Business Originality
Aboriginal people’s culture was displayed through their way of dressing as well as their performance of tangible and intangible art. Yum Yum Chips Company, which was established in 1959, used the logo of an Aboriginal boy with a feathered hat on Krispy Kernels, one of the company’s products. The boy in loincloth and a feathered hat portrayed the Aboriginal dress code. The logo was a major cause of contention because its origin was Aboriginal yet the company did not represent the interests of the Aboriginal people.
In 1990, the logo was abandoned due to the Oka land row (Banerjee, 2013). The cultural heritage inherent to the diverse American Indians was of great significance to the American history as well as its people’s identity. In addition, there were many Aboriginals in the United States. Consequently, the decision by Yum Yum Chips to reuse the logo in 2013 was opposed vehemently.
To recreate the past, the Aboriginal culture was studied to reveal past events, activities and phenomena of the American continent. Such activities made the Aboriginal people aloof on the use of any substantial or insubstantial material that belonged to them.
The use of the Aboriginal culture commercially had been carried out done before when most of their artifacts were excavated from different sites initially inhabited by the Aboriginals and thereafter used in museums. However, the recognition of the Aboriginal people by the government made them vocal and instigated them to demand compensation for the use of their heritage and culture.
The Legality of the Business Using the Aboriginal Logo
The logo of an Aboriginal boy with a feathered hat as used by Yum Yum Chips was a tangible cultural expression of the Aboriginal people. The logo was a cultural asset of the Aboriginals, which represented their cultural origin and process of development. The Aboriginals also owned a ceremonial mask referred to as ‘echo,’ which was related to the logo that was believed to be more than 150 years old (Cajune, 2011). The mask had various values attached to it.
For example, the mask carried with it a web of rights and responsibilities. The mask was also associated with ranks in ceremonial societies, spirit powers, names, songs, legends, and dances (Gough, 2001). The value attached to such an artifact was so great that the masterpiece could not be used by the company without the consent of the Aboriginal people.
Additionally, the mask was revered as was evidenced in Aboriginal ceremonies where the people believed that wearing a mask was akin to communing with their ancestors and the supernatural world. The logo used by Yum Yum Chips had an attachment to the art of the Aboriginals thus was their intellectual property (Banerjee, 2013). It was illegal and unethical for a company to use tangible or ethereal property without prior permission from the owner. Therefore, the company was not supposed to use the logo.
Evaluation of the Business Engagement with the Aboriginal People
The reintroduction of the old logo bearing the Aboriginal boy with a feathered hat by Yum Yum Chips faced opposition. The resistance originated from the public who saw that the logo was in bad taste (Madan, 2013). The company claimed that it had used the logo previously, and it should not be barred from reusing it.
However, the Aboriginal people disapproved its use because the engagement of the Aboriginals in the company was absent. The company did not seek the approval of the people before using the logo. Additionally, the business could not be categorized as Aboriginal since none of the shareholders in the company was Aboriginal.
References
Banerjee, S. (2013). Quebec snack-maker slammed for bringing back native logo. Web.
Cajune, J. (2011). Montana tribal histories: Educators resource guide. Office of Public Instruction. Web.
Gough, M. (2001). The changing relationship between first nation’s peoples and museums. Web.
Madan, R. (2013). Quebec chip company faces criticism for native logo. Web.