Triumph in Shame: My Patent Victory Leaves Me Dishonored

As an Egyptian inventor recently granted my second Israeli patent and seventh international patent, I find myself caught in a whirlwind of conflicting emotions. While this professional achievement brings a sense of victory and joy, it also overshadowed by a deep sense of moral crisis. I am simultaneously elated by this intellectual victory and burdened by shame and dishonor.

It's crucial to note that I filed these patent applications in 2022, approximately two years before the ongoing genocide. This timing adds another layer of complexity to my ethical dilemma, as decisions made in a different context now carry new weight in light of the ongoing genocide.

"Will our ideas be as safe as our olive groves? Only time will tell. But we won't let them harvest what isn't theirs." This poignant question encapsulates the heart of my dilemma. As we witness the ongoing genocide and expansion of occupation, the sanctity of both land and ideas hangs in a precarious balance.

This article aims to shed light on the complex relationship between intellectual property rights and occupation, exploring the ethical quagmires faced by inventors in regions affected by occupation. Moreover, it serves as a platform to announce a difficult decision: in light of recent events and the potential seizure of intellectual property rights mirroring the seizure of properties, I have decided to cease filing patent applications in occupiers' territories.

My experience stands as a testament to the intricate challenges faced by innovators worldwide, where the pursuit of scientific progress often collides with harsh realities. Through this narrative, I hope to ignite a crucial dialogue about the intersection of innovation, ethics, and human rights in the shadow of occupation.

The Dilemma of Protection vs. Principle

Filing a patent with an occupying power's institutions presents a profound moral conundrum. As a human being and Egyptian citizen, the ongoing genocide in neighboring Palestine weighs heavily on my conscience. The ongoing genocide in Gaza has escalated dramatically, with reports indicating over 38,000 casualties and severe restrictions on essential resources including food, water, and humanitarian aid.

The act of seeking patent protection in an occupied country might be misconstrued as normalization – an acceptance or legitimization of the status quo. However, it's crucial to distinguish between normalization and the pragmatic protection of intellectual property rights.

Normalization vs. Protection: A Fine Line

Normalization implies the establishment of regular diplomatic, economic, and cultural relations with an occupying power, often at the expense of justice and human rights. In contrast, seeking patent protection is a defensive measure to safeguard one's intellectual property in a global system that, unfortunately, doesn't always account for geopolitical complexities. This is especially concerning when the occupying forces' patent office is supported and recognized by major powers.

The Asymmetry of Rights

A troubling asymmetry exists in the current global intellectual property system. Occupying forces may freely file and own IP in countries like Egypt, while inventors from occupied countries face ethical and practical challenges in protecting their innovations. This creates a scenario where we risk having our ideas used freely by others, including those from the occupying power, if we choose not to engage with their patent system.

A Personal Conflict

As an Egyptian inventor, I find myself in an ethical quandary. On one hand, I feel a profound sense of shame and dishonor for having to file patents in a system associated with occupation and human rights violations. On the other, I cannot remain passive while occupying forces freely file patents and protect their rights in my country, potentially exploiting my ideas without consequence. This situation creates a painful paradox: these forces occupy others' lands and simultaneously threaten to appropriate our intellectual property. All the while, we bear witness to ongoing atrocities and crimes against humanity in occupied countries, yet paradoxically, the occupiers' rights remain protected in our lands.

This moral dilemma extends beyond personal conflict; it highlights a systemic issue in global intellectual property rights. The asymmetry of power allows occupying entities to benefit from international patent systems while those living under occupation face both practical and ethical barriers to protecting their innovations. It's a stark reminder that in today's interconnected world, the reach of occupation extends beyond physical borders, potentially colonizing ideas as well as land.

What would I do if an occupation forces' patent office seized my patent after they read this article?

If this were to happen, I would immediately publish press releases explaining the situation. I would also appeal to global intellectual property organizations and human rights groups to highlight this as a clear example of intellectual property rights being weaponized in the context of occupation. Furthermore, I would use this as a platform to advocate for the reform of international IP laws to protect inventors in occupied territories.

This potential seizure would serve as stark evidence of the need for a more just and equitable global IP system that respects human rights and does not perpetuate or profit from occupation.

A Call for Recognition of the Palestinian Patent Office

The international community must take immediate steps to recognize and support the Palestinian patent office. This recognition is crucial for several reasons:

1. Sovereignty and Self-Determination: Recognizing the Palestinian patent office affirms the right of Palestinians to govern their intellectual property, a key aspect of national sovereignty.

2. Economic Development: A functioning, internationally recognized patent office can foster innovation and attract investment, crucial for the economic development of Palestine.

3. Protection of Palestinian Innovations: Recognition would provide Palestinian inventors with a legitimate platform to protect their ideas globally, reducing the risk of exploitation.

4. Balancing the Asymmetry: It would help address the current imbalance where occupying forces can protect their IP in neighboring countries, while Palestinians struggle to do the same.

5. International Legitimacy: Recognition by the global community would strengthen Palestine's position in international IP forums and negotiations.

6. Promoting Peace Through Innovation: Encouraging and protecting Palestinian innovations could contribute to economic stability, which is crucial for long-term peace in the region.

The world must understand that recognizing the Palestinian patent office is not just about IP rights; it's about acknowledging the fundamental right of Palestinians to benefit from their intellectual achievements and contribute to global innovation on an equal footing.