When word spread this summer that a company had legally registered “Aloha Poke” for its use only and sent cease-and-desist letters to businesses with similar names in Hawaii and on the mainland, the response in some Native Hawaiian circles was fast and fiery.
Nearly 200 protesters staged a rally against Aloha Poke Co., a Chicago-based fast-food operation, on Aug. 13. There are ongoing calls for a boycott of the company, which has eateries as far west as Denver. And the Native Hawaiian Chamber of Commerce is urging reform of U.S. trademark and patent laws.
The Honolulu-based chamber asserts that it’s improper to limit use of the two words in question for the benefit of a single business — especially given that the trademark was registered just a few years ago.
In a statement, the pro-business group said: “If trademarks are badges of origin … then we call on the federal system of trademarks and patents to recognize that the ultimate origin of (aloha and poke) … is steeped in Olelo Hawaii — the traditional language of the First Nation’s people of Hawaii. And … measures should be in place to protect” those words and concepts.
Joseph Lapilio, who was installed as the chamber’s president in July, said the group, which includes a total of some 300 corporate and individual members, is advocating re-examination of the trademark and patent system to improve how native culture and knowledge is treated in the marketplace.
The lifelong Waianae Coast resident is a Kamehameha Schools grad. He holds a bachelor’s degree in community planning and development from Antioch University as well as a master’s in public administration from the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
For Lapilio — longtime owner of a community development consulting company, Naki‘i Ku LLC, and president and CEO of the Waianae Economic Development Council, a nonprofit community development corporation — the chamber serves as a go-to source for professional guidance.
“It helps me personally simply by providing a support group of like-minded individuals who struggle through the challenges of owning a business and dealing with the complexities of trying to do what I do in as pono a manner as I possibly can.”
Question: Do you see the Aloha Poke trademark issue as a matter of theft?
Answer: In this case, you’d be hard-pressed to find a Native Hawaiian or Native Hawaiian organization that does not see this as cultural theft. … I won’t get into the theft of our kingdom, or the theft of our lands, but I will say that cultural appropriation, at issue here, is the unauthorized (and often disrespectful) adoption of elements of the Native Hawaiian culture by members of the dominant non-native culture. This is distinguished from an equal cultural exchange.
Cultural appropriation is considered by many to be harmful, and a violation of the collective intellectual property rights of the originating minority cultures, notably indigenous cultures.
Q: What would satisfactory federal trademark and patent law reform look like, beyond resolving the Aloha Poke dispute?
A:We strongly believe that the greater issue is to be taken up with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and a system that has, for generations, inadequately addressed the commercialization and exploitation of Native Hawaiian traditional knowledge and culture.
We believe that U.S trademark laws must do a better job of protecting native culture and promoting its appropriate use. The specifics of striking such a balance should be left to the Native Hawaiian community working to reform the existing trademark system.
Q: Do you see the statue of Kamehameha III, or Kamehameha the Great, or other county and state uses of Hawaiian icons (including non-human things like the state motto) as unacceptable appropriations of Hawaiian culture?
A: I personally don’t. Others may. But a reasonable person would clearly see the difference between the Aloha Poke Co. case versus the adoption of the state’s motto or the honoring of Hawaiian alii in public places. … What we seek is the examination of a process that has not been sensitive to native cultures and knowledge and … improvements to said system so that it does take into consideration the perspectives of native cultures that have been far too long ignored.
Q: What is the NHCC’s position on the Thirty Meter Telescope? How do you address the desire for 21st-century education and opportunities versus cultural purism and protectionism?
A: This was a good issue for us. We had a thorough and meaningful discussion at the board level in responding to a call for us to take a position.
It is almost accurate to say that our board was split. … But the process is sometimes more important than the decision. We all felt heard. We expressed what we felt was important to consider toward a decision. But because we were unable to reach a degree of agreement beyond … a couple of votes, we agreed to not take a position. Simply put, it wasn’t just about the transaction. It was, in my mind, one of the prouder moments of my participation in the chamber. It speaks to the space between being a chamber of commerce and being Native Hawaiian. It doesn’t mean we freeze in place. It does mean we expect a higher, more comprehensive return on investment from the development decisions we make. Progress is not progress if it degrades or destroys. This holds true whether it’s about me as an individual, my family, my community, or the nation.
This was a powerful lesson for us. To navigate through the various issues we have, we need to have a more meaningful dialogue with one another. The business and economic development perspective needs a voice at the table, not to replace the other voices but to being an important part of the conversation.
I also need to mention though that your question has a bias. Cultural purism and protectionism are an attribute of the Western capitalist as well. And it is that bias that we are trying to change.
Q: The chamber took shape in the early 1970s. Has its focus changed over the years?
A: The Native Hawaiian Chamber of Commerce was started by Native Hawaiian businessmen who saw a disregard and dismissal by the business community toward Native Hawaiians as valid business people or as essential participants and capable leaders in the local economy.
In this environment, there was a need for a “place” for Native Hawaiian business people to meet and support one another. It would also serve to increase the visibility of Native Hawaiian businesses, encourage and support entrepreneurs, and begin the process to claim a place in the larger community.
Over time this evolved to include identifying and promoting individual Native Hawaiians who best exemplify the balance between professional success with a grounding in cultural values. The chamber’s annual ‘O‘o Awards provide a spotlight on these individuals who serve as role models to other Native Hawaiian business people.
In 2019, we will celebrate the 43rd annual ‘O ‘o Awards. The people who have been recognized over the years represent among the best our community has to offer — not just as business people but as outstanding leaders in the Native Hawaiian community.
Q: Who can join the chamber?
A: Anyone, and being Native Hawaiian is not a requirement. Understanding this organization’s history, mission and values is a personal commitment that members, and particularly the leadership in the chamber, should make.
Q: As the chamber’s president, what are your top goals for the organization?
A: A goal of visibility is being achieved. … We need to use that visibility for the good of our members and for the larger Native Hawaiian community. Within the lahui there is a need for a business perspective and for a voice that advocates for the economic development needs of the community.
I have three goals. … The first is to provide greater value for our members by increasing networking opportunities and developing the systems needed to support … and strengthen Native Hawaiian businesses. The second is to create a voice for Native Hawaiian businesses and to be a steward for the economic development perspectives needed in the Hawaiian nation. Third, is to develop the chamber’s resources — our members, our leadership and our finances — so we can afford the first two goals and to do them well.
