Sl.

Content Page
No No
1. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 2
2. COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS, PATENTS, IDUSTRIAL DESIGN, TRADE SECRETS, 2
PLANT VARIETIES, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (GI TAG)
3. NEED FOR IPR, KAPILA 4
4. HISTORY OF IPR IN THE WORLD 5
5. IPR IN INDIA, HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE IN INDIA 8
6. NATIONAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) POLICY OF INDIA 11
7. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE NEW IPR POLICY INDIA 14
8. COMPULSORY LICENSING AND DIPP (DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY 17
AND PROMOTION)
9. RIGHTS PROVIDED AND ASSURED BY COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS 19
10. COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS IN RELATION WITH ADVANCEMENT IN 22
TECHNOLOGY
11. DELHI HIGHCOURT COPYRIGHT JUDGEMENT (DU PHOTOCOPY CASE) 26
12. TRADEMARKS, DIFFERENT TYPES OF TRADEMERKS THAT MAY BE 28
REGISTERED IN INDIA
13. REGISTRAR, IPAB 31
14. RED BULL'S PLEA ON TRDEMARK REJECTED 33
15. PATENT,IMPORTANCE OF PATENT, PROTECTION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF 35
PATENTS, RIGHTS OF PATENT OWNERS, IMPORTANCE OF PATENTS IN
EVERYDAY LIFE, PATENT GRANTING, PROTECTION OF INVENTION
16. INDIAN PATENT ACT 1970 AND 2005 38
17. PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY PROGRAMME 41
18. PATENTING IN INDIA, SECONDARY PATENTS AND ITS RECENT ISSUE FOR 43
INDIA
19. PEPSICO'S PATENT ISSUE 46
20. THE PPV & FR ACT 2001 49
21. PATENTABILITY OF COMPUTER-RELATED INVENTIONS 52
22. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEX, MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE IIPI 2018 55
23. INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, BASIC CONCEPT OF INDUATRIAL DESIGN, PROTECTION 57
OF INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
24. GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION, ADVANTAGES FOR OBTAINING PROTECTION 59
FOR AA GI, WHO ALL CAN APPLY FOR GI REGISTRATION?, VALIDITY OF
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION, GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS AT THE
INTERNATIONAL LEVEL
25. PAKISTAN TO CHALLENGE INDIA'S APPLICATION FOR EXCLUSIVE GI TAG 62
FOR BASMATI RICE IN EU
26. GI TAG SOUGHT FOR INDIA'S COSTLIEST MUSHROOM 65
27. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION AND A TRADEMARK 66
28. SUMMARY OF BASMATI GI TAGE ISSUE 67
29. ROLE OF WIPO IN THE PROTECTION OF GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS 69
30. GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS IN INDIA 71
31. PLANT BREEDER'S RIGHTS 73
32. INDIAN SUPREME COURT SAYS SEED, PLANTS AND ANIMALS ARE NOT 76
PATENTABLE
33. FARMER'S RIGHTS, GENETIC MEDIFICATION IS A METHOD NOT A PRODUCT 77
34. IPR AND INDIAN AGRICULTURE 79
35. TURMERIC, NEEM, COTTON, BASMATI IPR 81
36. WIPO 83
37. FUNDING OF WIPO AUDIENCE 85
38. MCQ 88

1
 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

COPYRIGHTS, TRADEMARKS, PATENTS, IDUSTRIAL

DESIGN, TRADE SECRETS, PLANT VARIETIES,
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS (GI TAG)
Here's a breakdown of intellectual property rights (IPR), including Copyrights,
Trademarks, Patents, Industrial Designs, Trade Secrets, Plant Varieties, and
Geographical Indications (GI Tag):

1. Copyrights

• Definition: Copyright is a legal protection given to the creators of original works of

authorship, such as literary, artistic, and musical works. It provides the creator
exclusive rights to use, reproduce, distribute, and perform the work.
• Duration: Generally lasts for the life of the author plus 60 years in many countries
(including India).
• Protection: Covers literary works, musical compositions, art, software, films, etc.

2. Trademarks

• Definition: A trademark is a symbol, word, logo, or any combination used to

distinguish goods or services of one enterprise from those of another. It can include
names, phrases, logos, and packaging design.
• Duration: Can be renewed indefinitely as long as the trademark is in use.
• Purpose: Protects brands and helps consumers distinguish between different products
or services.
• Examples: Nike’s swoosh logo, McDonald’s golden arches.

3. Patents

• Definition: A patent grants exclusive rights to an inventor for a new invention,

typically in the field of technology or manufacturing. It prevents others from making,
using, selling, or distributing the invention without the inventor’s permission.
• Duration: Typically lasts for 20 years from the date of filing.
• Protection: Inventions, processes, or new technological innovations.
• Examples: Apple’s iPhone technology, pharmaceutical drugs.

4. Industrial Design

• Definition: Industrial design protects the aesthetic aspects of products, such as the
shape, color, or surface decoration of an item. It is intended to safeguard the
appearance and visual design of a product, not its technical or functional features.
• Duration: Varies from country to country, but generally lasts for 10-25 years.
• Protection: Designs of products such as furniture, electronics, fashion items, and
packaging.

2
 • Examples: The design of the Coca-Cola bottle, smartphone designs.

5. Trade Secrets

• Definition: Trade secrets are confidential business information, processes, or

techniques that give a business an advantage over competitors. This can include
recipes, manufacturing processes, or marketing strategies.
• Duration: Protection lasts as long as the trade secret is kept confidential.
• Protection: Depends on maintaining the secrecy of the information; no formal
registration is required.
• Examples: Coca-Cola’s recipe, Google’s search algorithm.

6. Plant Varieties

• Definition: Protection of new plant varieties involves granting rights to breeders who
develop new plant varieties through breeding, genetically modified organisms
(GMOs), or other techniques.
• Duration: Generally 20-25 years, depending on the country and the type of plant.
• Protection: Encourages agricultural innovation by protecting breeders' rights over
new plant varieties.
• Examples: New breeds of flowers, crops, or genetically modified plants.

7. Geographical Indications (GI Tag)

• Definition: A geographical indication (GI) is a sign used on products that have a

specific geographical origin and possess qualities or a reputation due to that origin. It
ensures that only those producers who are in the designated area are entitled to use the
GI.
• Duration: Indefinite, as long as the product continues to meet the required standards.
• Purpose: Protects the authenticity of products that are linked to specific regions.
• Examples: Darjeeling tea, Kanjeevaram silk sarees, Basmati rice.

Summary of Key Differences:

• Copyrights protect creative works.

• Trademarks safeguard brands and product names.
• Patents protect new inventions and innovations.
• Industrial Designs protect the look and aesthetics of products.
• Trade Secrets protect confidential business information.
• Plant Varieties protect new agricultural innovations.
• Geographical Indications (GI Tag) preserve the identity of products tied to specific
geographic locations.

All of these intellectual property rights help foster creativity, innovation, and competition,
while ensuring that creators and businesses can protect and benefit from their creations.

3
NEED FOR IPR, KAPILA
Need for Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are essential for several reasons, as they provide protection
to innovations and creations, incentivizing innovation and creativity. Below are the key
reasons for the need for IPR:

1. Encouragement of Innovation:
o IPRs protect creators' and inventors' work, offering them exclusive rights. This
protection motivates individuals and businesses to invest time, effort, and
resources in creating new products and ideas without fear of their work being
copied or exploited by others.
2. Economic Growth:
o IPRs foster economic growth by promoting innovation, creating jobs, and
facilitating new business opportunities. Companies can monetize their IP,
which can contribute significantly to the economy, particularly in industries
like technology, entertainment, and pharmaceuticals.
3. Protection of Creativity:
o IPR ensures that creators—such as authors, artists, musicians, and designers—
can control the use of their work and earn royalties or compensation, thus
preventing unauthorized copying or misuse of their creations.
4. Attracting Investment:
o Strong IPR protection increases investor confidence, particularly in industries
reliant on new technologies and research. Investors are more likely to support
innovative projects when they know that intellectual property is well-
protected.
5. Global Trade and Competitiveness:
o In a globalized economy, IPRs help companies secure their position in
international markets, offering protection against counterfeiting and piracy.
Countries with strong IPR laws attract more international trade and
investment.
6. Cultural and Social Development:
o IPRs encourage the dissemination of knowledge and cultural content. They
enable creators to share their works with a global audience, while also
benefiting from recognition and compensation.

KAPILA (Kriti Azadi Ke Liye Intellectual Property Awareness) Scheme

The KAPILA scheme was launched by the Ministry of Education under the Government
of India to raise awareness about the importance of Intellectual Property (IP) and encourage
the filing of patents and other IP by students, especially in educational institutions. Here are
the key features and objectives of the KAPILA scheme:

1. Objective:
o The primary objective of KAPILA is to spread awareness about Intellectual
Property (IP) rights, particularly among students and researchers in India.

4
 The initiative aims to create a more robust IP ecosystem in educational
institutions.
2. Promoting Patent Filing:
o KAPILA encourages students, researchers, and faculty members in
academic institutions to file patents for their innovative ideas and inventions,
helping them protect their intellectual creations.
3. Supporting Innovation:
o The scheme seeks to nurture the spirit of innovation and creativity among
students by encouraging them to file patents for their research outcomes,
technological developments, and unique ideas.
4. Collaboration with Educational Institutions:
o Educational institutions are provided support to enhance their IP awareness
programs and capacity building, facilitating an environment conducive to
research and innovation.
5. Incentives for Filing Patents:
o The KAPILA scheme offers incentives to students and researchers who file
patents, such as financial support for the patent application process, and
recognition for contributing to India’s innovation ecosystem.
6. Contribution to National Development:
o By promoting the protection of innovations, the scheme contributes to
economic and social growth, positioning India as a global leader in research,
development, and innovation.

Conclusion:

IPR is crucial for fostering innovation, supporting economic growth, and protecting the
interests of creators. Programs like KAPILA aim to raise awareness and encourage the
younger generation, especially students, to participate in the IP ecosystem by filing patents,
thus contributing to India’s overall development as an innovation-driven economy.

HISTORY OF IPR IN THE WORLD

The history of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) can be traced back several centuries,
evolving alongside technological, scientific, and cultural advancements. Below is an outline
of the significant milestones in the development of IPR across the world:

1. Early Origins of Intellectual Property

• Ancient Greece and Rome:

o Intellectual property-like concepts existed in ancient civilizations. For
example, in Ancient Greece, playwrights and poets had some protection for
their works, and the Roman Empire acknowledged authorship and artistic
rights to some extent. However, formalized systems for protecting intellectual
property were not in place.

5
2. The Renaissance and Early Modern Period (15th-17th Century)

• Printing Press (15th Century):

o The invention of the printing press by Johannes Gutenberg in the mid-15th
century created a need for protection against the unauthorized copying of
printed material, leading to the emergence of early copyright-like laws.
o In 1474, the Venetian Patent Statute was enacted in Italy, which granted
exclusive rights to the inventors of new technologies and innovations for the
first time, laying the foundation for modern patent law.

3. The Birth of Modern Patent Laws (17th-18th Century)

• The Statute of Monopolies (1624) – England:

o This is considered the first modern patent law. It granted exclusive rights to
inventors in England for new inventions for a fixed period (typically 14
years). The Statute of Monopolies paved the way for the development of
patent laws that would influence future patent systems globally.
• The Venetian Patent Law (1474):
o Venice passed the first law granting inventors the right to exclusive use of
their inventions, influencing future legal systems. The Venetian system set a
precedent for patent law worldwide.
• The French Patent Law (1791):
o France established a formal patent system, creating one of the world’s first
modern patent offices to administer patents for new inventions. This was the
beginning of a broader international recognition of invention rights.

4. Development of Copyright Law (18th-19th Century)

• Statute of Anne (1710) – England:

o The Statute of Anne is considered the first copyright law in the world. It
granted authors of books the exclusive right to print and distribute their works
for a limited time (initially 14 years, renewable for another 14). This statute
laid the foundation for modern copyright laws.
• Copyright in the United States (1790):
o The US Copyright Act of 1790 allowed authors to protect their literary
works, and similar laws for patents and trademarks soon followed.

5. Internationalization of IPR (19th Century)

• Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883):

o The Paris Convention was a major milestone in the international protection
of patents, trademarks, and industrial designs. It established minimum
standards for patent and trademark laws across member countries, facilitating
cross-border protection of intellectual property.
• Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (1886):
o The Berne Convention established international copyright protection,
ensuring that authors and creators in member countries had their works
recognized and protected in other member countries. The convention initially

6
 covered literary and artistic works but expanded over time to include other
forms of protection.

6. The 20th Century: Expansion and Formalization of IPR

• Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) (1970):

o The Patent Cooperation Treaty was established to streamline the patent
application process across multiple countries, making it easier for inventors to
apply for patents internationally. It simplified the procedure for obtaining
patent protection in many countries at once.
• World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (1967):
o WIPO, a specialized agency of the United Nations, was established to promote
and protect intellectual property rights internationally. It oversees a range of
treaties and conventions aimed at harmonizing and strengthening global IPR
systems.
• Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) (1994):
o The TRIPS Agreement was introduced as part of the World Trade
Organization (WTO) in 1994. It established global standards for intellectual
property protection and enforcement, requiring all WTO members to adhere to
minimum standards of patent, copyright, trademark, and other IPR laws.

7. Modern Developments in IPR (21st Century)

• Digital Technologies and Copyright (2000s):

o The rise of the internet and digital technologies has led to new challenges in
IPR enforcement, especially in copyright protection. The Digital Millennium
Copyright Act (DMCA) in the United States (1998) and similar laws in other
countries sought to address the unauthorized sharing of digital content.
• IPR and Biotechnology (2000s-Present):
o The biotechnology industry, including genetic engineering and
pharmaceutical innovations, has raised complex questions about patenting
biological materials and processes. This has led to debates about the ethical
and social implications of patenting genetic resources and life forms.
• Geographical Indications and Traditional Knowledge:
o With growing globalization, Geographical Indications (GIs) and traditional
knowledge have gained importance in protecting regional products and
cultural heritage. For example, India has gained recognition for its GI tags on
Darjeeling Tea, Basmati Rice, and Kanjeevaram Silk.

Key Milestones in Modern IPR:

• Digital Copyright and Online Piracy Laws (2000s): The digital age led to new
challenges in protecting digital content and curbing online piracy.
• Biotechnology Patents: Ethical debates about patenting life forms and
biotechnological innovations have gained prominence in the 21st century.
• Global IPR Systems: Modern international treaties, like TRIPS, provide a framework
for protecting intellectual property rights across borders.

7
Conclusion:

The history of IPR has evolved from rudimentary protection mechanisms in ancient and
medieval times to a sophisticated global system that ensures creators and inventors are
rewarded for their intellectual works. Today, international treaties like the TRIPS
Agreement and organizations such as WIPO work to harmonize IPR laws across the globe.
The growing challenges of digital technologies, biotechnology, and globalization continue to
shape the evolution of intellectual property law.

IPR IN INDIA, HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE IN INDIA

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in India: Historical Perspective

India’s journey with Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) has evolved significantly from
colonial times to becoming a global player in the 21st century. Below is a historical
perspective of IPR in India, highlighting key milestones:

1. Early Historical Context (Pre-Independence Period)

• Colonial Period:
o During British colonial rule, the protection of intellectual property in India
was governed by the laws of the British Empire. The intellectual property laws
were primarily intended to protect the interests of British inventors and
creators.
• Patents Act of 1856:
o The first formal patent law in India, the Patents and Designs Act of 1856,
was introduced during the British rule. It was a rudimentary law that allowed
the grant of patents to inventors.
• Indian Copyright Act of 1911:
o Before independence, the Indian Copyright Act of 1911 was introduced,
which was heavily influenced by British copyright law. This Act laid down the
framework for the protection of literary, dramatic, and artistic works, as well
as musical compositions.
• Trademarks Act of 1940:
o The Trademarks Act of 1940 was introduced to regulate the use of
trademarks in India, ensuring that businesses could protect their brand
identities.

2. Post-Independence Era (1947-1970s)

• Early Post-Independence Period (1947-1950s):

8
 o After independence in 1947, India continued to follow the colonial legal
framework for intellectual property. There was no major reform in IPR during
this early period.
• India’s Constitution (1950):
o The Indian Constitution adopted in 1950 did not specifically mention
Intellectual Property Rights but acknowledged the importance of innovation
and creation through the Directive Principles of State Policy.
• Patent Act of 1970:
o A major milestone in India's IPR history was the Patent Act of 1970. This Act
was a turning point as it laid the foundation for India's independent patent law
regime. The law was designed to cater to the country's development needs,
offering protection to inventions in specific sectors like pharmaceuticals and
chemicals while also promoting public welfare.
• Focus on Domestic Innovation:
o The Patent Act of 1970 sought to balance the interests of foreign patent
holders with the need for affordable access to essential medicines and
technological development in India.

