Devil's advocacy - some choad in the Netherlands was never going to sue anybody in Ethiopia for making injera. He wanted to be able to sue other white people for being other white people making injera. You'd like your patent office to be knowledgeable to go "dude they've been making this in Ethiopia for four thousand years" but patent offices aren't omniscient. So here's the question - you're a white guy. You discover the wonders of Injera. You want to sell it in the Netherlands - what can you do to protect yourself so that Aldi doesn't swoop in and sell a knockoff of your product after you've blown your life savings and four years getting the word out? Or do we argue that white people aren't allowed to make Ethiopian tortillas? 'cuz we've done that, too. What if you're Ethiopian? Do you get to sue Aldi for stealing your cuisine after you've spent your life savings building a reputation? I have no answers here. It's stupid to give patents to people who didn't invent shit. But the marketplace is so tilted towards the giants that it's a fuckin' miracle if Aldi and Starbuck's don't end up making the lion's share of the money all the time every time. As far as Starbuck's, their cultural appropriation is sometimes hilarious.
I mean, I'd argue that they shouldn't have had the patent on principle - I don't think it's okay just because they didn't sue anyone over it. For starters, I disagree with granting a patent for teff in the first place, Ethiopian or not. I especially don't think you should get a patent for something you've essentially stolen from another culture. If we assume the patent office simply didn't know what they were doing, then this guy conned his way into being the lone distributor of a staple food-item that's existed for 2000 years. That sucks. And what if you're not another white dude who wants to sell ethnic cuisine, but you're the ethnicity-in-question and you want to sell teff flour? You can't sell it even though your ancestors have been eating it for longer than the government of the Netherlands has existed? That sucks too. And what if you're Ethiopian and living in Ethiopia? After doing some research, I found this quote: ...That being said, the the research also revealed that the original article might be a little dishonest: https://twitter.com/BerhanuTsegaye/status/1093102056418803712 https://twitter.com/NLinEthiopia/status/1093051701299417088 https://twitter.com/ZekuZelalem/status/1093026338561130496 https://twitter.com/joost_heij/status/1093033146285785088 Basically, teff was never patented, but a specific way of processing teff was. That patent is now invalid, because it patented the way that teff flour has been prepared internationally for years (cutting it with flour, since teff is an expensive import). Now Ethiopians can sell teff to the Netherlands, but patents exist in other European countries. If Ethiopia wants to invalidate similar patents, this could set a precedent. That litigation would (apparently) be costly and likely ineffective. This comment has been all over the place. I apologize for writing it as I researched instead of starting it after looking into the issue fully. I'm starting to realize that this issue is more complicated than I first thought, and I don't know that I can really invest time into further investigating it. I learned some interesting things, though, so thank you for that! At the end of the day, I don't have all the answers either. If Ethiopia wants to reclaim teff flour internationally by fighting patents, I'd support them. At this point, though, I think I have to recognize that it's an Ethiopian issue and it's not something I'm fully equipped to chime in on....These claims bestow the patent owner monopoly rights, i.e., legal rights in the above countries to exclude others from making, using, selling or importing the flour and food product made from the flour. In other words, for example, if an Ethiopian company wishes to produce bread made exclusively of teff flour that has a falling number of at least 250 (i.e., teff that has been stored for several weeks) for export into the countries listed above, then the patent owner can legally sue the company for patent infringement, and further block their importation into the countries (or entirely block the company from producing the product if the company is based in one of those countries).
To be perfectly, lucidly clear: I agree 100% with the argument that you shouldn't be able to patent something that already exists. No. Nobody - don't care who - should be allowed to squat on ideas that make the world go 'round. But your grappling with complications is entirely related to "how things are" vs. "how things should be." "How things are" has sucked ass in patent law for a while now. And I don't see it getting better any time soon. And the guys that get the most advantage out of it? They're the ones who give no fucks about international opinion.
Thanks for clarifying, rereading your comment I don't fully understand why I thought anything to the contrary! Either way, I appreciate how much effort you put into it - you really inspired me to do some researching. My takeaway lessons here are that patent law is fucked, and it doesn't get un-fucked easily. I'm just glad nobody's life was ruined by this patent, and hope that the Ethiopian government will pursue legal action if they decide it matters enough to their people. C'est la vie, thanks for the conversation kleinbl00 :)