ABSTRACT
Along with tangible, property-like conceptualizations, legal systems often institutionalize control of intangible products through laws of copyright, patent, and trademark. Although such regimes may work well when attached to national and international standards, they can be more problematic when an object or purpose does not fit neatly into categories generated from Western experience. After 'property', the most common metaphor applied to native and non-native peoples is that of 'heritage'. Copyright is, of course, forward looking, but it is basically oriented towards the well-being of the proprietor alone and bars others' use of the work for a limited time. Analogies based on personal identity can take many forms. A number of European countries phrase copyright as a 'moral right'. In the law, the choice of metaphors and analogies can make all the difference. The choice and impact of a metaphor may, of course, be deeply entwined with the broader narrative style within which it operates.