3. Development of IPR Framework (1980s-1990s)

• Entry into the Global IPR System:

o During the 1980s, India’s domestic laws and policies came under increasing
pressure from international institutions and foreign governments to align with
global standards.
• The 1990s: Economic Liberalization and the TRIPS Agreement
o With the economic liberalization in 1991 and the opening up of the economy,
India was exposed to greater global trade. India joined the World Trade
Organization (WTO) in 1995, which required compliance with the Trade-
Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. The
TRIPS Agreement set global minimum standards for intellectual property
protection.
• Amendment to the Patent Act (1999):
o India made a significant amendment to the Patent Act in 1999 to align it
with the TRIPS Agreement. This included the introduction of product patents
for pharmaceuticals, a critical step in the internationalization of India's IPR
system.

4. IPR Reforms and Modernization (2000s-Present)

• Intellectual Property Laws of the 2000s:

o As part of its WTO commitments, India enacted several key reforms to its IPR
system, including the Copyright Act of 2002, Trademarks Act of 1999,
Designs Act of 2000, and Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration
and Protection) Act, 1999.
• Strengthening of Patent Laws:

9
 o In 2005, India brought about further amendments to the Patent Act. The
amendment aligned India’s patent law with global norms, particularly in terms
of patentability, duration, and patent rights. The amended law allowed for
patents on medicines, though it continued to include safeguards like
compulsory licensing to ensure public access to life-saving drugs.
• Geographical Indications (GI) Protection:
o In 2003, India passed the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration
and Protection) Act, which granted legal protection to products originating
from specific regions, such as Darjeeling tea, Kashmir Pashmina, and
Basmati rice.
• Intellectual Property Office (IPO) Reforms:
o The Indian Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has undergone reforms to
streamline the registration process for patents, trademarks, designs, and
copyrights. The IPO has adopted new technologies to speed up the processing
of IPR applications and improve transparency.
• National IPR Policy (2016):
o In 2016, India launched the National Intellectual Property Rights Policy,
which aims to create and sustain an ecosystem that promotes creativity,
innovation, and entrepreneurship. The policy focuses on improving IP
awareness, enforcement, and commercialization in India.

5. India in the Global IPR Landscape (2000s-Present)

• India’s Role in International IPR Governance:

o India has played a significant role in international IPR discussions, particularly
in the WTO and WIPO forums. India has argued for balanced IPR laws that
respect both global standards and public welfare, especially in areas like
pharmaceutical patents and access to medicines.
• Rise of Patent Filings and IPR Awareness:
o Over the past two decades, India has seen a steady increase in patent filings,
particularly in technology, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology sectors. The
growing awareness of intellectual property and its commercialization is
helping Indian businesses protect their innovations.
• IPR and Digital India:
o With the growth of digital technologies and software innovations, India has
seen increased importance of IPR in sectors like information technology,
software development, and entertainment. India is also addressing
challenges related to digital copyright infringement and the protection of
software code and digital content.

Conclusion

India's IPR journey has undergone significant transformation from colonial times to
becoming an active participant in the global intellectual property regime. The country’s legal
framework for patents, copyrights, trademarks, and other IPRs has evolved in response to
both domestic needs and international obligations. As India continues to grow as an

10
innovation hub, particularly in sectors like pharmaceuticals, IT, and biotechnology, the
importance of strengthening IPR enforcement, fostering innovation, and ensuring equitable
access to knowledge remains at the forefront of policy discussions.

NATIONAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR)

POLICY OF INDIA
The National IPR Policy was adopted in 2016 by the Government of India to provide a
comprehensive framework for the protection and promotion of intellectual property in the
country. It was designed to create a robust and effective IPR ecosystem that encourages
innovation, facilitates commercialization, and strengthens India's global position in
intellectual property.

Main Objectives of the National IPR Policy in India

The National IPR Policy focuses on several key objectives aimed at fostering creativity,
innovation, and entrepreneurship while ensuring that the benefits of intellectual property are
accessible to society at large. The main objectives of the policy are as follows:

**1. IPR Awareness and Promotion

• Objective: To increase awareness about the significance of IPR among the general
public, particularly among creators, entrepreneurs, and students.
• Action Plan:
o Promoting IPR education and training across various sectors.
o Conducting awareness campaigns and workshops to help individuals and
businesses understand the importance of protecting their intellectual assets.
o Encouraging schools, universities, and research institutions to integrate IPR
into curricula.

**2. IPR Creation, Protection, and Commercialization

• Objective: To encourage the creation, protection, and commercialization of

intellectual property in India, facilitating innovation and economic growth.
• Action Plan:
o Strengthening IPR laws to ensure they are conducive to the protection of
innovations.
o Supporting creators in registering and protecting their patents, trademarks,
designs, copyrights, and geographical indications.

11
 o Promoting technology transfer and commercialization of IP to enable
businesses to leverage their intellectual assets for financial growth.

**3. Legal and Enforcement Framework

• Objective: To improve the legal and enforcement mechanisms for the effective
protection of IPRs, ensuring that IPR laws are enforced in a manner that deters
infringements and promotes fair competition.
• Action Plan:
o Strengthening enforcement bodies such as customs, police, and courts to
prevent counterfeiting, piracy, and IPR violations.
o Improving dispute resolution mechanisms, including the IPR Tribunal, for
quick and efficient handling of intellectual property disputes.
o Enhancing collaboration between government agencies, law enforcement,
and IPR stakeholders.

**4. Global IPR Linkages

• Objective: To enhance India's standing in the international IPR system, ensuring that
the country adheres to global standards and participates in international IPR
discussions.
• Action Plan:
o Strengthening India's participation in global IPR bodies such as WIPO
(World Intellectual Property Organization), TRIPS (Trade-Related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights), and other international treaties.
o Fostering bilateral and multilateral relationships with other countries to
share best practices and enhance cooperation on intellectual property matters.
o Ensuring that India's IPR laws comply with international agreements like
TRIPS.

**5. IPR Commercialization and Innovation Ecosystem

• Objective: To promote innovation by creating a supportive ecosystem that facilitates

the commercialization of intellectual property, turning ideas into products and
services.
• Action Plan:
o Encouraging the creation of IPR hubs that bring together innovators,
businesses, and legal professionals to support innovation and its
commercialization.
o Promoting collaboration between academic institutions, industry, and
government to translate research and development into commercially viable
technologies and solutions.
o Enhancing technology licensing, start-ups, and small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs) through better access to intellectual property protection.

12
**6. Strengthening the IPR Ecosystem

• Objective: To create a dynamic and efficient IPR ecosystem that supports innovation
and entrepreneurship, particularly in key sectors like pharmaceuticals,
biotechnology, information technology, and entertainment.
• Action Plan:
o Improving intellectual property office systems, ensuring the timely and
effective processing of patent, trademark, and copyright applications.
o Increasing the capacity and infrastructure of the IPR office to handle the
growing volume of intellectual property filings.
o Creating IPR cells in various sectors to support industry-specific IP protection
and commercialization strategies.

**7. Promotion of Traditional Knowledge and Geographical Indications (GIs)

• Objective: To protect traditional knowledge, cultural heritage, and geographical

indications, ensuring that India's rich cultural diversity is recognized and preserved
globally.
• Action Plan:
o Promoting the registration and protection of geographical indications for
products that have a unique association with specific regions, such as
Darjeeling Tea, Kashmir Pashmina, and Basmati rice.
o Recognizing and preserving India's traditional knowledge (such as
Ayurveda, yoga, and arts) by ensuring its proper documentation and
protection from misuse.

**8. Incentivizing Research and Development (R&D)

• Objective: To incentivize and support research and development, fostering

innovation in fields like healthcare, clean energy, agriculture, and technology.
• Action Plan:
o Facilitating R&D collaborations between academic institutions, industry, and
the government.
o Providing financial incentives for companies and individuals engaging in
cutting-edge research and development activities.
o Encouraging the protection of innovations in life sciences, pharmaceuticals,
information technology, and other priority sectors.

**9. IPR for Economic Development

13
 • Objective: To use intellectual property as a tool for economic development, ensuring
that the benefits of IPR are distributed equitably across all sectors of society.
• Action Plan:
o Creating an environment where IPR contributes to the economic growth of
industries and helps boost employment in sectors like technology,
manufacturing, agriculture, and creative industries.
o Supporting the commercialization of IPR by providing financial and
technical assistance to businesses, particularly startups and SMEs.

Conclusion

The National IPR Policy of India aims to create an environment that fosters innovation and
creativity, while protecting the intellectual property of individuals, businesses, and creators.
The policy seeks to balance the need for effective IPR protection with promoting access to
knowledge and supporting equitable growth across the country. By aligning with global
standards and strengthening the national IP ecosystem, the policy aims to position India as a
global leader in innovation and intellectual property.

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE NEW IPR POLICY INDIA

Highlights of the New IPR Policy of India (2016)

The National Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy of India, launched in 2016, was
designed to strengthen the IPR ecosystem in India, promote innovation, and enhance the
country's competitiveness in the global economy. Here are the key highlights of the policy:

1. Vision of the Policy

• Objective: To create and sustain an ecosystem that encourages creativity and

innovation, ensuring that the benefits of IPRs are accessible to all sectors of society.
• Goal: To position India as an innovative and creative nation by maximizing the use
of IPRs to foster economic development, improve the country's global standing, and
promote the welfare of the public.

2. The 7 Key Objectives of the IPR Policy

The policy articulates seven specific objectives that guide its implementation:

1. IPR Awareness and Promotion

o Promote awareness about IPR and its benefits across all segments of society,
including creators, entrepreneurs, students, and the public.

14
 o Focus on IPR education and training to develop a culture of respect for
intellectual property.
2. Creation, Protection, and Commercialization of IPRs
o Encourage the creation and protection of intellectual property, with a focus on
their commercialization to boost innovation and entrepreneurship.
o Support the efficient registration and protection of patents, copyrights,
trademarks, designs, and other IP assets.
3. Legal and Enforcement Framework
o Strengthen the legal and enforcement mechanisms to prevent counterfeiting,
piracy, and IPR violations.
o Enhance the legal infrastructure to deal with IPR cases in a more efficient and
transparent manner.
4. Global IPR Linkages
o Increase India’s engagement in international IPR systems and organizations,
including WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), TRIPS
(Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights), and others.
o Ensure that Indian IPR laws align with international standards and treaties.
5. Commercialization of IPR and Innovation Ecosystem
o Foster an innovation-driven ecosystem that helps transform ideas into
commercial products and services.
o Encourage collaboration among industry, academia, and government to
translate research into practical, marketable innovations.
6. Strengthening the IPR Ecosystem
o Improve the infrastructure of IPR offices (Patents, Copyrights, Trademarks,
and Designs) for faster processing of applications.
o Develop sector-specific IPR cells and make the entire IP ecosystem more
efficient and transparent.
7. Promotion of Traditional Knowledge and Geographical Indications (GIs)
o Protect traditional knowledge, cultural heritage, and geographical indications
(such as Darjeeling tea and Kashmir Pashmina) to ensure India’s cultural
assets are safeguarded and globally recognized.

3. Key Principles of the Policy

• Balanced Approach: The policy emphasizes a balanced approach between

incentivizing innovation and ensuring public access to essential products, especially
in sectors like healthcare and education.
• Economic Growth: The policy aims to use IPR as a tool for economic growth,
creating jobs, increasing productivity, and fostering an entrepreneurial spirit among
Indian businesses.
• Ease of Doing Business: The policy envisions creating an environment where IPR
registration and enforcement are efficient, transparent, and user-friendly, making it
easier for individuals and businesses to protect their innovations.

4. Specific Focus on Key Sectors

15
 • Start-ups and MSMEs: The policy recognizes the importance of start-ups and
micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in driving innovation and
economic growth. It emphasizes providing financial support and IPR guidance to help
these businesses scale.
• Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology: It highlights the need to balance patent
protection with access to essential medicines, ensuring that public health is not
compromised.
• Creative Industries: The policy acknowledges the role of India’s entertainment,
arts, and cultural industries in driving the economy and emphasizes the protection
of copyrights and geographical indications related to cultural products.

5. Strengthening IPR Offices and Human Resources

• Efficiency and Modernization: The policy outlines measures to streamline the

functioning of IPR offices by introducing digital tools and technology for faster
processing of applications.
• Human Resource Development: It proposes to enhance IPR education and
training, aiming to build expertise among professionals and institutions involved in
IPR.

6. IPR as a Tool for Sustainable Development

• Inclusive Growth: The policy emphasizes ensuring that the benefits of IPR extend to
all sectors of society, especially those that contribute to social and economic
development, like agriculture, environmental protection, and renewable energy.
• Sustainable Innovation: It encourages innovation that contributes to sustainable
development, particularly in the fields of clean energy and environment-friendly
technologies.

7. Enhanced Collaboration Between Stakeholders

• The policy seeks to foster collaboration between government agencies, industry,

academia, and international organizations to create a robust ecosystem for
innovation and IP protection.
• It also calls for regular interaction and partnerships between IPR enforcement
agencies, law enforcement, and industry associations to address counterfeiting,
piracy, and IPR violations effectively.

8. Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanism

16
 • The policy outlines the creation of a monitoring and evaluation framework to
assess the progress of IPR initiatives and ensure the policy's goals are met efficiently
and on time.
• Annual reviews and feedback mechanisms will be used to adapt and update the
policy in response to emerging global trends and challenges in the IPR space.

Conclusion

The National IPR Policy represents India’s commitment to building a robust IPR ecosystem
that nurtures creativity and innovation. By focusing on awareness, creation, protection,
commercialization, and enforcement of intellectual property, the policy aims to position India
as a global leader in intellectual property and innovation. The policy also ensures that India's
cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and public welfare are well-protected and integrated
into the global IPR framework.

COMPULSORY LICENSING AND DIPP (DEPARTMENT OF

INDUSTRIAL POLICY AND PROMOTION)
Compulsory licensing and the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP)
play key roles in the context of intellectual property (IP) rights and their regulation in India.
Let's look at these concepts in more detail:

Compulsory Licensing

Compulsory licensing refers to the practice where a government allows a third party to
produce a patented product or process without the consent of the patent holder, typically to
address public health issues or other national concerns. It is considered an exception to the
general principle of patent rights, which grant exclusive rights to the patent holder.

Key Aspects of Compulsory Licensing in India

1. Legal Basis
o The provision for compulsory licensing in India is governed by the Patents
Act, 1970 (amended in 2005 to comply with WTO’s TRIPS Agreement).
o Section 84 of the Patents Act, 1970 allows the grant of a compulsory license
after three years from the grant of the patent, provided certain conditions are
met.
o Section 92 also provides the option of granting a compulsory license during
emergencies, such as public health crises (e.g., the COVID-19 pandemic),
national emergencies, or extreme urgency.
2. Conditions for Granting a Compulsory License

17
 oThe patent holder has not made the patented product available to the public at
an affordable price.
o The patented product is not manufactured or distributed in the country to
meet domestic demand.
o The patented invention is not being worked in the country to an adequate
extent.
o In the case of public health, the invention may be made available at lower
prices for patients, especially in the case of life-saving medicines.
3. Notable Examples
o Bayer's Nexavar (2012): One of the most notable cases of compulsory
licensing in India was when the Indian Patent Office granted a compulsory
license for Bayer's cancer drug Nexavar, allowing an Indian pharmaceutical
company, Natco Pharma, to manufacture and sell a generic version of the
drug at a much lower price. This case set a precedent for public health-related
compulsory licensing.
o Other Drug Cases: India has used compulsory licensing in the case of other
life-saving medications, making critical treatments accessible at affordable
prices to the public.
4. Impact on Innovation and Access to Medicine
o Positive Impact: Compulsory licensing can help make essential medicines
and technologies available to the public at affordable prices, especially in
cases of public health emergencies.
o Negative Impact: It has raised concerns among patent holders and
pharmaceutical companies about the potential reduction in incentives to
innovate, as it allows third parties to use patented inventions without
compensating the patent holder adequately.

Role of DIPP (Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion)

The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), now part of the Ministry of
Commerce and Industry, is responsible for formulating and overseeing the implementation
of policies related to industrial development, intellectual property, and industrial promotion
in India.

Key Functions of DIPP Related to IPR

1. Formulation of IPR Policy

o DIPP played a critical role in the development and implementation of the
National IPR Policy (2016), which aims to strengthen the IPR ecosystem in
India.
o It has been actively involved in creating frameworks to improve the efficiency
and effectiveness of IP-related laws and policies in the country.
2. Administration of Patents, Trademarks, and Designs
o DIPP oversees the functioning of the Intellectual Property Office in India,
which deals with patents, trademarks, designs, and geographical indications.

18
 o The office ensures the smooth processing of applications for IP registration
and handles the examination, grant, and protection of patents and trademarks.
3. Promotion of IPR Awareness
o The department is also engaged in creating awareness about the importance of
intellectual property rights, especially in fostering innovation and economic
growth.
o DIPP conducts various training programs, workshops, and public outreach
initiatives to promote the understanding and importance of IPRs in industry,
research, and development sectors.
4. Regulation of Compulsory Licensing
o DIPP is involved in regulating the compulsory licensing mechanism,
ensuring that it is applied in accordance with Indian law and in line with
global trade obligations under the TRIPS Agreement.
o The department also oversees cases where compulsory licenses are sought and
ensures that these decisions align with India’s national interests, especially in
public health.
5. Facilitating FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) and Industrial Growth
o DIPP works on creating a conducive environment for industrial growth, which
includes facilitating the transfer of technology and the development of
patented innovations.
o It works to enhance the ease of doing business and attract FDI by improving
the overall IPR environment in India.

