Copyright, Traditional Cultural Expressions and Digital Commercialisation: A Case Study of the Avelune Collective–MiraNova Dispute

Abstract

The digitisation and commercialisation of traditional cultural expressions have created increasingly complex intellectual property questions. Traditional songs, patterns, stories, symbols, craft techniques, ceremonial designs, and visual motifs may be deeply embedded within the cultural identity of communities while remaining inadequately protected by conventional copyright doctrines. The emergence of digital platforms has intensified this problem by enabling cultural expressions to be reproduced, modified, marketed, and distributed globally at minimal cost. This article examines these challenges through a fictional case study involving the Avelune Cultural Collective, a community-based organisation responsible for preserving a traditional textile tradition, and MiraNova Design House, a fictional international fashion company accused of commercially appropriating Avelune cultural motifs.
The dispute arose after MiraNova launched a luxury fashion collection incorporating patterns substantially resembling designs historically used by the Avelune community. The company argued that the designs were part of the public domain and that individual geometric elements were insufficiently original to qualify for copyright protection. The Avelune Collective argued that the commercial collection reproduced a culturally significant combination of motifs and that the company's use occurred without consent, attribution, or benefit-sharing. The dispute subsequently expanded to include digital images, social media marketing, artificial intelligence-assisted design, moral rights, geographical associations, and the limits of conventional copyright doctrine.
Using a qualitative case-study methodology, this article analyses the dispute through hypothetical archival records, design registrations, community protocols, commercial contracts, marketing materials, expert opinions, and judicial submissions. The analysis demonstrates that conventional individualistic copyright frameworks may struggle to address community-based cultural creativity. It further identifies a tension between the public-domain principle and the collective interests of communities seeking control over culturally significant expressions. The article proposes a layered protection model combining conventional intellectual property rights, community protocols, contractual licensing, provenance requirements, collective marks, benefit-sharing mechanisms, and specialised protection for traditional cultural expressions.
The article concludes that effective protection of traditional cultural expressions does not require abandoning the public-domain principle. Rather, legal systems should develop complementary mechanisms capable of recognising collective cultural interests while maintaining appropriate space for artistic freedom, research, cultural exchange, and legitimate transformative creativity.