may be deterred from engaging in lawful data scraping, at the cost of not engaging in research that can serve the public interest. Moderated by Dr. Maayan Perel and Professor Eldar Haber, the workshop aimed to bring greater clarity to what ethical data scraping is and should be. The workshop applied practical and technical insights from real-world data scraping, analyzed the legal implications of various transatlantic approaches, and proposed guidelines for promoting ethical data scraping for research and development. To obtain a better understanding of how data scraping models work in practice, participants explored a test case model from Bright Data, an international data scraping company, whose model was also discussed in recent litigation with X and Meta. In a stimulating presentation, Bright Data representatives described their publicly available data scraping technology, elaborated on their ethical policies, and presented their “data for good” initiative, which offers scraping opportunities for researchers as well as other stakeholders. To encourage a productive dialogue between academic and business participants, the discussion followed a “red teaming” approach. Red teaming, a concept we adapted from the cybersecurity realm, essentially aims to help organizations proactively identify weaknesses and strengthen their security posture before actual attacks occur. Applying red-teaming’s critical approach, the participants identified potential legal challenges in Bright Data’s data test case model from various perspectives, including intellectual property law, competition law, privacy law, and data protection law, while also identifying points of legal tension between the US and the EU frameworks. The issues highlighted included the legal application of copyright law to information copying and storage; questions of competition law arising from the dominant market actors’ ability to adjust behavior and match prices; and the scope of privacy protection in personal information that data providers voluntarily make publicly accessible.   Next, insights from Bright Data’s test case were used to draw broader observations about what constitutes ethical data scraping in practice, especially for AI training. Key issues included: The workshop concluded with a broader discussion of potential legal, technical, and institutional strategies to promote ethical data scraping for academic research and technological development. Participants identified the need to distinguish between questions of access to data and questions of the use of the data, as each raises different legal issues. Key suggestions included: Participants: Tanya Aplin, Mor Avisar, Balazs Bodo, Sharon Bar Ziv, Sean Flynn, Eldar Haber, Uri Hacohen, Bernt Hugenholtz, Aline Iramina, Matthias Leistner, Dana Mazia, Maayan Perel, Mando Rachovista, Pamela Samuelson, Martin Senftleben, Ben Sobel, Streffan Verhultz, Amit Zac

Scroll to Top