Conclusion

Compulsory licensing and the DIPP are crucial elements in India's approach to managing
intellectual property rights. Compulsory licensing ensures that essential medicines and
technologies are accessible to the public, especially in health emergencies, while DIPP is
responsible for overseeing the development and regulation of IPR policies, fostering
innovation, and balancing the interests of stakeholders in the IPR ecosystem. This dynamic is
central to India's commitment to both global trade norms and public welfare.

RIGHTS PROVIDED AND ASSURED BY COPYRIGHT AND

RELATED RIGHTS
Rights Provided and Assured by Copyright and Related Rights

Copyright is a form of intellectual property (IP) that protects the original works of
authorship, including literary, artistic, musical, and other creative works. It grants the creators
of these works exclusive rights to control how their works are used and distributed.
Additionally, related rights (also known as neighboring rights) are granted to performers,
producers, and broadcasters who contribute to the use and dissemination of copyrighted
works.

Here’s a breakdown of the rights provided under copyright and related rights:

19
1. Rights Provided by Copyright

Copyright generally grants the creator or author of the work the exclusive rights to:

A. Economic Rights

Economic rights allow the copyright holder to benefit financially from their work and to
control its commercial use. These include:

1. Reproduction Right
o The right to make copies of the copyrighted work (e.g., printing, recording, or
downloading).
2. Distribution Right
o The right to sell, lease, or distribute copies of the work to the public.
3. Right of Public Performance
o The right to perform the work in public, such as in the case of music, plays, or
dance performances.
4. Right of Public Communication
o The right to make the work available to the public via broadcasting,
streaming, or public display.
5. Adaptation Right (Derivative Works)
o The right to create new works based on the original work, such as adaptations,
translations, or any form of transformation (e.g., movie adaptations of books).
6. Rental Right
o The right to authorize the rental of copies of the work, commonly applicable to
books, films, and software.

B. Moral Rights

Moral rights protect the personal, reputational, and integrity interests of the author. These are
typically non-transferable and are independent of economic rights.

1. Right of Attribution (Paternity Right)

o The right to claim authorship of the work and to prevent others from falsely
attributing the work to someone else.
2. Right of Integrity
o The right to object to any modification, distortion, or mutilation of the work
that could harm the author's reputation or honor.
3. Right to Object to Derivative Works
o The right to object to the modification of the work or its use in contexts that
may harm the creator’s honor or reputation, even after the work has been
publicly released.

2. Related Rights (Neighboring Rights)

20
Related rights are closely associated with copyright but are granted to specific groups that
contribute to the dissemination and performance of copyrighted works. These rights are
designed to protect those involved in the reproduction, performance, or broadcasting of
works, but they do not extend to the authors of the original work.

A. Performers' Rights

These are rights granted to performers (e.g., actors, musicians, dancers, etc.) who bring a
work to life through performance.

1. Right to Control Recording

o Performers have the right to control the recording of their performances,
including audio and video recordings.
2. Right to Control Broadcasting
o Performers can prevent unauthorized broadcasts or transmissions of their
performances.
3. Right to Prevent Distortion
o Performers have the right to prevent unauthorized alterations or distortions of
their performances that could harm their reputation.

B. Producers' Rights

These rights apply to producers of phonograms (recordings), films, and other media who
invest in bringing a work to the public.

1. Right to Reproduction
o Producers have the right to authorize the reproduction of their productions
(e.g., sound recordings or films).
2. Right to Distribution
o Producers can control the distribution of copies of their productions.
3. Right to Rental
o Producers have the right to permit or prohibit the rental or lending of copies of
their productions.

C. Broadcasters' Rights

These rights are granted to radio and television broadcasters that broadcast works to the
public.

1. Right to Broadcast
o Broadcasters have the exclusive right to transmit their broadcasts and to
control the rebroadcasting of their transmissions.
2. Right to Fixation and Distribution
o Broadcasters can control the fixation (e.g., recording) and distribution of
their broadcasts, including making copies of broadcasts available to the public.

3. Exceptions and Limitations

21
While copyright and related rights grant exclusive control over the work, there are exceptions
and limitations to prevent undue restrictions on the free flow of information. These may
include:

• Fair Use/Fair Dealing: Certain uses of copyrighted works, such as criticism,

commentary, news reporting, teaching, or research, may not require the copyright
holder’s permission.
• Educational and Research Uses: Copyright protection may be limited in educational
contexts to promote learning.
• Library and Archive Exceptions: Libraries and archives may be allowed to
reproduce works for preservation or research purposes.

4. Duration of Copyright and Related Rights

• Copyright: The duration of copyright protection varies depending on the type of

work and jurisdiction but generally lasts for the life of the author plus 50 to 100
years. In the case of works with no individual author (e.g., corporate works), the
duration can be a set period after publication.
• Related Rights: These rights usually last for 50 years from the date of the
performance, recording, or broadcast, depending on the jurisdiction.

Conclusion

Copyright provides creators with economic rights to control how their works are used,
reproduced, distributed, and adapted, while also protecting their moral rights related to
attribution and integrity. Related rights or neighboring rights extend protection to
performers, producers, and broadcasters, acknowledging their contribution to the creation and
distribution of works. Both sets of rights are essential for encouraging creativity and ensuring
that creators and contributors are compensated for their work and efforts.

COPYRIGHT AND RELATED RIGHTS IN RELATION WITH

ADVANCEMENT IN TECHNOLOGY
Copyright and Related Rights in Relation to Advancements in Technology

Advancements in technology have had a profound impact on copyright and related rights
by reshaping how creative works are created, distributed, and consumed. While technological
developments have expanded the opportunities for creators, they have also introduced new
challenges in protecting and enforcing these rights. Here’s a detailed exploration of how
technology has influenced copyright and related rights:

22
1. Impact of Technology on Copyright

A. Digital Reproduction and Distribution

• Digital Technology has made it incredibly easy to copy and distribute works on a
mass scale, making unauthorized reproduction a growing concern. This has led to
the need for stronger digital rights management (DRM) technologies to protect
works from piracy.
• Piracy and Unauthorized Distribution: The ease with which works can be
replicated (e.g., digital music, movies, books) and shared online has made
unauthorized distribution a serious issue. Platforms like peer-to-peer file sharing and
illegal streaming have led to copyright infringement challenges.
• Digital Copies: Copyright holders must adapt their protection strategies to account
for digital copies, which can be easily stored, altered, and shared.

B. Internet and Online Platforms

• User-Generated Content: The rise of platforms like YouTube, Instagram, TikTok,

and others has led to a flood of user-generated content. Many users upload
copyrighted material without permission, leading to challenges in copyright
enforcement.
• Online Platforms’ Responsibility: The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA) in the United States, for example, provides a "safe harbor" provision for
platforms like YouTube, which limits their liability for user-uploaded content.
However, platforms are still required to act when copyright infringement is reported.
• Content Identification Tools: Platforms like YouTube use Content ID to
automatically detect and block or monetize unauthorized uploads of copyrighted
works (e.g., songs, videos). These tools help rights holders assert their rights in an
environment where manual enforcement would be impractical.

C. Streaming and Cloud Computing

• Streaming Services: Services like Spotify, Netflix, and Amazon Prime Video have
transformed the way copyrighted works (music, movies, etc.) are consumed. These
services often involve complex licensing agreements between rights holders, service
providers, and content distributors.
• Cloud Storage: Technologies that allow users to store and share data in the cloud
also raise issues of copyright enforcement. For instance, users might upload
copyrighted content to cloud services, which may be shared with others, making it
difficult to track or control the distribution.

D. Copying and Fair Use

• Fair Use: Technological advancements have expanded the scope of what can be
considered fair use. For instance, creating mashups, remixes, or commentary based
on copyrighted works is often done using digital tools like audio or video editing
software, leading to debates about what constitutes transformative use.
• Automated Use: Automated tools, like those that use algorithms to generate art or
music, raise questions about who owns the rights to works created by machines, and
whether human authorship is a necessary element for copyright protection.

23
2. Impact of Technology on Related Rights (Neighboring Rights)

A. Performers’ Rights in Digital Performances

• Online Performances: The rise of live streaming platforms like Twitch, YouTube
Live, and Facebook Live has given performers new opportunities to reach audiences,
but also presents challenges for ensuring performers’ rights are protected.
• Virtual Performances: Technologies such as virtual reality (VR) and augmented
reality (AR) may create opportunities for new types of performance, which
complicates the application of traditional performers' rights. For instance, virtual
concerts or performances by digital avatars may raise questions about the rights of
human performers vs. digital creations.

B. Producers' Rights in the Digital Era

• Reproduction and Distribution: The ability to reproduce and distribute works via
digital platforms (e.g., music streaming, video streaming) has made the management
of producers' rights more complex. Producers must ensure they have licensing
agreements with both the creators and distributors.
• Digital Copies of Phonograms and Films: The reproduction of sound recordings
(phonograms) and films in digital form (MP3s, MP4s, etc.) has raised challenges in
protecting the rights of producers, especially in the context of online piracy and
unauthorized file-sharing.

C. Broadcasters’ Rights in the Digital Age

• Online Broadcasting: The growth of online streaming platforms such as Netflix,

Hulu, and Amazon Prime Video has created new challenges in protecting
broadcasters’ rights. These platforms often provide access to content globally, which
may violate territorial broadcasting rights.
• Rebroadcasting: With technologies like satellite broadcasting and streaming, the
issue of rebroadcasting becomes more prominent. Broadcasters need to ensure they
hold rights in all regions where their content is distributed, requiring them to navigate
complex international agreements.

3. Technological Measures for Copyright Protection

A. Digital Rights Management (DRM)

• DRM Systems are widely used to prevent unauthorized reproduction and distribution
of digital content. These systems can restrict users' ability to copy, share, or alter
content, ensuring the protection of the creator’s economic interests.
• However, DRM is controversial because it can limit the ability of legitimate users to
use the content they have purchased (e.g., transferring music between devices or
making backup copies).

24
B. Watermarking and Fingerprinting

• Digital Watermarking: A technique used to embed a unique identifier in digital

media (images, videos, audio) to track and verify ownership. Watermarks can serve as
a deterrent to unauthorized copying.
• Content Fingerprinting: This technology analyzes digital content and creates a
unique "fingerprint" or digital signature that allows content to be identified, even if it
has been modified. Services like YouTube's Content ID use this technology to
identify infringing content.

4. Legal and Policy Responses

A. Updating Copyright Laws

• As technology evolves, copyright laws are continuously being updated to address the
changing landscape of content creation and distribution. International treaties such as
the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and
Phonograms Treaty (WPPT) have introduced provisions to adapt copyright laws to
the digital age.
• National governments, including India, have amended their copyright laws to reflect
technological advancements, especially concerning the protection of digital works and
the handling of online piracy.

B. Balancing Innovation and Protection

• Flexibility in Licensing: Licensing models like Creative Commons and other open-
source initiatives are gaining popularity. These frameworks allow creators to protect
their works while enabling more flexible sharing, remixing, and use of content,
particularly in educational and non-profit contexts.

5. Conclusion: Adapting Copyright to Technological Advancements

Advancements in technology have radically transformed the landscape of copyright and

related rights. While they have provided opportunities for increased access to creative works,
they have also posed challenges in terms of enforcement, protection, and the equitable
distribution of benefits. As digital tools make the replication and distribution of works
easier, it’s essential that copyright and related rights continue to evolve to balance the
interests of creators, consumers, and technology companies. Legal frameworks, along with
technological measures such as DRM and content fingerprinting, are crucial in addressing
these challenges, ensuring that creators and other stakeholders in the IP ecosystem are fairly
compensated and protected in the digital age.

25
DELHI HIGHCOURT COPYRIGHT JUDGEMENT (DU
PHOTOCOPY CASE)
Delhi High Court Copyright Judgment: The DU Photocopy Case (2016)

The Delhi University Photocopy Case is a significant legal judgment delivered by the Delhi
High Court in 2016. The case involved a copyright dispute between Delhi University (DU)
and a group of publishers, addressing the issue of photocopying textbooks for educational
purposes. The core of the case revolved around whether Delhi University could authorize the
photocopying of textbooks for its students under the fair use or fair dealing provision of
Indian copyright law.

Here’s an overview of the case details and judgment:

Case Background:

In 2012, a group of academic publishers filed a case against Delhi University (DU) and the
Rameshwari Photocopy Service (a photocopying business) for allegedly violating their
copyrights. The publishers argued that photocopying textbooks without permission for
distribution to students was an infringement of their copyright.

Delhi University had authorized the photocopying of sections of textbooks for its students,
which were sold at a much lower price than the original books. The university argued that
this was for educational purposes and benefited students, particularly those from
economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

The publishers argued that such photocopying was not covered under the fair use provisions
of the Indian Copyright Act, as it violated their exclusive rights, such as the right to
reproduce and distribute the copyrighted works.

Key Issues in the Case:

1. Fair Use vs. Copyright Infringement:

Whether the photocopying of parts of books for educational purposes could be
justified as fair use under Indian copyright law.
2. Educational Exceptions:
Whether Delhi University could use the defense of educational exceptions under the
Indian Copyright Act, particularly Section 52, which allows certain uses without the
author’s permission for educational purposes.
3. Public Interest:
The question of whether the public interest in making textbooks available to a wider
range of students justified the infringement of the publishers’ rights.

26
Delhi High Court Judgment:

In 2016, the Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Delhi University, holding that the
photocopying of textbooks under the given circumstances did not constitute copyright
infringement. The court provided the following key points:

1. Fair Use Doctrine

The Court held that the photocopying of portions of textbooks by Delhi University fell
within the “fair use” or “fair dealing” exceptions under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957.
Specifically, the court ruled that this type of use was for education and research, which is
one of the recognized purposes under the Act.

The Court observed that fair use allows for the reproduction of copyrighted works without
permission for non-commercial purposes like teaching, criticism, or research, as long as it
does not harm the commercial interests of the original work.

2. Public Benefit of Education

The Court emphasized the public interest in ensuring that students, especially those from
low-income backgrounds, have access to educational materials. It noted that the cost of
textbooks is often prohibitive, and photocopying provided an affordable alternative,
benefiting education in general.

3. Proportionality of Reproduction

The Court also ruled that only limited portions of textbooks (not entire books) were being
photocopied, which aligns with the proportionality principle of fair use. The amount of
copying was not excessive, and it was done in a manner that aligned with educational
purposes rather than commercial exploitation.

4. Reasonable Licensing System

The court suggested that a reasonable licensing system should be adopted by the university
and the publishers to strike a balance between the interests of authors and the needs of
educational institutions. The university should engage in licensing agreements for the
reproduction of textbooks where feasible.

Impact of the Judgment:

1. Educational Institutions and Fair Use: The judgment provided a significant relief
to educational institutions in India, allowing them to photocopy books or parts of
books for teaching and educational purposes without needing to secure individual
permissions from copyright holders.
2. Encouraging Access to Education: The ruling was seen as a victory for students,
particularly those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, as it opened up
greater access to textbooks that were otherwise too expensive for many students.

27
 3. Reinforcement of Fair Use in India: The judgment reinforced the concept of fair
use and its application in the context of education, which aligns with global trends in
countries like the U.S. and the UK.
4. Commercial Publishers’ Concerns: On the other hand, the judgment was seen as
detrimental to the commercial interests of publishers. Publishers argued that this
practice resulted in lost revenues and impacted the market for textbooks.

Criticism and Concerns:

1. Impact on Publishers: Many publishers argued that the judgment would undermine
the economics of publishing. They claimed that universities and photocopying
services would simply photocopy entire books, thereby depriving them of sales
revenues.
2. Scope of Fair Use: The broad interpretation of fair use by the Court raised concerns
about whether it could be exploited in ways that might unduly favor educational
institutions at the expense of authors and publishers.
3. Sustainability of the Decision: Critics argued that while this judgment helped
students in the short term, it could have long-term implications for the sustainability
of the publishing industry in India. A balance was needed between making books
accessible and compensating authors and publishers for their work.

Conclusion:

The Delhi High Court’s decision in the DU Photocopy Case marked a landmark
judgment in the context of copyright law in India. It struck a balance between fair use for
educational purposes and the rights of copyright holders, particularly in a context where
access to educational resources is critical. While it favored educational institutions and
students, it also highlighted the need for innovative licensing solutions to ensure that the
interests of both authors and publishers are protected.

TRADEMARKS, DIFFERENT TYPES OF TRADEMERKS

THAT MAY BE REGISTERED IN INDIA
Trademarks in India: Definition and Types

A trademark is a unique sign, symbol, word, logo, or a combination of these elements that
identifies and distinguishes the goods or services of one business from those of others.
Trademarks serve as an indicator of the origin of products or services and help build a brand's
identity.

In India, trademarks are governed by the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and the Trade Marks
Rules, 2017. A trademark can be registered to ensure legal protection against unauthorized
use by others.

28
Types of Trademarks that May Be Registered in India

Under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the following are the different types of trademarks that
may be registered in India:

1. Word Mark

A word mark is a trademark consisting solely of words or letters. It could be a single word, a
combination of words, or even a distinctive letter or number.

Example: "Coca-Cola", "Nike", "Google".

