The aff heeds the demands of indigenous communities. Indigenous law already is incorporating non-Western copyright statutes, but they’re calling on the federal government to adopt a similar stance.
Kenney 11, JD @ UC-Berkeley (Cortelyou, “REFRAMING INDIGENOUS CULTURAL ARTIFACTS DISPUTES: AN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY-BASED APPROACH,” 28 Cardozo Arts & Ent LJ 501)//BB
Finally, indigenous communities are passing their own laws that put pressure on and provide legitimacy for national courts to adopt similar stances. 103 For example, the Hopi claim an interest in "all published or unpublished field data relating to the Hopi, including notes, drawings, and photographs, particularly those dealing with religious matters." 104 Similarly, the Apache have demanded "exclusive decision-making power and control over Apache "cultural property' … defined as "all images, text, ceremonies, music, songs, stories, symbols, beliefs, customs, ideas and other physical and spiritual objects and concepts' relating to the Apache, including any representation of Apache culture offered by Apache or non-Apache people." 105 Indigenous laws are the frontlines of intellectual property in terms of innovation and departure from existing legal frameworks, but they draw on existing mechanisms such as copyright to demand benefits, sharing arrangements such as joint-copyright over research which would convert them into legal co-authors of the materials produced, or trademark to protect the creation of new artifacts akin to the IACA. 106