title: Student Companion: Intellectual Property (June 2012)

authors: Kingsbury, Anna

subjects: patent

abstract: This article discusses the patent and copyright infringement cases (respectively) : “Mayo Collaborative Services v Prometheus Laboratories Inc” [566 US __2012], and “Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Ltd” [2012 HCA 16].

text: Student Companion: Intellectual Property (June 2012) This article discusses the patent and copyright infringement cases (respectively) : “Mayo Collaborative Services v Prometheus Laboratories Inc” [566 US __2012], and “Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Ltd” [2012 HCA 16].

year: 2012-06

title: Pacific students and pedagogical success [Editorial]

authors: Sharma, Sashi

abstract: Debates about rates of achievement for Pacific students have been a feature of educational conversations in New Zealand for over three decades. We do not intend rehearsing the substance of them here, as components of them are included in the articles in this special edition. However, two aspects of this ongoing commentary continue to stand out. Points related to the educational underachievement of Pacific students are an enduring feature of these discussions. Secondly, Pacific students are seen to struggle, in particular, in Science, Technology and Maths (STEM) related areas of the New Zealand curriculum. Individual Pacific students can, and do, experience success in New Zealand educational environments including in STEM-related subjects, as Fonua in this edition points out. However, their achievements are considered examples of ‘exceptions that prove the rule’ related to the continuity of a dominant assumption of underachievement. As Chu, also in this edition remarks, “education for Pacific peoples in Aotearoa New Zealand is a contentious issue” (Chu, C. 2018, p. 5) and the articles in this edition reinforce the strength of this claim.

text: Pacific students and pedagogical success [Editorial] Debates about rates of achievement for Pacific students have been a feature of educational conversations in New Zealand for over three decades. We do not intend rehearsing the substance of them here, as components of them are included in the articles in this special edition. However, two aspects of this ongoing commentary continue to stand out. Points related to the educational underachievement of Pacific students are an enduring feature of these discussions. Secondly, Pacific students are seen to struggle, in particular, in Science, Technology and Maths (STEM) related areas of the New Zealand curriculum. Individual Pacific students can, and do, experience success in New Zealand educational environments including in STEM-related subjects, as Fonua in this edition points out. However, their achievements are considered examples of ‘exceptions that prove the rule’ related to the continuity of a dominant assumption of underachievement. As Chu, also in this edition remarks, “education for Pacific peoples in Aotearoa New Zealand is a contentious issue” (Chu, C. 2018, p. 5) and the articles in this edition reinforce the strength of this claim.

year: 2018

title: The "false generosity" of treaty settlements: innovation and contortion

authors: Te Aho, Linda

abstract: In Aotearoa New Zealand the ways in which indigenous claims to lands and waters are addressed are often looked to as good, or even best, practice by indigenous peoples around the world. While things are far from perfect, in recent decades Maori have succeeded in changing perceptions about the Treaty of Waitangi as the foundation of the nation, and work steadily continues on settling outstanding Treaty claims. The resulting Treaty of Waitangi settlements are negotiated arrangements which aim to remove a sense of historical grievance and achieve significant rebuilding of the Maori economy. They are seen by some as dynamic and powerful steps towards economic independence, as a means of recognising special relationships to lands and waters, and a necessary prerequisite to improved relationships between the state and the indigenous Maori in the future. ¹ Critics see the settlements and the processes followed to reach them as too heavily weighted in the government's favour. ² They argue that the settlements do not sufficiently compensate for actual losses. They are said to pit Maori against Maori. Diverse claimant groups are effectively forced to negotiate within standardised and fixed parameters. For these and other reasons, the settlement agreements, policies and processes have been labelled as divisive and compromising self-determination. ³

text: The "false generosity" of treaty settlements: innovation and contortion In Aotearoa New Zealand the ways in which indigenous claims to lands and waters are addressed are often looked to as good, or even best, practice by indigenous peoples around the world. While things are far from perfect, in recent decades Maori have succeeded in changing perceptions about the Treaty of Waitangi as the foundation of the nation, and work steadily continues on settling outstanding Treaty claims. The resulting Treaty of Waitangi settlements are negotiated arrangements which aim to remove a sense of historical grievance and achieve significant rebuilding of the Maori economy. They are seen by some as dynamic and powerful steps towards economic independence, as a means of recognising special relationships to lands and waters, and a necessary prerequisite to improved relationships between the state and the indigenous Maori in the future. ¹ Critics see the settlements and the processes followed to reach them as too heavily weighted in the government's favour. ² They argue that the settlements do not sufficiently compensate for actual losses. They are said to pit Maori against Maori. Diverse claimant groups are effectively forced to negotiate within standardised and fixed parameters. For these and other reasons, the settlement agreements, policies and processes have been labelled as divisive and compromising self-determination. ³

year: 2017