2. Device Mark

A device mark consists of a logo, symbol, or any image without any accompanying text. It
could be a visual representation of the brand's identity, such as a unique symbol, design, or
emblem.

Example: The Apple logo or the McDonald's Golden Arches.

3. Combination Mark

A combination mark consists of a combination of text and design or logo. It can feature
both a word and a symbol, offering a dual form of brand recognition.

Example: Pepsi, which includes both the word "Pepsi" and the iconic logo design.

4. Shape Mark

A shape mark is a trademark consisting of the shape or packaging of a product. It can be a

three-dimensional shape (3D mark) or packaging that is distinctive and identifiable as a
source of goods or services.

Example: The Coca-Cola bottle shape and the Lego brick shape.

5. Colour Mark

A colour mark can be a single colour or a combination of colours used in a particular way
that identifies the brand. The colour(s) must have distinctive character and must not be
commonplace in the industry.

Example: The Tiffany blue used in jewelry, or Cadbury's purple in chocolate packaging.

6. Sound Mark

29
A sound mark is a non-visual sound used to identify the brand, such as a jingle, a unique
sound, or a musical note associated with a product or service.

Example: The Intel chime or the Yahoo! jingle.

7. Scent Mark

A scent mark is a trademark that consists of a distinctive smell used to identify and
distinguish a product or service. However, registering scent marks is rare, and it is often
difficult to prove that a scent is unique and identifiable as a brand.

Example: The scent of play-dough or the scent associated with certain perfumes.

8. Certification Mark

A certification mark is used to certify that goods or services meet certain standards or
possess a certain quality, characteristic, or origin. It is not a trademark used by the owner for
marketing purposes but by others who meet the certification standards.

Example: The IS0 9000 certification mark for quality management systems or the Agmark
used for agricultural products.

9. Collective Mark

A collective mark is used by a group of businesses or organizations to identify their goods

or services and indicate that they come from a collective source, membership, or affiliation.
These marks are used to denote membership or association with an organization.

Example: The "Made in Italy" collective mark used to represent Italian products or the
"FSSAI" (Food Safety and Standards Authority of India) mark for food products.

10. Trade Dress

Trade dress refers to the overall appearance or image of a product or its packaging that
distinguishes it from others. This includes the shape, colour, texture, and design elements.
While trade dress is not a traditional trademark, it can be protected under trademark law if it
meets the distinctiveness requirement.

Example: The shape and design of Tiffany's blue box or the distinctive packaging of
Coca-Cola bottles.

Eligibility for Trademark Registration in India

To be eligible for trademark registration in India, the mark must be:

1. Distinctive: The mark must be capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one
entity from others.

30
 2. Non-Descriptive: It cannot be a mere description of the goods or services it
represents.
3. Non-Generic: It cannot be a term that is commonly used in the industry.
4. Non-Deceptive: It should not mislead consumers as to the origin, quality, or other
characteristics of the product or service.

Process of Trademark Registration in India

1. Trademark Search: Before applying for registration, it is advisable to conduct a

trademark search to ensure the mark is not already registered.
2. Filing the Application: An application for trademark registration is filed with the
Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trademarks (CGPDTM).
3. Examination of Application: The application will be examined for compliance with
legal requirements, including distinctiveness and non-conflict with existing marks.
4. Opposition: If the application is accepted, a publication is made in the Trademark
Journal. If any third party has objections, they may file an opposition within a set
time frame.
5. Registration: If no opposition is filed or if the opposition is unsuccessful, the
trademark will be registered, and a certificate of registration is issued.

Conclusion

Trademarks play an essential role in distinguishing products and services, building brand
identity, and protecting consumer interests. In India, there are various types of trademarks
that can be registered, ranging from word marks to scent marks. Understanding these types
and the legal framework for registering and protecting them can help businesses protect their
brand assets and avoid legal conflicts.

REGISTRAR, IPAB
Registrar of Trademarks and the Intellectual Property Appellate Board
(IPAB)

Registrar of Trademarks

In India, the Registrar of Trademarks is the official authority responsible for administering
and overseeing the registration process of trademarks under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
The Registrar’s office operates under the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and
Trademarks (CGPDTM), which falls under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry.

Key Functions of the Registrar of Trademarks:

31
 1. Trademark Registration: The Registrar is responsible for examining and registering
trademarks after ensuring compliance with legal requirements. The process includes a
detailed examination of the application, opposition proceedings, and publication in the
Trademark Journal.
2. Maintenance of the Trademark Registry: The Registrar maintains an official
registry of all registered trademarks and provides public access to the data for
verification.
3. Opposition and Rectification: The Registrar handles opposition to trademark
applications from third parties and addresses rectification petitions to remove
incorrect or fraudulent marks from the registry.
4. Granting of Certificates: Once a trademark is successfully registered, the Registrar
issues the certificate of registration.
5. Regulating Use of Marks: The Registrar ensures compliance with the Trade Marks
Act by addressing issues such as non-use of registered marks and enforcing protection
of trademark rights.

Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB)

The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) was a quasi-judicial body in India
responsible for hearing appeals against the decisions of the Registrar of Trademarks and other
authorities under the Intellectual Property laws. It was primarily established to provide a
forum for dispute resolution related to intellectual property matters.

Key Functions of IPAB:

1. Appeals: IPAB heard appeals against decisions made by the Registrar of Trademarks
regarding issues such as the refusal of trademark registration, opposition
proceedings, and rectification applications. It was an appellate authority for
trademark and patent matters.
2. Rectification of Trademark Register: IPAB also had the power to hear and decide
on matters related to rectification of the trademark register, especially when a person
wanted to remove a registered trademark from the registry.
3. Appellate Authority: The IPAB served as the final authority for disputes and
appeals relating to the refusal of trademark registration, rectification, and
decisions made by the Patent Office and the Registrar of Trademarks.
4. Decisions on Conflicts: IPAB also handled inter-party disputes relating to
intellectual property, including issues of trademark infringement, validity, and
ownership.

Recent Changes:

In 2021, the Government of India issued a notification for the abolition of the Intellectual
Property Appellate Board (IPAB). The IPAB’s functions were transferred to the High
Courts across India, which now handle appeals related to intellectual property matters. This
change was aimed at streamlining the intellectual property dispute resolution process and
making it more efficient.

32
Reasons for Abolition of IPAB:

1. Delays in Proceedings: IPAB was criticized for delays in delivering judgments,

which hindered the effective enforcement of intellectual property rights.
2. Overlapping Jurisdictions: Some critics argued that the existence of IPAB led to
jurisdictional confusion, especially when the High Courts already had jurisdiction
over IP matters.
3. Cost and Efficiency: The shift to the High Courts was seen as a way to reduce the
cost of appeals and improve efficiency in the resolution of IP-related disputes.

Conclusion

• Registrar of Trademarks: Plays a critical role in the trademark registration

process, including examining applications, maintaining the trademark registry, and
granting rights to brand owners.
• IPAB (formerly): Served as the appellate body for trademark and patent disputes,
providing a platform for appeals against decisions made by the Registrar and other
authorities, though its functions have now been transferred to the High Courts.

The evolving framework for intellectual property in India reflects the government's push for
faster, more efficient mechanisms for protecting IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) and
resolving disputes.

RED BULL'S PLEA ON TRDEMARK REJECTED

Red Bull's Plea on Trademark Rejected: A Legal Overview

Case Background: The Red Bull GmbH, an Austrian energy drink manufacturer, filed a
plea with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in 2020 to register a
three-dimensional trademark for the shape of its iconic red and blue can. However, in a
recent legal development, the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) rejected Red Bull’s request to
register the shape of its can as a trademark, which would have granted it exclusive rights over
the shape across the European Union.

Key Points of the Legal Case:

1. Trademark Application:
o Red Bull filed the application to register the 3D shape of its energy drink
cans, specifically the distinctive red and blue can design, as a trademark in
the EU in 2014.
o The company argued that the design of the can, especially its unique color
scheme, shape, and appearance, had become strongly associated with the
brand, making it a distinctive trade mark.
2. Initial Rejection:

33
 o The EUIPO initially rejected the application, arguing that the shape of the can
lacked distinctiveness. This is a critical requirement for a trademark, as a mark
must distinctively identify the product to the public, distinguishing it from
other products in the market.
o The EUIPO contended that the shape of the can was a common design in the
beverage industry and did not significantly differ from other similar products
available on the market.
3. Appeal:
o Red Bull appealed the decision, arguing that over time, its can’s distinctive
color scheme and shape had become identifiable as its product, forming an
essential part of its brand identity.
o Red Bull claimed that due to its extensive advertising, marketing, and sales
efforts, the public associated the red and blue can design exclusively with the
Red Bull brand, giving it the necessary distinctiveness for trademark
registration.
4. Court Ruling:
o The European Court of Justice (CJEU) upheld the EUIPO’s rejection. The
Court found that the design of the Red Bull can, despite its success in
marketing and widespread recognition, did not meet the criteria for
trademark registration.
o Specifically, the Court emphasized that the shape of the can should be
inherently distinctive, and in this case, the can’s shape did not have the
required uniqueness in comparison to other beverage cans.
o The ruling clarified that consumer perception plays a vital role in trademark
registration, and a design must be perceived as indicating the origin of the
product, which was not the case with the Red Bull can's shape alone.

Impact of the Ruling:

1. Importance of Distinctiveness:
o The case underscores the importance of distinctiveness in trademark law. A
design must be unique and clearly identify a product to be granted
trademark protection.
o This ruling highlights that even popular and widely recognized brands must
prove that their designs are not just a form of marketing but have
established a unique association with the product's origin.
2. Broader Implications for Branding:
o The case sets a precedent for future applications related to the registration of
three-dimensional marks or shape marks in the EU, indicating that the mere
popularity of a product is not enough for trademark registration.
o Companies wishing to protect distinctive shapes or designs need to
demonstrate evidence of secondary meaning and consumer recognition over
a significant period, beyond just commercial success.
3. Red Bull's Future Strategy:
o While Red Bull failed to register the can design as a trademark, the company
can still protect its design through other means, such as copyright or trade
dress protection. This ensures that competitors cannot copy the look of Red

34
 Bull’s cans, as long as they don’t infringe on existing intellectual property
rights.

Conclusion:

The European Court’s ruling reflects the stringent criteria for trademark registration,
particularly for three-dimensional marks. While Red Bull’s iconic can design may be
widely recognized, the Court concluded that it did not meet the necessary legal requirements
for a registered trademark, reinforcing the idea that a design must have inherent
distinctiveness to qualify for protection.

PATENT,IMPORTANCE OF PATENT, PROTECTION OF

DIFFERENT TYPES OF PATENTS, RIGHTS OF PATENT
OWNERS, IMPORTANCE OF PATENTS IN EVERYDAY
LIFE, PATENT GRANTING, PROTECTION OF INVENTION
Patent: Definition and Importance

A patent is a form of intellectual property (IP) granted by a government to an inventor or

assignee for a new, useful, and non-obvious invention. A patent provides the inventor
exclusive rights to make, use, sell, and distribute the invention for a certain period of time,
typically 20 years from the filing date.

The primary purpose of a patent is to encourage innovation by protecting the inventor's

intellectual creation while allowing the public access to knowledge once the patent expires. In
return for the exclusive rights granted, the inventor must disclose the details of the invention,
making it available to the public, which can spur further innovation and technological
advancement.

Importance of Patents

1. Encouraging Innovation: Patents provide inventors with the incentive to invest time,
effort, and resources into developing new technologies by granting them exclusive
rights for a limited period. This exclusivity helps them to capitalize on their
innovations without immediate competition.
2. Economic Growth: Patents can contribute significantly to a country's economic
growth by promoting new products and technologies that lead to new industries and
markets.
3. Reward for Creativity: Patents reward inventors for their creativity and hard work.
The protection of intellectual property also encourages research and development
(R&D) across various industries.
4. Fostering Knowledge Sharing: The patent system encourages the sharing of
knowledge. While granting exclusive rights, patents require that the details of the

35
 invention be disclosed, thus advancing public knowledge in science, technology, and
engineering.

Protection of Different Types of Patents

There are several types of patents that protect different forms of inventions:

1. Utility Patents:
o Utility patents protect inventions that are functional and serve a specific
utility. These include new machines, processes, compositions of matter, or
improvements to existing inventions.
o Example: A new type of engine or a unique pharmaceutical compound.
2. Design Patents:
o Design patents protect the aesthetic aspects of an invention, such as the
shape, appearance, or surface ornamentation of a product. These patents do not
cover the functional aspects of the invention.
o Example: The unique design of a bottle, the shape of a mobile phone, or the
look of a chair.
3. Plant Patents:
o Plant patents are granted for new and distinct varieties of plants that have
been asexually reproduced (such as through grafting or cutting).
o Example: A new variety of rose or tomato.
4. Provisional Patents (In some jurisdictions):
o A provisional patent application allows inventors to secure an early filing
date while giving them additional time (usually 12 months) to file a full utility
patent application. It does not grant patent rights but serves as a placeholder
for the final filing.

Rights of Patent Owners

The patent owner is granted several exclusive rights under the patent law:

1. Exclusive Manufacturing and Selling Rights: The patent holder has the exclusive
right to manufacture, use, or sell the patented invention. Others cannot make, use, or
sell the invention without the inventor's permission, usually in the form of a license.
2. Licensing: The patent owner can license their rights to other parties, allowing others
to use, produce, or sell the patented invention for a fee (royalty). This can help
generate additional revenue.
3. Infringement Action: The patent owner has the right to enforce their patent by
taking legal action against any entity that uses or sells the patented invention without
permission (infringement).
4. Assignment: A patent holder can also assign or transfer their rights to another party,
who then becomes the new patent owner.
5. Exclusivity for a Set Period: Patents are granted for a limited period (typically 20
years for utility patents). During this period, the owner enjoys exclusive rights, but
once the patent expires, others can use the invention freely.

36
Importance of Patents in Everyday Life

Patents are integral to the development and availability of products and services in daily life.
Some ways in which patents impact everyday life include:

1. Technological Advancements: Patents protect innovations that lead to everyday

products like smartphones, medicines, home appliances, and even food products.
Without patents, inventors would have less incentive to innovate.
2. Consumer Safety and Quality: Patented inventions often lead to improved products,
enhanced safety features, and higher-quality standards for consumers. For instance,
patents protect innovations in medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and consumer
electronics that improve quality of life.
3. Job Creation: Innovation protected by patents often leads to the creation of new
industries and job opportunities, benefiting the economy and providing employment.
4. Market Competition: Patents can create a competitive environment where different
companies work to improve upon existing inventions, resulting in more choices and
better prices for consumers.

Patent Granting Process

1. Patent Search: Before filing for a patent, a thorough patent search is usually
conducted to determine whether the invention is novel or if similar patents exist.
2. Filing the Application: An inventor files a patent application with the relevant
patent office. This application includes a detailed description of the invention and any
associated diagrams, technical specifications, and claims regarding what the inventor
wishes to protect.
3. Examination: The patent office examines the application to check for novelty, non-
obviousness, and utility. This can involve multiple back-and-forth communications
between the patent office and the applicant.
4. Granting of Patent: If the invention meets all criteria, the patent is granted. The
inventor then holds exclusive rights over the invention for a fixed period (typically 20
years from the filing date for utility patents).

Protection of Inventions

1. Legal Protection: A granted patent gives the inventor legal protection against others
who might attempt to copy or use the invention without permission.
2. Preventing Imitation: A patent prevents competitors from copying the invention,
thereby ensuring that the inventor can capitalize on their innovative efforts without
fear of direct competition.
3. Encouraging Investment: Patents often serve as a form of collateral for securing
investment or partnerships. The exclusivity granted by a patent adds value to the
invention and makes it attractive to investors.

37
Conclusion

Patents play a vital role in promoting innovation, protecting inventors’ rights, and facilitating
technological progress. They provide inventors with exclusive rights to their inventions for a
limited time, helping to secure investments and foster competition. In everyday life, patents
contribute to advancements in various sectors, from healthcare and technology to
manufacturing and agriculture, enhancing the quality of life and providing economic benefits.
The patent granting process ensures that new ideas are legally protected and that the fruits of
innovation are properly rewarded.

INDIAN PATENT ACT 1970 AND 2005

Indian Patent Act of 1970 and 2005 Amendments

The Indian Patent Act, 1970 and its subsequent amendments in 2005 represent a crucial
framework for the protection of inventions in India. The Act regulates the granting of patents
for new inventions, providing rights to inventors to protect their creations. These laws aim to
foster innovation while balancing public interests by ensuring knowledge dissemination
through patents.

The Indian Patent Act, 1970

The Indian Patent Act of 1970 was a significant reform that sought to modernize India's
patent law system. It was designed to encourage technological development, safeguard local
industries, and avoid over-patenting of trivial innovations. This Act replaced the Indian
Patents and Designs Act, 1911 and laid the foundation for India's approach to intellectual
property.

Key Features of the Indian Patent Act, 1970:

1. Patentable Inventions:
o The Act introduced the criteria of novelty, non-obviousness, and utility for
granting patents.
o It included process patents for products, particularly in pharmaceuticals,
over the more traditional product patents. This was a key feature, especially
for India’s pharmaceutical industry.
2. Patent Duration:
o The Act provided patents for a period of 14 years, which could be extended
under certain conditions.
3. No Patentability for Certain Inventions:
o The Act excluded certain categories of inventions from being patentable, such
as atomic energy technologies and inventions detrimental to public health.
4. Compulsory Licensing:

38
 o The 1970 Act allowed for compulsory licensing, enabling the government to
grant licenses for patented products if the public interest required it,
particularly in sectors like pharmaceuticals.
5. Product and Process Patents:
o The Act provided for process patents for chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and
food products, while product patents were not allowed for these sectors. This
provision was particularly beneficial for India's generic pharmaceutical
industry, enabling it to produce medicines that were not patented.
6. Public Interest:
o The Act was designed to protect public interest by promoting access to
essential products, especially medicines.

Amendments in the Indian Patent Act, 2005

India’s Patent Act of 1970 underwent major reforms in 2005 in response to India’s
**commitment to the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Agreement on Trade-
Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which mandates member
countries to bring their patent laws in line with international standards. The 2005
amendments were critical in bringing Indian law in compliance with TRIPS, specifically
regarding product patents in the pharmaceutical sector.

Key Features of the 2005 Amendments:

1. Introduction of Product Patents:

o One of the most significant changes was the introduction of product patents
for pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and food products. Before 2005, India allowed
only process patents for these categories, which meant that the country could
produce generic versions of patented products.
o After the 2005 amendment, India had to grant product patents in line with
TRIPS. This change affected the pharmaceutical industry, as patented
medicines could no longer be copied legally unless the patent expired.
2. Patent Duration:
o The duration of patents was extended to 20 years from the filing date for all
types of inventions, aligning with the global standard.
3. Compulsory Licensing:
o The amendment strengthened the provision for compulsory licensing,
allowing the government to intervene in situations where a patented invention
was not being sufficiently exploited, especially in the pharmaceutical sector.
o It also allowed compulsory licensing in case of national emergencies or
public health crises, as seen in the case of HIV/AIDS medicines.
4. Evergreening of Patents:
o The amendments introduced provisions to prevent evergreening, which is the
practice of obtaining new patents on slightly modified versions of existing
products to extend exclusivity. A new section (Section 3(d)) was introduced,
which restricts patenting of new forms or combinations of known substances
unless they show significant enhancement of efficacy.
5. Linking of Patents with Traditional Knowledge:

39
 o To prevent the exploitation of India’s traditional knowledge without
compensation, the 2005 amendments made provisions for protecting
traditional knowledge and biodiversity.
o The Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) was established to
safeguard the country’s traditional knowledge and ensure that it was not used
without consent.
6. Patent Examination Process:
o The amendments introduced a more streamlined process for patent
examination and patent opposition, making the process more efficient and
transparent.
7. Provisions for Patent Filing and Protection:
o The amendments made it easier to file patents online and introduced new
procedures for the international recognition of Indian patents.
o India became part of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), which allows
Indian inventors to file patents internationally.

Importance of the 1970 and 2005 Amendments

1. Encouraging Innovation:
o The 2005 amendments were designed to strike a balance between protecting
the interests of innovators and public welfare. The changes made India’s
patent law more robust and aligned it with global standards, creating an
environment conducive to innovation and research.
2. Boosting the Pharmaceutical Sector:
o While the introduction of product patents was initially seen as a challenge to
India’s generic pharmaceutical industry, the compulsory licensing
provisions have allowed India to continue producing affordable medicines for
domestic use and export.
3. Complying with International Agreements:
o The amendments helped India comply with international IP norms under the
WTO’s TRIPS agreement, ensuring that the country remained a competitive
player in the global market while protecting domestic public interests.
4. Facilitating Foreign Investment:
o The 20-year patent term and protection for new types of inventions make
India an attractive destination for foreign investors looking to commercialize
their innovations.

Conclusion

The Indian Patent Act, 1970, laid the foundation for India’s intellectual property rights
system, emphasizing public interest and facilitating the growth of India’s generic
pharmaceutical industry. The 2005 amendments brought India’s patent laws in line with
global standards, introducing product patents and strengthening provisions for
compulsory licensing and evergreening prevention. While these changes have made the
patent landscape more competitive, they have also ensured that public health needs remain a
priority, especially in the pharmaceutical sector.

40
PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY PROGRAMME
Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programme

The Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) is an international initiative aimed at accelerating

the patent examination process across participating countries. The goal is to streamline and
fast-track the examination of patent applications, thus reducing the time and cost involved in
obtaining patents in multiple jurisdictions.

The program allows applicants to request expedited examination in a participating country

based on a favorable ruling from another participating country’s patent office. The idea
behind the PPH is to leverage the examination work already done by one patent office,
thereby avoiding duplication and improving the efficiency of the global patent process.

Key Features of the PPH Programme:

1. Expedited Examination:
o The PPH allows an applicant to request expedited processing in a second
participating country if the application has already been examined and granted
(or allowed) in the first country. This can significantly shorten the time to get
a patent in the second country.
2. Cross-Border Cooperation:
o The program encourages international cooperation between patent offices by
enabling them to share information on patent applications and the results of
their examinations. This reduces redundant work and speeds up the overall
patenting process.
3. Use of Positive Examination Results:
o If a patent is granted in one country, the applicant can request that the results
(such as the search report or the decision) be used to expedite the process in
other countries. This is particularly useful when the initial examination results
are positive, meaning that the invention is considered novel and inventive.
4. No Additional Fees:
o Generally, there are no additional fees for participating in the PPH. The
applicant only needs to submit the relevant documents and request expedited
examination in the second country.

How the PPH Works:

1. Initial Filing: The applicant files a patent application in a country (for example, the
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the European Patent
Office (EPO), or the Indian Patent Office).
2. Granting of a Favorable Result: The applicant receives a positive outcome (e.g., a
Notice of Allowance or a grant decision) from the first country’s patent office. This
could mean the application has been deemed to meet the requirements of novelty,
inventiveness, and utility.

41
 3. Requesting the PPH: After receiving a favorable result, the applicant can submit a
request for expedited examination under the PPH program in another participating
country.
4. Examination and Grant: The second country's patent office uses the first country's
examination results to expedite the review of the application. If the second office
agrees with the initial findings, the patent is granted faster.

Benefits of the PPH Programme:

1. Reduced Examination Time:

o One of the main benefits of the PPH is that it accelerates the patent
examination process. Applicants can receive a decision on their application
much more quickly than through the standard examination process.
2. Cost Efficiency:
o By reducing the time to grant, applicants can save costs associated with
prolonged patent prosecution. Furthermore, the use of prior examination
results can avoid duplicative work, making the overall process more efficient.
3. Global Protection:
o The PPH facilitates faster patent protection in multiple jurisdictions, which is
particularly important for companies looking to protect their innovations
internationally. It also helps ensure that the patent process aligns across
different countries.
4. Increased Certainty:
o The PPH helps reduce the uncertainty that applicants may face while waiting
for a decision from multiple jurisdictions. A positive outcome from one
country can be leveraged in other countries, leading to a smoother process.
5. Efficient Patent Portfolio Management:
o For companies with a global presence, the PPH allows them to manage their
patent portfolios more effectively, ensuring that their intellectual property is
protected in all relevant markets.

Global Participation and India’s Role in the PPH

The Patent Prosecution Highway was launched in 2006 as a pilot program, and since then,
many countries have joined the initiative. Today, more than 25 patent offices worldwide
participate in the program, including major patent offices such as:

• USPTO (United States)

• JPO (Japan)
• EPO (European Patent Office)
• KIPO (Korea)
• SIPO (China)
• IP Australia
• Indian Patent Office (IPO)

42
India has been an active participant in the PPH program since its inclusion in 2015. The
Indian Patent Office (IPO) entered into agreements with other countries to implement the
PPH program, which has contributed to speeding up the patent examination process in India,
particularly for companies and inventors seeking international protection.

Conditions for Participation in the PPH

1. Eligible Patents:
o The PPH program is typically available for patent applications that have
been examined favorably by the patent office of one participating country.
2. Patent Examination Outcome:
o The applicant must have received a positive examination report, such as a
Notice of Allowance or Grant in the first office, which serves as the basis for
the PPH request.
3. No Duplicate Applications:
o Applicants must ensure that the same invention is not subject to duplicate
filings or patent protection in the same jurisdiction under different
classifications.
4. Time Limit:
o The time to request expedited examination under the PPH is generally limited
to a certain period after the positive examination outcome (e.g., within 12
months).

Conclusion

The Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) is an important initiative that promotes

international cooperation and accelerates the patent granting process. By leveraging positive
examination results from one country, applicants can fast-track the process in other
participating countries, reducing the time and cost of obtaining global patent protection. The
program is beneficial to companies, inventors, and industries that need to safeguard their
intellectual property in multiple markets quickly and efficiently. India’s involvement in the
PPH has further streamlined the patenting process, fostering innovation and increasing access
to global patent protection.

PATENTING IN INDIA, SECONDARY PATENTS AND ITS

RECENT ISSUE FOR INDIA
Patenting in India: An Overview

Patenting in India is governed by the Patents Act of 1970, which has undergone significant
amendments in 2005 to align with international intellectual property norms, particularly the
TRIPS agreement (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) under the World

43
Trade Organization (WTO). Patents in India are granted for inventions that meet the
requirements of novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability.

• Patentable Subject Matter: The Act covers products and processes that are new,
useful, and non-obvious. It excludes inventions related to atomic energy, certain
pharmaceutical substances, and traditional knowledge.
• Duration: The duration of a patent is 20 years from the filing date, after which the
patent expires and enters the public domain.

Secondary Patents in India

Secondary patents, also known as secondary innovation patents or secondary patents in

the pharmaceutical industry, refer to patents granted for minor modifications or incremental
innovations of an existing product. These can include:

1. New formulations of existing drugs (e.g., a different form like a tablet or injectable
form of a known compound).
2. Combination patents that combine two previously known compounds into a new
product.
3. Polymorphs, which are different crystalline forms of a known molecule that may
have better properties such as solubility or stability.
4. New uses of existing substances.
5. Manufacturing processes that are slightly modified or improved.

Types of Secondary Patents:

1. Evergreening of Patents: This is the practice of filing secondary patents for slight
modifications of an existing invention to extend the exclusivity period of the original
patent. The new patents are often granted for minor changes, which do not meet the
standards of novelty or inventiveness required for primary patents.
2. Polymorph Patents: These patents protect new crystal forms of known compounds.
While the new polymorph may have improved properties (such as better solubility),
critics argue that they may not always be sufficiently innovative to warrant a new
patent.
3. Combination Patents: Patents granted for combinations of known drugs or
chemicals can be used to extend the market exclusivity of existing drugs without
introducing truly new or groundbreaking innovations.

Recent Issues with Secondary Patents in India

Secondary patents have been a controversial issue in India, especially in the

pharmaceutical industry. The main concern is the practice of evergreening, where
companies file multiple secondary patents to extend the patent life of a product without
making significant innovations. This can lead to high drug prices and limited access to
essential medicines. Some key issues surrounding secondary patents in India include:

44
 1. Impact on Public Health:
o The patenting of incremental innovations such as new formulations or
combinations without significant technical advancements can lead to
artificially high drug prices.
o For instance, a secondary patent on a combination drug might prevent the
production of generic versions by other companies, thereby restricting access
to affordable medications for large sections of the population.
2. Challenges in Patent Examination:
o Secondary patents, particularly in the pharmaceutical sector, have sometimes
been granted by the Indian Patent Office despite not meeting the stringent
patentability criteria of novelty and non-obviousness.
o Critics argue that the patent office may approve such patents due to weak
examination practices or lack of sufficient resources to properly evaluate
the incremental innovations.
3. Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act:
o Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act, 1970, was introduced in the 2005
amendments to specifically prevent evergreening in the pharmaceutical
industry. It prohibits the granting of patents for new forms of known
substances unless they demonstrate enhanced efficacy. This provision has
been central in addressing the issue of secondary patents.
o The Supreme Court of India’s ruling in the Novartis case (2013) was a
landmark decision regarding Section 3(d), where the court denied a patent for
a new crystalline form of the cancer drug Imatinib (Glivec) on the grounds
that it did not show a significant enhancement of efficacy.
4. Opposition to Patents:
o In India, the system of opposition allows third parties (including competitors
and public interest groups) to challenge the grant of a patent. The pre-grant
and post-grant opposition provisions are frequently used to challenge
secondary patents that do not fulfill the required criteria of innovation.
o Many generic drug manufacturers and public health organizations in India
actively use the opposition process to prevent evergreening and ensure that
essential medicines remain affordable.

Recent Examples and Issues with Secondary Patents in India

1. Novartis and Glivec:

o One of the most prominent examples of the issue of secondary patents and
evergreening in India was the Novartis vs. Union of India case (2013), which
involved the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis seeking a patent for a
new form of Imatinib mesylate (Glivec). The Supreme Court ruled that the
drug did not meet the criteria for patentability under Section 3(d) of the
Indian Patent Act, emphasizing that a mere modification of an existing drug
does not qualify for a patent unless it shows a significant improvement in
therapeutic efficacy.
2. Bayer and Nexavar:
o Another significant case was Bayer’s Nexavar (Sorafenib), where Bayer
sought a patent for its cancer drug. The Indian Patent Office denied a patent
for a secondary formulation of the drug, and Natco Pharma was granted a

45
 compulsory license to produce a generic version at a much lower price. This
was hailed as a victory for public health and a step against the evergreening
of patents in India.

Recent Developments and Way Forward

1. Strengthening Patent Examination:

o The Indian Patent Office has been taking steps to improve its patent
examination process to ensure that patents, especially secondary patents, are
granted only if they meet the criteria of novelty, non-obviousness, and utility.
Enhanced training for examiners, as well as better access to patent databases,
is helping in this regard.
2. Public Health Advocacy:
o Advocacy groups, such as Doctors Without Borders (MSF), Health Action
International (HAI), and the Indian Network for People Living with
HIV/AIDS (INP+), continue to highlight the dangers of evergreening and
push for stricter standards for secondary patents, especially in the
pharmaceutical sector.
3. Innovation in Generic Drugs:
o Despite the challenges posed by secondary patents, India continues to be a
leader in generic drug production, and many companies are finding
innovative ways to circumvent secondary patents by developing new
formulations, drug delivery systems, or focusing on drugs not yet patented
in India.

Conclusion

Secondary patents, especially in the pharmaceutical sector, have raised significant concerns
in India, primarily related to the practice of evergreening. The Indian Patent Act has
provisions, particularly Section 3(d), that help prevent the grant of such patents, ensuring that
only genuinely innovative products are awarded patent protection. While India’s stance has
often been favorable to public health, ensuring access to affordable medicines, there remain
ongoing challenges in combating secondary patents and their potential impact on healthcare.
Stronger patent examination, increased public health advocacy, and effective use of the
opposition system are key to addressing these concerns.

PEPSICO'S PATENT ISSUE

PepsiCo has faced various patent-related issues over the years, many of which revolve
around its products, packaging, and processes. However, one of the more significant and
widely discussed patent issues involving PepsiCo relates to the battle over patent
infringement and intellectual property protection of certain innovations in its food and
beverage business.

46
Here are some notable PepsiCo patent-related issues:

1. PepsiCo’s Patent for Lays "Baked" Process

One of PepsiCo's key innovations was its baking process for producing Lays baked chips.
The company patented the method of creating low-fat chips by using a special baking
technique instead of traditional frying. PepsiCo sought to protect this unique process and
method under intellectual property rights to maintain a competitive edge.

Issue: PepsiCo's competitors in the snack industry, including companies like Pringles
(Kellogg’s), raised concerns about the patentability of the process and claimed
infringement on similar processes. PepsiCo had to defend its patent rights through legal
channels.

Resolution: PepsiCo won key patents related to its baked snacks, but issues related to
infringement claims and product innovations continued to arise as competitors adapted
similar baking techniques or introduced their own versions of low-fat snacks.

2. Patent Disputes with Competitors

PepsiCo has also faced patent issues involving its various flavoring systems and food
technologies. In the food and beverage industry, patents often cover the specific chemical
compositions or methods used to flavor products, extend shelf life, or improve packaging.
PepsiCo has been involved in patent disputes over these areas, particularly with rivals like
Coca-Cola and Nestlé.

**3. Pepsico vs. Coca-Cola

PepsiCo and Coca-Cola are long-standing competitors, and intellectual property disputes
have often arisen between them, particularly regarding brand protection and packaging
designs, although these are usually not patent issues directly. For example, the companies
have clashed over the use of certain trademarked elements, designs, and packaging.

While these disputes aren't directly related to patents, they show the broader competitive
environment where both companies seek to protect their intellectual property across several
dimensions, including trademarks, patents, and trade secrets.

4. PepsiCo's Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Competitors

PepsiCo has also been involved in lawsuits against other companies for patent infringement.
For example, PepsiCo filed suits against smaller companies or tech firms that were perceived
to infringe on PepsiCo’s patented packaging and beverage dispensing technologies.

47
 • In some cases, PepsiCo has also fought to protect the designs of its packaging and
unique distribution technologies, asserting that rival companies were copying
elements of its innovation.

5. PepsiCo’s Patent for Water Purification Technology

In recent years, PepsiCo, through its subsidiary Aquafina, has patented technologies related
to the purification and filtration of water. These technologies focus on improving the
purity of the water, removing contaminants, and enhancing the flavor of bottled water.

Issue: Similar purification technologies and bottled water production processes can lead to
patent disputes, especially when competitors introduce similar filtration systems. PepsiCo
has had to protect its filtration technology patents to ensure that competitors do not infringe
upon them.

6. Patent Issues Related to Sustainable Packaging

PepsiCo has also been involved in the sustainable packaging space, focusing on the
patenting of biodegradable and recyclable packaging systems. As environmental concerns
grow, PepsiCo has increasingly focused on innovations in sustainable materials and
recyclable packaging.

Issue: PepsiCo’s packaging innovations face competition from other major brands who are
also patenting sustainable packaging solutions. Additionally, there are ongoing issues with
companies challenging the validity of packaging patents based on prior art.

Recent Developments and Challenges in Patents

In recent years, there has been growing pressure on major food and beverage companies like
PepsiCo to ensure that their patents reflect genuine innovations and are not used for
evergreening purposes. For instance, there have been cases where companies may be
accused of filing patents for minor modifications rather than substantial innovations. This
could lead to legal challenges based on patentability under global standards.

PepsiCo’s patent disputes and efforts to protect its intellectual property are part of a broader
challenge faced by companies that need to strike a balance between protecting their
innovations and fostering competition. Issues such as patent infringement, secondary
patents, and the scope of patent protection are increasingly important, particularly in
industries where innovation cycles are rapid, and competitors frequently introduce similar
products.

48
Conclusion

PepsiCo’s patent issues primarily revolve around protecting its innovations in the areas of
food processing, packaging, and beverage technologies. While the company has faced
challenges from competitors over patent infringement, it has also been actively involved in
defending its intellectual property and innovating in the areas of sustainable practices and
product development. As with many large corporations, managing patent portfolios and
defending against infringement claims remain crucial to maintaining a competitive advantage
in the food and beverage industry.

THE PPV & FR ACT 2001

The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights (PPV & FR) Act, 2001, is a
significant legislation in India designed to protect the rights of farmers and breeders over
plant varieties. It aims to encourage the development of new plant varieties, ensuring the
conservation of genetic diversity, and providing farmers with recognition and rewards for
their contributions to agriculture.

Key Features of the PPV & FR Act, 2001

1. Protection of Plant Varieties

• Plant Variety Protection: The Act provides protection to new plant varieties by
granting exclusive rights to breeders, farmers, and other stakeholders. This
encourages the development of new plant varieties with enhanced traits like disease
resistance, higher yield, or improved quality.
• Criteria for Protection:
o The variety must be distinct (different from existing varieties),
o It must be uniform (same characteristics across the variety),
o It must be stable (traits remain consistent when propagated).
• Duration of Protection:
o The protection for plant varieties is granted for 18 years for crops and 15
years for trees and vines.

2. Farmers' Rights

• Recognition of Farmers' Contributions: The Act recognizes the significant

contributions of farmers to plant breeding, particularly in conserving traditional
knowledge and local varieties.
• Farmers' Rights Include:
o The right to save, use, exchange, and sell seeds of protected plant varieties.
o The right to receive compensation for the development of new varieties,
including the recognition of traditional knowledge and innovations made by
farmers.
• Benefit Sharing: Farmers are entitled to receive benefits when their varieties are used
for commercial purposes. This ensures that farmers are rewarded for their role in the
development and conservation of plant genetic resources.

49
3. National Gene Bank and Farmers' Registry

• The Act provides for the establishment of a National Gene Bank, which stores seeds
and genetic material of various plant species, both indigenous and developed
varieties.
• Farmers' Registry: The Act also establishes a registry of farmers who cultivate
traditional varieties, ensuring they are recognized for their efforts in preserving
biodiversity.

4. Plant Variety Protection Rights

• The Plant Variety Protection Rights granted under the Act allow breeders, farmers,
and researchers to protect their newly developed plant varieties from being copied
without permission.
• Incentives for Breeders and Researchers: The Act promotes research in the
agriculture sector by providing legal recognition and rights to breeders, including
profit-sharing with farmers and communities.

5. Benefit Sharing and Compulsory Licensing

• The Act contains provisions for compulsory licensing, enabling others to use the
protected plant varieties under certain conditions, such as public interest or when the
breeder fails to meet the demands for seeds or varieties.
• The benefit-sharing system ensures that communities or individuals whose
knowledge contributed to the development of new plant varieties receive financial
rewards.

6. Plant Variety Protection Application Process

• The Act established the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights
Authority (PPV&FR Authority), which is responsible for granting protection to
plant varieties, maintaining the Plant Variety Register, and resolving disputes.
• To obtain protection, breeders must submit an application to the authority, providing
details about the variety, its characteristics, and its potential benefits.

7. Enforcement and Appeals

• Infringement and Enforcement: The PPV & FR Act provides mechanisms for the
enforcement of plant variety protection, including the infringement of plant variety
rights. If anyone infringes the rights, they are liable to penalties and fines.
• Appeals: If a breeder or farmer is dissatisfied with the decision of the PPV&FR
Authority, they can file an appeal with the Intellectual Property Appellate Board
(IPAB).

8. International Obligations

• The Act aligns India’s national law with its obligations under the TRIPS (Trade-
Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) agreement, which mandates the
protection of plant varieties through either patent, sui generis, or a combination of
both systems.

50
9. Focus on Farmers' Access to Seeds

• The Act also emphasizes that farmers' access to seeds should not be unduly restricted
by the plant variety protection system. Farmers retain the right to save, use, and sell
seeds of protected varieties, which distinguishes it from commercial seed companies'
rights.

Importance of the PPV & FR Act, 2001

• Promotes Agricultural Innovation: By protecting plant varieties, the Act encourages

innovation in the agriculture sector, enhancing the productivity and resilience of
crops.
• Empowers Farmers: It gives farmers the right to participate in the development of
new varieties and ensures they benefit from the use of their indigenous knowledge.
• Conservation of Biodiversity: The PPV & FR Act aids in the conservation of
traditional plant varieties and facilitates the development of new plant varieties that
are resistant to diseases, pests, and changing climatic conditions.
• Compliance with International Treaties: The Act brings India in compliance with
international intellectual property treaties, such as the UPOV (International Union
for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants) convention and the WTO's TRIPS
agreement.

Challenges and Criticism

• Complex Process: The process of registering and protecting plant varieties can be
lengthy and complicated for small-scale farmers and breeders.
• Implementation Issues: There are concerns about the effective enforcement of
farmers' rights and the benefit-sharing system, especially in cases where large
corporations exploit the system for their benefit without fairly compensating farmers.
• Potential for Exploitation: Critics argue that multinational corporations could
exploit the patent system to privatize traditional knowledge and indigenous plant
varieties, thus disadvantaging small-scale farmers and local communities.

Conclusion

The PPV & FR Act, 2001 plays a critical role in the Indian agricultural system by providing
legal protection to plant varieties and the rights of farmers. It encourages agricultural
innovation, helps conserve biodiversity, and ensures that farmers receive recognition and
benefits for their contributions. However, there are challenges related to the implementation
and safeguarding of the interests of small farmers, which need to be addressed for the
effective functioning of the system.

51
PATENTABILITY OF COMPUTER-RELATED INVENTIONS
The patentability of computer-related inventions (CRIs) is a subject of significant legal
and technical discussion, particularly in jurisdictions like the United States, Europe, and
India. This is because many computer-related inventions, especially software and
algorithms, are viewed as abstract ideas that, in some cases, do not meet the typical criteria
for patentability. However, several legal frameworks have developed rules and exceptions to
deal with such innovations.

General Criteria for Patentability

For any invention, including computer-related ones, to be patentable, it must meet the
following essential criteria:

1. Novelty: The invention must be new and not have been disclosed publicly in any form
prior to the filing of the patent application.
2. Inventive Step (Non-obviousness): The invention must not be obvious to someone
skilled in the relevant field based on prior art. This ensures that only true innovations
are patented.
3. Utility: The invention must have a practical application and provide a technical or
functional solution to a problem.
4. Enablement: The patent application must describe the invention in sufficient detail
that someone skilled in the field can reproduce the invention.
5. Patentable Subject Matter: This is one of the key challenges for computer-related
inventions. The invention must fall within the patentable categories of subject matter
(typically, processes, machines, manufactures, or compositions of matter).

Key Challenges with Computer-Related Inventions

Computer-related inventions often involve abstract concepts, such as software algorithms or

business methods, which may not meet traditional patent requirements. Here are some
specific challenges:

1. Abstract Nature of Software: Software, by itself, is often seen as abstract and not a
"technical solution" to a problem. Thus, software that doesn't have a tangible
application or doesn't improve the technical functioning of a computer system might
not be patentable.
2. Business Methods: Inventions related to business methods (e.g., an innovative way of
managing an online auction or customer data) often involve algorithms or processes
that can be implemented through software but are seen as abstract, making them non-
patentable in some jurisdictions.
3. Technical Effect: Many jurisdictions require that a computer-related invention
produce a technical effect or solve a technical problem in a tangible way. This
means that software inventions must show how they improve the functioning of a
computer system or solve a technical issue, rather than just implementing an abstract
business method.

Patentability of CRIs in Key Jurisdictions

52
1. United States (USPTO)

In the United States, the patentability of computer-related inventions has evolved

significantly over the years. Historically, software patents were more easily granted.
However, a series of court decisions and changes to patent law have made the process more
restrictive.

• Key Legal Precedent: The Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank (2014) decision by the U.S.
Supreme Court dramatically impacted the patentability of abstract ideas, including
many software-based inventions. The ruling created a two-step framework:
1. Step 1: Determine whether the claimed invention is directed to an abstract
idea.
2. Step 2: If it is an abstract idea, determine whether the invention includes
additional elements that provide an "inventive concept" (i.e., make the
invention more than just an abstract idea).

This decision led to a higher standard for software patents, particularly those that claim
abstract ideas or business methods without a tangible technical solution.

• Software and Algorithms: Software alone, without a clear technical solution or

hardware integration, is often not considered patentable unless it solves a technical
problem. Algorithms for data processing or encryption, for instance, can be patented
if they demonstrate a technical effect or improve the computer's functioning.

2. European Union (EPO)

The European Patent Office (EPO) follows a more stringent approach compared to the U.S.
regarding the patentability of software and algorithms.

• Exclusion from Patentability: Under the European Patent Convention (EPC),

software "as such" is generally excluded from patentability. However, if the software
has a technical character or contributes to the technical solution of a problem, it
may be patentable. The key criterion is whether the invention provides a technical
effect that goes beyond the mere execution of a business method or abstract idea.
• Examples of Patentable CRIs:
o Software that improves the performance of hardware (e.g., faster
processors or new ways to store data efficiently).
o Innovative processes that involve a combination of hardware and software
elements that address technical problems (e.g., encryption algorithms that
improve security).

3. India

India's Patent Act, 1970, amended in 2005, provides guidelines on the patentability of
computer-related inventions. Under Section 3(k) of the Act, software per se is excluded from
being patented, but computer-implemented inventions (CIIs) can be patented if they
demonstrate a technical effect.

• Exclusions: The Act excludes patents for:

53
 o Algorithms (if they are not integrated with hardware or do not provide a
technical effect),
o Business methods, and
o Mathematical methods or mental processes.
• Patentability Criteria: A computer-related invention must show a technical
advancement (e.g., improving the performance of hardware or solving a technical
problem) to be eligible for a patent. If an invention only involves a non-technical
business method implemented using a computer, it will not be patented.

4. Other Jurisdictions

• Australia: Similar to the U.S. and EU, Australia allows software patents if the
software produces a technical effect. The legal test is whether the software causes a
new or improved functionality of a computer or device.
• Japan: Japan has a relatively more lenient approach to software patents, provided that
the software-related invention has a technical character and solves a technical
problem.

Key Considerations for Patentability of CRIs

1. Technical Contribution: In many jurisdictions, a computer-related invention will be

considered patentable if it provides a technical solution to a technical problem, such
as improving computer hardware performance, optimizing data processing, or
enhancing the functionality of computing systems.
2. Integration with Hardware: In many countries, software must be closely integrated
with hardware to be considered patentable. For example, a novel method of improving
a computer’s operating system or optimizing hardware performance would be
patentable.
3. Clarifying Legal Standards: Different countries and legal systems are evolving their
standards for patentability of software and algorithms. The trend is moving toward
requiring that software innovations provide a substantial technical contribution
beyond just abstract ideas.

Conclusion

The patentability of computer-related inventions is complex and varies across jurisdictions.

While software and algorithms are often excluded from patent protection as abstract ideas,
many jurisdictions allow them to be patented if they solve technical problems or offer
technical solutions. The key to patenting computer-related inventions lies in demonstrating
that the invention is not just an abstract concept but contributes to the technical functioning of
a computer or its hardware.

Understanding the legal nuances and requirements of each jurisdiction is critical for those
seeking to protect their computer-related inventions through patents.

54
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEX, MAJOR FINDINGS OF
THE IIPI 2018
The Intellectual Property Index (IPI) is a global ranking of countries based on their
intellectual property (IP) systems, which is published by the Global Innovation Policy
Center (GIPC) of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The index evaluates how well countries
protect intellectual property rights, focusing on factors such as patent and trademark laws,
enforcement, enforcement practices, and general business environments that influence IP
innovation and protection.

The IPI 2018 assessed 45 countries across 45 indicators under seven categories, including:

1. Patents, Related Rights, and Limitations

2. Copyrights, Related Rights, and Limitations
3. Trademarks, Related Rights, and Limitations
4. Enforcement
5. Trade Secrets
6. Commercialization of IP Assets
7. Designs

Major Findings of the IIPI 2018

1. Top Performers:
o Sweden, the United States, and the United Kingdom were the top three
countries in the IIPI 2018. These countries showed strong protection and
enforcement of IP rights and demonstrated well-developed legal and
regulatory frameworks, which foster innovation and encourage investment.
2. Strengthened IP Enforcement:
o Countries with stronger enforcement mechanisms ranked higher. Enforcement
of IP rights, including penalties for infringement, effective border
enforcement, and judicial processes, was a key focus in the rankings.
o Enforcement challenges, such as counterfeiting and piracy, were observed to
negatively affect some countries’ rankings.
3. Global Trends in IP Protection:
o The GIPC 2018 highlighted the growing importance of intellectual property
as a tool for economic development, especially for countries focused on
innovation-driven growth. Countries with policies that encourage R&D,
protect IP assets, and support commercialization of innovations showed a
positive correlation with higher rankings.
o It was noted that developing economies were improving their IP
infrastructure, though many still faced challenges related to enforcement, IP
awareness, and capacity building.
4. Key Improvements in IP Systems:
o Some countries had made notable improvements in their IP systems in areas
like the digitization of IP processes, streamlining IP administration, and
making IP more accessible for entrepreneurs and SMEs (small and medium-
sized enterprises).
o For example, India, which had previously lagged, showed positive progress in
IP administration and trademark application processes.

55
 5. Challenges for Developing Countries:
o The IIPI 2018 emphasized that many developing countries still faced
challenges in aligning their national IP laws with international standards. This
included challenges such as lack of IP education, insufficient IP enforcement,
and the high costs of IP protection for small and medium enterprises (SMEs).
o Brazil, China, and India were noted for having mixed performances in the
index, with certain areas like patent protection and enforcement practices
improving, while concerns about IP piracy and weak enforcement remained.
6. Trade Secrets:
o Trade secret protection emerged as an important area of focus. The
protection of trade secrets in certain countries, such as the U.S. and Sweden,
was recognized as strong, while other countries were called upon to improve
legislation and enforcement related to trade secrets.
7. Digital and Online IP Issues:
o The report discussed the challenges of addressing online infringement,
particularly with the rise of e-commerce and digital technologies. Countries
with robust laws against online piracy and counterfeit goods performed better
in the rankings.
o Issues related to digital copyright, including enforcement of IP rights in
online environments and against digital piracy, were also key considerations
for the rankings.
8. IP and Innovation:
o The IIPI 2018 highlighted the link between IP protection and innovation,
noting that countries with stronger IP laws tend to foster more dynamic and
competitive economies. Intellectual property was identified as a crucial driver
for the global innovation economy and technological advancement.

Notable Changes in the 2018 Index

• India made significant strides, improving in areas such as trademark application

processes and the digitization of IP systems, though challenges in patent protection
and enforcement remained.
• China faced criticism for IP theft and counterfeiting, though there were
improvements noted in the enforcement of patents and trademarks.
• Brazil was highlighted for its progress in aligning its IP systems with international
standards, though issues with enforcement and access to IP for SMEs were noted.
• Some developing nations saw improvements in IP education and administration,
contributing to their higher rankings in later years.

Conclusion

The Intellectual Property Index (IPI) 2018 emphasized the growing importance of robust
IP systems in fostering innovation, economic growth, and global competitiveness. While
developed countries generally performed better, emerging economies were making
significant strides in improving their IP environments. The report highlighted the importance
of enforcement, commercialization, and IP education for countries to harness the full
potential of their IP systems.

56
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, BASIC CONCEPT OF
INDUATRIAL DESIGN, PROTECTION OF
INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS
Industrial Design: Basic Concept and Protection

An industrial design refers to the aesthetic aspect of an article, primarily its shape,
configuration, pattern, or ornamentation, which is applied to a product to make it visually
appealing. Industrial designs play a key role in adding value to products by making them
attractive to consumers, thus influencing purchasing decisions.

Basic Concept of Industrial Design

1. Definition: An industrial design refers to the visual aspects of an object or product. It

includes the shape, pattern, color, texture, or decoration that gives the product a
unique and distinctive appearance. For example, the design of a smartphone, car
body, furniture, or household appliances can be protected as an industrial design.
2. Features of Industrial Design:
o Aesthetic Appeal: The main goal of industrial design is to enhance the visual
appeal of a product, making it more attractive and functional in the
marketplace.
o Non-Functional Aspects: Unlike patents that focus on functionality or
technical features, industrial designs primarily protect the non-functional
visual attributes of a product.
o Originality: To qualify for protection, the design must be new and original. If
a design is already publicly known or used in the market, it may not be eligible
for protection.
o Design Registration: An industrial design needs to be registered with the
relevant intellectual property office to be legally protected. The registration
grants exclusive rights to the owner, preventing others from using, copying, or
imitating the design.
3. Examples:
o The design of smartphone cases, packaging, footwear, car interiors, and
electronics.
o Fashion designs of clothing or accessories.
o Appliances, such as the aesthetic design of a blender or a coffee maker.

Protection of Industrial Designs

The protection of industrial designs is essential for promoting creativity and innovation. A
protected design provides the owner with the exclusive right to use, license, or sell the design,
thereby preventing others from copying or reproducing the design without authorization.

International Framework for Industrial Design Protection

1. The Hague Agreement (WIPO):

57
 oThe Hague Agreement, administered by the World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO), provides a system for the international registration
of industrial designs.
o Through this system, an inventor or designer can register their design in
multiple countries with a single application, making it more convenient and
cost-effective for international protection.
2. National Protection:
o Most countries have their own industrial design laws, and designs can be
registered through national IP offices. In many countries, industrial designs are
granted protection under specific laws related to design rights.
o For example, in India, industrial designs are protected under the Designs Act,
2000, which provides for the registration of new and original designs.
3. Duration of Protection:
o The protection period for industrial designs is typically 5 to 10 years, with an
option to extend the protection in some jurisdictions. After the expiration of
the protection period, the design enters the public domain, and others can
freely use it.
o For example, under the Hague Agreement, designs can be protected for an
initial period of 5 years, renewable up to a maximum of 15 years.

Requirements for Protecting Industrial Designs

To be eligible for protection, industrial designs must meet the following requirements:

1. Novelty: The design must be new and original. It should not have been disclosed or
used publicly before the filing date.
2. Non-Functionality: The design must not be purely functional. It should focus on
aesthetic features that are separate from the technical or functional aspects of the
product.
3. Visual Appearance: The protection only applies to the visual characteristics of the
product. It does not cover technical or functional features (which are covered by
patents).
4. Registration: Protection for industrial designs is generally granted through a formal
registration process with an IP office. In some countries, designs are automatically
protected when created, but registration provides stronger legal protection.

Scope of Protection

Once registered, the owner of an industrial design has the exclusive right to use, reproduce, or
license the design. The scope of protection includes:

1. Right to Prevent Infringement: The designer can prevent others from copying,
using, or imitating their design without permission. This can help protect the design in
the market and maintain its uniqueness.
2. Legal Remedies for Infringement: In case of infringement, the design owner can
take legal action to stop unauthorized use, seek damages, or obtain other remedies.
3. Licensing: The designer can license the design to third parties for commercial use,
allowing for revenue generation.

Challenges and Considerations in Industrial Design Protection

58
 1. Global Challenges: The protection of industrial designs in the global market can be
challenging due to differences in IP laws and registration procedures across countries.
For example, some countries might not have robust enforcement mechanisms, leading
to difficulties in protecting designs internationally.
2. Limited Protection for Functionality: If a design includes functional or technical
features, it may not be fully protected as an industrial design. In such cases, the design
may require a patent for technical innovation.
3. Design Around: After the expiration of the design's protection, competitors may
design around the protected features and create products that look similar but avoid
infringing the registered design.
4. Piracy and Counterfeiting: Industrial design owners often face issues related to
counterfeiting and the infringement of their designs in markets, especially in
industries like fashion, electronics, and automotive.

Conclusion

Industrial design protection encourages innovation and creativity by granting exclusive

rights to creators for the visual design of products. It ensures that designers and companies
can capitalize on their aesthetic innovations, thus promoting economic growth. However,
designers must meet specific criteria like novelty and originality, and they should be
proactive in registering their designs to safeguard their rights effectively.

In the globalized marketplace, international registration systems like the Hague Agreement
help designers protect their creations across multiple jurisdictions with ease, ensuring their
designs are safeguarded on a global scale.

GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION, ADVANTAGES FOR

OBTAINING PROTECTION FOR AA GI, WHO ALL CAN
APPLY FOR GI REGISTRATION?, VALIDITY OF
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION, GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS AT THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL
Geographical Indication (GI)

A Geographical Indication (GI) is a sign used on products that have a specific geographical
origin and possess qualities, reputation, or characteristics inherent to that location. It serves as
an indication that a product comes from a particular place and is made using traditional
methods or natural resources unique to that region. GIs are used primarily for agricultural
products, food items, handicrafts, and other local products.

Advantages of Obtaining Protection for a GI

1. Legal Protection: Registration of a GI provides legal protection against unauthorized

use by others. This helps prevent imitation or counterfeit goods that mislead
consumers into believing that a product is from a particular place when it is not.

59
 2. Economic Benefits: GI protection can help improve the marketability and value of
the product by highlighting its quality, reputation, and origin. This, in turn, can
increase demand and lead to higher prices for local producers.
3. Promoting Local Identity: GIs help in preserving and promoting traditional
knowledge, culture, and craftsmanship. It enables producers to capitalize on their
unique local heritage and build a distinct identity for their products in the market.
4. Market Access and Export Opportunities: A registered GI opens up new avenues
for market expansion, both nationally and internationally. It can help local producers
access more competitive and global markets where consumers prefer authentic,
origin-based products.
5. Protection of Traditional Knowledge: GIs protect traditional methods and processes
that are tied to specific geographic areas. This ensures the sustainability and
continuity of cultural heritage and local expertise.
6. Preventing Misuse: It prevents the use of a name or symbol that is misleading or
falsely associated with the region of origin. Without protection, there could be
misappropriation of the name by outsiders.

Who Can Apply for GI Registration?

• Producers or Associations: Any group or association of producers who are involved

in the production of the product in question and whose product possesses qualities or
characteristics that can be attributed to its geographical origin can apply for GI
registration. This can include:
o Farmers
o Artisans
o Producers of agricultural, handicraft, or food products
• Geographical Indication Authority: In India, the Geographical Indications
Registry is the authority responsible for the registration of GIs. Producers or
organizations representing a group of producers apply to the Geographical
Indications Registry for protection.
• Collective Applications: An organization or association representing the collective
interests of the producers of a particular region (like a cooperative or a producers'
association) can apply on behalf of all members. The organization must demonstrate
that it represents a significant number of producers who share a common interest in
the product.

Validity of Geographical Indication

• Initial Protection: The protection of a Geographical Indication lasts for 10 years

from the date of registration. After this period, the GI can be renewed indefinitely as
long as the product continues to meet the requirements specified in the application.
• Ongoing Requirements: The product must maintain the qualities, characteristics,
and reputation that justify the use of the GI. If a GI is misused, or the conditions are
no longer met, its protection can be challenged, and it may lose its registered status.
• Renewal: A GI registration can be renewed every 10 years for an unlimited number
of times, as long as the product continues to meet the criteria of geographical origin
and reputation. Producers must prove that the product maintains its distinctiveness
and links to the origin.

Geographical Indications at the International Level

60
 • International Recognition and Protection: GI protection varies from country to
country. While some nations have a strong national legal framework for GIs, others
might not offer sufficient protection for geographically linked products. To
standardize protection internationally, various agreements and treaties have been
established:
o TRIPS Agreement (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
Rights): Under the TRIPS Agreement, countries that are members of the
World Trade Organization (WTO) are required to provide protection to GIs.
TRIPS sets out general standards for the protection of GIs, ensuring they are
protected from misuse, imitation, or false advertising.
o Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and Their
International Registration: Managed by the World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO), the Lisbon Agreement enables countries to protect
GIs internationally by registering them with WIPO, which ensures that the
registered GIs receive protection in all member countries.
o Geographical Indications in the EU: The European Union offers protection
for GIs through the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) and Protected
Geographical Indication (PGI) systems. These systems help protect the
reputation of regional products within the EU market.
o Bilateral and Multilateral Agreements: Countries often enter into bilateral
or multilateral agreements for mutual recognition and protection of GIs. These
agreements allow producers in one country to export their GI-protected
products to another country with assurances of protection.
o India and GI Protection: India is a member of the WTO and a signatory to
the TRIPS Agreement, which ensures that Indian GIs are protected globally.
India has also been involved in international GI protection agreements
through WIPO.
• Challenges in International GI Protection:
o Different Legal Frameworks: While many countries provide legal protection
for GIs, the level of protection and enforcement mechanisms may differ
significantly. Some countries, particularly in developing regions, might face
challenges in implementing international GI agreements.
o Counterfeit Products: The rise of counterfeiting and the sale of fake products
with similar names can pose significant challenges in enforcing GI protection
internationally. Proper monitoring and enforcement at the global level are
needed to maintain the integrity of GIs.
• Promoting International Trade: GI protection helps open doors for products to gain
recognition in international markets. For instance, products like Darjeeling tea,
Basmati rice, and Kashmiri saffron have been granted GI status in India, enabling
them to be marketed globally with a distinct and protected identity.

Conclusion

Geographical Indications (GIs) provide essential protection for products that are deeply
rooted in their local culture and geographical origins. The protection of GIs offers significant
economic, cultural, and social advantages to producers, enhancing product value,
marketability, and global recognition.

• Who can apply: Producers or organizations representing a group of producers whose

product is linked to its geographic origin.

61
 • Validity: GIs are valid for 10 years and can be renewed indefinitely.
• International Protection: GIs are protected under international frameworks like the
TRIPS Agreement, the Lisbon Agreement, and through bilateral agreements.

The effective use and enforcement of GIs can significantly contribute to preserving cultural
heritage, promoting sustainable development, and enhancing the global competitiveness of
unique products.

PAKISTAN TO CHALLENGE INDIA'S APPLICATION FOR

EXCLUSIVE GI TAG FOR BASMATI RICE IN EU
The dispute over Basmati rice between India and Pakistan regarding Geographical
Indication (GI) status has been a contentious issue in international trade. In September 2020,
India's application for an exclusive GI tag for Basmati rice in the European Union (EU)
prompted Pakistan to challenge the move, citing shared cultural and historical links to the
product.

Background

1. India's Application for GI Tag in the EU:

o India filed for an exclusive GI tag for Basmati rice in the EU, claiming it as a
product of Indian origin.
o India had already granted Basmati rice a GI tag domestically under its
Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act,
1999.
2. Pakistan's Reaction:
o Pakistan, being a significant producer and exporter of Basmati rice, contested
India's claim.
o It argued that Basmati rice is grown in both India and Pakistan and holds
cultural and historical significance in the Indo-Gangetic plains, which
include regions in both countries.
3. Exports and Economic Importance:
o India and Pakistan are the largest exporters of Basmati rice globally.
o The EU is a critical market for Basmati rice, with substantial exports from
both countries. In 2019, India exported €300 million worth of Basmati rice to
the EU, while Pakistan exported €80 million.
4. Shared Heritage:
o Pakistan claims that the Indus Valley Civilization played a significant role in
the origin of Basmati rice and that the crop has been cultivated for centuries on
both sides of the border.

Pakistan’s Challenge

1. Formal Objection:

62
 o Pakistan formally opposed India’s exclusive GI application in the EU in
December 2020.
o Pakistan submitted evidence supporting its claim that Basmati rice is not
exclusive to India, emphasizing its geographical and cultural significance to
Pakistan as well.
2. Legal Basis for Opposition:
o Under the EU GI framework, a product must meet strict criteria demonstrating
its unique geographical origin and historical link.
o Pakistan argued that India's application violates this principle by excluding
Pakistan, where Basmati rice is also grown and has an identical history and
reputation.
3. Pakistan’s Own GI Registration:
o Pakistan had delayed granting domestic GI protection to its Basmati rice.
However, in 2020, the country approved its Geographical Indications
(Registration and Protection) Act, paving the way for domestic GI
registration and challenging India's claim internationally.

Key Points of Contention

1. Exclusivity:
o India seeks exclusive rights over the term "Basmati" in the EU, effectively
blocking Pakistan's access to use the term for its rice exports in the region.
2. Cultural and Historical Overlap:
o Both countries have shared a cultural and historical connection with Basmati
rice since pre-independence. Pakistan argues that it is unreasonable for India
to claim sole ownership.
3. Economic Implications:
o A GI tag for India alone could undermine Pakistan’s ability to market its
Basmati rice in the EU and other regions.
4. Labeling in the EU Market:
o If India secures the exclusive GI tag, rice exports from Pakistan would need to
be marketed under a different name, potentially reducing their appeal to
consumers familiar with "Basmati" as a premium product.

International Framework and Possible Outcomes

1. EU’s Role:
o The European Union will review the evidence and arguments presented by
both countries before making a decision. It will assess the historical and
geographical claims of both parties to determine the rightful holder of the GI
tag.
2. Possible Outcomes:
o Exclusive GI for India: India may succeed in obtaining sole GI rights, which
could negatively impact Pakistan’s exports to the EU.

63
 o Joint GI Tag: The EU might decide to grant a shared GI tag to both India and
Pakistan, similar to the champagne GI tag shared by multiple regions in
France.
o Rejection of India’s Application: If Pakistan successfully demonstrates its
case, the EU could reject India's claim for exclusivity.

Implications for India and Pakistan

For India:

• An exclusive GI tag would strengthen India’s market position in the EU and globally.
• It could increase the premium and demand for Indian Basmati rice.

For Pakistan:

• Losing the challenge could severely affect Pakistan’s rice exports, particularly to the
EU, its key market.
• Pakistan’s ability to market its Basmati rice globally may also be impacted, as GI
recognition in the EU often influences other markets.

Way Forward

1. Negotiations:
o Both countries could explore the possibility of a joint GI registration,
emphasizing their shared heritage while ensuring fair market access for both.
2. Strengthening Domestic Systems:
o Pakistan needs to further strengthen its domestic GI framework to support its
claims for other products internationally.
3. Collaborative Marketing:
o A joint marketing strategy could enhance the global reputation of Basmati rice
as a premium product from the South Asian region, benefiting both countries.

Conclusion

The dispute over Basmati rice highlights the importance of Geographical Indications in
protecting the economic and cultural identity of products. While India seeks to solidify its
dominance in the global market, Pakistan’s challenge reflects its vested interest in
safeguarding its own share of the Basmati rice trade. The EU’s decision will have significant
implications for both countries and their ability to market Basmati rice internationally.

64
GI TAG SOUGHT FOR INDIA'S COSTLIEST MUSHROOM
India is seeking a Geographical Indication (GI) tag for the Gucci mushroom, known for
being the costliest mushroom in the country. This rare and prized variety, scientifically
called Morchella esculenta, grows naturally in the forests of the Himalayan region and
commands a high price both in domestic and international markets due to its unique taste,
medicinal properties, and scarcity.

About the Gucci Mushroom

1. Scientific Name: Morchella esculenta

2. Common Names: Gucci, Morel
3. Characteristics:
o A wild variety of mushroom found in the Himalayan region, particularly in
Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and parts of Jammu and Kashmir.
o It is known for its earthy flavor and is used in gourmet dishes worldwide.
o The mushroom has medicinal properties, including being rich in antioxidants
and aiding in immunity boosting.
4. Economic Value:
o Price: Gucci mushrooms can sell for as much as ₹25,000 to ₹30,000 per
kilogram in local markets and even higher internationally.
o It is a significant source of livelihood for local communities in the Himalayan
region, where it is harvested by hand.

Importance of the GI Tag

1. Economic Benefits:
o The GI tag would help protect the unique identity of Gucci mushrooms,
ensuring that only produce from designated Himalayan regions can use the
name "Gucci."
o It would boost the income of local communities and increase export
opportunities.
2. Market Protection:
o A GI tag would prevent misuse or misrepresentation of the product by
ensuring that only genuine Gucci mushrooms from the Himalayan region can
be marketed under the name.
3. Promotion of Regional Heritage:
o The tag would highlight the cultural and geographical link between the
mushroom and the Himalayan communities, promoting sustainable harvesting
and tourism in the region.
4. Global Recognition:
o The GI tag would enhance the international reputation of the Gucci
mushroom, opening doors for greater demand in gourmet and medicinal
markets worldwide.

65
Challenges

1. Sustainability:
o Overharvesting of wild mushrooms could lead to depletion of natural stocks.
Sustainable harvesting practices will need to be promoted alongside GI
recognition.
2. Quality Control:
o Ensuring that only authentic Gucci mushrooms are sold under the name may
require robust mechanisms for certification and quality control.
3. Legal and Administrative Delays:
o The process of applying for and securing a GI tag can be lengthy, and delays
could hinder the immediate benefits to local communities.

Conclusion

Securing a GI tag for the Gucci mushroom would not only protect this rare and valuable
product but also provide significant economic, cultural, and ecological benefits. By ensuring
authenticity and promoting sustainable harvesting practices, India can preserve the heritage of
this prized mushroom while improving the livelihoods of Himalayan communities.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION

AND A TRADEMARK
Difference Between Geographical Indication (GI) and Trademark

Aspect Geographical Indication (GI) Trademark

A GI is a sign used on products that A trademark is a sign, symbol, word,
have a specific geographical origin and or combination used to identify and
Definition
possess qualities, reputation, or distinguish goods or services of one
characteristics inherent to that location. entity from another.
Protects the reputation and uniqueness Ensures brand identity and prevents
Purpose of products linked to a particular unauthorized use of a business's
region. mark or symbol.
Owned collectively by communities or
Owned by an individual, company,
Ownership groups from a specific geographic
or entity.
region.
- Darjeeling Tea (India) - Nike (logo and name)
Examples - Champagne (France) - Coca-Cola
- Pashmina (Kashmir, India) - Apple (logo and name)
Tied to a specific location and the Applicable to goods, services, or
Scope
qualities of the product derived from it. both, unrelated to geographical

66
 Aspect Geographical Indication (GI) Trademark
location.
Requires proof of the product's
Requires distinctiveness, uniqueness,
Protection connection to its origin, including
and non-similarity to existing
Criteria quality, reputation, and distinct
trademarks.
characteristics.
Valid for 10 years initially and Valid for 10 years initially and
Duration
renewable indefinitely. renewable indefinitely.
Applicable
Geographical Indications of Goods
Laws in Trade Marks Act, 1999.
(Registration and Protection) Act, 1999.
India
To protect regional heritage, promote To protect brand identity and ensure
Objective local industries, and prevent misuse of customer association with a
region-specific product names. particular source or quality.
A specific type of rice labeled A logo or brand name such as
Example of
"Basmati" must come from designated "Adidas" signifies the producer of
Use
regions in India or Pakistan. the product.

Key Distinctions

• Geographical Dependency: GIs are inherently tied to a specific location, while

trademarks are not.
• Ownership Nature: GIs are collectively owned, whereas trademarks are exclusive to
an individual or company.
• Focus: GIs emphasize regional characteristics, while trademarks focus on brand
identity.

Both GIs and trademarks play significant roles in protecting intellectual property, but their
objectives and scopes differ significantly.

SUMMARY OF BASMATI GI TAGE ISSUE

Summary of the Basmati GI Tag Issue

The Basmati GI tag dispute is a long-standing issue between India and Pakistan, revolving
around the exclusive rights to market and protect the premium rice variety under a
Geographical Indication (GI) tag.

Key Highlights of the Issue

1. What is Basmati Rice?

67
 o A premium variety of long-grain aromatic rice grown primarily in the Indo-
Gangetic plains.
o Valued for its unique taste, aroma, and quality, it is a significant export
product for both India and Pakistan.
2. India's GI Application in the EU:
o In 2020, India applied for an exclusive GI tag for Basmati rice in the
European Union (EU).
o A GI tag grants recognition and protection to products originating from a
specific region, ensuring authenticity and premium pricing.
3. Pakistan’s Objection:
o Pakistan challenged India's GI application, arguing that Basmati rice is a
shared heritage of both countries.
o Pakistan emphasized that it is also a major producer and exporter of Basmati
rice and should be equally recognized in the EU’s GI framework.
4. Economic and Trade Implications:
o The EU is a key market for Basmati rice, with India and Pakistan exporting
significant volumes to the region.
o If India secures exclusive rights, Pakistan's exports to the EU under the name
"Basmati" could be blocked or face restrictions.
5. Pakistan’s Domestic GI Measures:
o Pakistan passed its Geographical Indications (Registration and Protection)
Act in 2020 to formalize its claims on Basmati rice and other products.
o This step was necessary to contest India's GI application internationally.
6. Shared Heritage Argument:
o Both countries claim historical and cultural ties to Basmati rice, as it has been
cultivated in the Indo-Gangetic plains for centuries, a region spanning India
and Pakistan.

Possible Outcomes

1. Exclusive GI Tag to India:

o If India’s application is approved, it could block Pakistan’s use of the term
"Basmati" for its rice exports in the EU.
2. Joint GI Tag:
o The EU may recognize Basmati rice as a product of both India and Pakistan,
similar to the Champagne GI tag in France, shared by regions.
3. Rejection of India’s Application:
o Pakistan could succeed in its challenge, preventing India from obtaining
exclusive GI rights.

Why the GI Tag Matters

• Market Recognition: GI protection enhances the product's market value and ensures
authenticity.
• Export Earnings: Basmati rice is a significant foreign exchange earner for both
countries.

68
 • Regional Identity: GI tags also promote the cultural and geographical heritage of a
region.

Current Status

As of now, the EU is reviewing arguments from both countries. The outcome of this dispute
will have significant implications for the global rice trade, particularly in terms of market
access and branding in the lucrative EU market.

Both countries might explore a collaborative approach, such as a shared GI tag, to avoid
economic losses and foster better trade relations.

ROLE OF WIPO IN THE PROTECTION OF

GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
Role of WIPO in the Protection of Geographical Indications (GIs)

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) plays a pivotal role in the
protection, promotion, and regulation of Geographical Indications (GIs) at the
international level. It provides a framework for the recognition and legal protection of
products that derive their unique qualities, reputation, or characteristics from their geographic
origin.

Key Functions of WIPO in GI Protection

1. International Legal Frameworks:

o WIPO oversees key treaties that facilitate the protection of GIs globally:
▪ Paris Convention (1883): Provides basic protection for GIs under the
broader category of "indications of source" and "appellations of
origin."
▪ Lisbon Agreement (1958): Offers a specific framework for the
international registration and protection of GIs (called "appellations of
origin" in the treaty).
▪ Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement (2015): Modernized the Lisbon
Agreement to accommodate both appellations of origin and
geographical indications, allowing a broader range of products to be
protected.
2. International Registration of GIs:
o WIPO administers the Lisbon System, which enables countries to register GIs
and secure protection across member countries with a single application.
o The system simplifies the legal process and reduces costs for GI protection
internationally.
3. Capacity Building and Technical Assistance:

69
 o WIPO helps countries develop and strengthen their GI frameworks by:
▪ Offering training for policymakers, producers, and enforcement
agencies.
▪ Providing guidance on legislation to align national laws with
international standards.
▪ Supporting the establishment of certification and control systems for
GIs.
4. Dispute Resolution:
o WIPO facilitates dispute resolution for conflicts involving GIs through its
Arbitration and Mediation Center.
o This service helps resolve disputes related to GI protection without resorting
to lengthy and costly litigation.
5. Awareness and Promotion:
o WIPO promotes awareness of the economic and cultural benefits of GIs
through:
▪ Publishing studies on successful GI implementations.
▪ Organizing conferences, seminars, and workshops on GI-related issues.
6. Integration with Broader IP Systems:
o WIPO ensures that GIs are integrated into the broader intellectual property
framework, linking them with trademarks, trade secrets, and industrial designs
where appropriate.

Challenges WIPO Addresses in GI Protection

1. Harmonization of Standards:
o Differences in national GI laws and definitions create inconsistencies. WIPO
works toward harmonizing these standards through international treaties.
2. Cross-Border Disputes:
o WIPO provides a platform to resolve disputes where multiple countries claim
rights to the same GI (e.g., Basmati rice).
3. Protection in Non-Member Countries:
o Through international agreements, WIPO seeks to ensure that GIs are
respected in countries outside the jurisdiction of specific treaties.
4. Balancing Global Trade:
o WIPO collaborates with organizations like the World Trade Organization
(WTO) to align GI protection with trade rules under the Agreement on
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

Significance of WIPO's Role

1. Economic Development:
o GIs boost rural economies by creating premium markets for region-specific
products (e.g., Darjeeling Tea, Champagne).
2. Cultural Heritage Protection:
o WIPO ensures that GIs safeguard traditional knowledge, skills, and heritage
tied to specific regions.

70
 3. Consumer Protection:
o WIPO helps prevent misleading practices by ensuring that GI-labeled products
meet the standards and origins claimed.
4. International Trade Benefits:
o By standardizing GI protection, WIPO reduces barriers to international trade
and ensures equitable access for producers in developing countries.

Conclusion

WIPO’s work in protecting GIs enhances the value of geographically linked products,
promotes cultural heritage, and ensures fair competition in international markets. Its legal
frameworks, registration systems, and capacity-building efforts empower countries to
effectively protect their GIs and gain a competitive edge in the global economy.

GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS IN INDIA

Geographical Indications (GI) in India

A Geographical Indication (GI) is a form of intellectual property that identifies a product as

originating from a specific region, where its qualities, reputation, or distinctiveness are linked
to that geographic origin. In India, GIs are protected under the Geographical Indications of
Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, which came into effect in 2003.

Key Features of GI Protection in India

1. Administering Authority:
o The Geographical Indications Registry in Chennai oversees GI registrations
in India.
o The Controller-General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks serves as
the Registrar of GIs.
2. Eligibility:
o Any association of persons, producers, organizations, or authorities
representing the interests of producers of goods can apply for a GI.
3. Validity:
o GI registration is valid for 10 years and can be renewed indefinitely.
4. Scope of Protection:
o Prevents unauthorized use of the GI name.
o Ensures that only products meeting specific criteria can use the GI tag.
5. Enforcement:
o Legal action can be taken against infringement under the GI Act.

71
Significance of GI in India

1. Economic Benefits:
o Boosts local economies by ensuring premium pricing for GI-tagged goods.
o Helps rural and traditional artisans, farmers, and producers gain global
recognition.
2. Cultural Preservation:
o Protects traditional knowledge, skills, and heritage associated with specific
regions.
3. Consumer Protection:
o Guarantees authenticity and quality for consumers.
4. Export Potential:
o Enhances the marketability of GI products in international markets.

Categories of GI Products in India

1. Agricultural Products:
o E.g., Darjeeling Tea, Basmati Rice, Alphonso Mango, Nagpur Orange.
2. Handicrafts:
o E.g., Mysore Silk, Kanjeevaram Saree, Banarasi Saree, Pashmina.
3. Manufactured Goods:
o E.g., Feni (Goa), Madhubani Paintings, Khadi.
4. Food Products:
o E.g., Hyderabadi Haleem, Rasgulla (Odisha), Bikaneri Bhujia.

Notable GI Tags in India

1. First GI Tag in India:

o Darjeeling Tea (2004-05).
2. GI Tags of Global Recognition:
o Kashmir Pashmina.
o Naga Mircha (Ghost Pepper).
o Hyderabadi Biryani (applied for but yet to be granted).

Challenges in GI Protection in India

1. Inadequate Awareness:
o Producers and artisans in rural areas often lack knowledge about the GI
application process.
2. Counterfeiting:
o Unauthorized use of GI names in domestic and international markets leads to
economic losses.
3. Cost of Certification:

72
 oHigh costs and bureaucratic hurdles deter small-scale producers from seeking
GI registration.
4. Limited Enforcement:
o Ineffective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms lead to frequent misuse.

Examples of Indian GI Tags with Regions

Product Region Category

Darjeeling Tea West Bengal Agricultural
Mysore Silk Karnataka Handicraft
Alphonso Mango Maharashtra Agricultural
Pashmina Jammu and Kashmir Handicraft
Banarasi Saree Uttar Pradesh Handicraft
Tirupati Laddu Andhra Pradesh Food Product
Blue Pottery Jaipur, Rajasthan Handicraft

Way Forward for GI in India

1. Enhancing Awareness:
o Conduct campaigns to educate producers about the benefits and process of GI
registration.
2. Streamlining Procedures:
o Simplify the registration and renewal process to encourage more applications.
3. Global Promotion:
o Use trade fairs, exhibitions, and digital platforms to showcase Indian GI
products internationally.
4. Effective Enforcement:
o Strengthen legal frameworks to curb counterfeiting and unauthorized use of GI
names.
5. Digital Tools:
o Develop digital tracking systems for certified GI products to ensure
authenticity.

Geographical Indications play a crucial role in preserving India's cultural heritage while
driving economic growth. With a diverse range of GI-tagged products, India stands to gain
significantly in global markets if challenges are addressed effectively.

PLANT BREEDER'S RIGHTS

73
Plant Breeder’s Rights (PBR)

Plant Breeder’s Rights (PBR) are a form of intellectual property protection specifically for
new varieties of plants. These rights grant plant breeders eclusive control over the
propagation and commercialization of their plant varieties for a specified period, encouraging
innovation in agricultural and horticultural practices.

Key Features of Plant Breeder’s Rights

1. Exclusive Rights:
o Breeders have exclusive rights to produce, sell, reproduce, and distribute the
propagating material (e.g., seeds, cuttings) of their protected plant variety.
2. Duration of Protection:
o Typically, protection lasts for 15-20 years, depending on national laws and the
type of plant (annual crops, perennial crops, or trees).
3. Criteria for Protection: A plant variety must fulfill the following criteria to be
eligible for PBR:
o Novelty: The variety must be new and not previously exploited.
o Distinctiveness: It must differ significantly from existing varieties.
o Uniformity: The variety must display consistent characteristics.
o Stability: Traits of the variety should remain unchanged after repeated
propagation.
4. Exemptions:
o Farmer’s Privilege: In some jurisdictions (e.g., India), farmers are allowed to
save, reuse, and exchange seeds of a protected variety for personal use.
o Research Exemption: Breeders can use protected varieties for further
research and breeding of new varieties.

PBR in India: The PPV&FR Act, 2001

In India, Plant Breeder's Rights are governed by the Protection of Plant Varieties and
Farmers’ Rights (PPV&FR) Act, 2001. The Act balances the rights of breeders with those
of farmers.

Key Provisions of the PPV&FR Act:

1. Protection of Varieties:
o Includes new plant varieties, extant varieties, essentially derived varieties,
and farmers' varieties.
2. Rights for Farmers:
o Farmers are recognized as breeders if they develop a new variety.
o Farmers can save, use, sow, and share seeds of a protected variety.
o Compensation is provided to farmers if the protected seed fails to perform as
promised.
3. National Gene Fund:

74
 o Established to promote the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic
resources. Farmers who contribute to the breeding or conservation of genetic
material are rewarded.
4. Registration Authority:
o The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority oversees
the registration and protection of plant varieties.

Advantages of Plant Breeder’s Rights

1. Encourages Innovation:
o Provides incentives for breeders to develop new and improved plant varieties.
2. Improves Agricultural Productivity:
o Promotes the introduction of high-yielding, disease-resistant, and climate-
resilient crop varieties.
3. Economic Benefits:
o Breeders gain commercial rewards for their innovations, boosting the
agricultural economy.
4. Conservation of Biodiversity:
o Encourages the sustainable use of plant genetic resources.

Criticism and Challenges

1. Conflict with Farmers' Rights:

o Overemphasis on breeder's rights may undermine traditional practices of seed
saving and sharing by farmers.
2. Access and Affordability:
o High costs of protected seeds may create barriers for smallholder farmers,
especially in developing countries.
3. Biopiracy Concerns:
o Fear of exploitation of indigenous genetic resources and traditional knowledge
by multinational corporations.
4. Enforcement Issues:
o Protecting breeders' rights while ensuring farmers' rights remain intact is
complex, especially in countries with weak enforcement mechanisms.

International Framework for PBR

1. UPOV Convention:
o The International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants
(UPOV) provides a global framework for PBR.
o India follows its own PPV&FR Act instead of the UPOV model to safeguard
farmers' interests.
2. TRIPS Agreement:

75
 o Article 27.3(b) of the WTO-TRIPS Agreement mandates that member
countries protect plant varieties through patents, an effective sui generis
system, or a combination of both.

Way Forward

1. Balanced Policies:
o Harmonize breeders' rights with farmers' rights to ensure equitable benefit-
sharing.
2. Support for Farmers:
o Provide subsidies or financial support to help farmers access protected seeds.
3. Strengthening Local Varieties:
o Encourage the registration and protection of traditional and indigenous plant
varieties.
4. Awareness and Capacity Building:
o Educate farmers, breeders, and policymakers on the benefits and
responsibilities associated with PBR.

Plant Breeder’s Rights are essential for fostering innovation in agriculture while ensuring
sustainable practices. Striking a balance between breeders' rights and farmers' privileges
remains a critical challenge for nations worldwide.

INDIAN SUPREME COURT SAYS SEED, PLANTS AND

ANIMALS ARE NOT PATENTABLE
The Indian Supreme Court's statement that seeds, plants, and animals are not patentable
aligns with India's existing legal framework on intellectual property in the agricultural and
biological sectors. The country follows principles rooted in the Patents Act, 1970, and The
Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights (PPVFR) Act, 2001. Here's a
breakdown:

Key Points:

1. Patents Act, 1970:

o Section 3 of the Act specifies that plants and animals, including seeds and
biological processes for their production, are not considered patentable subject
matter.
o This exclusion prevents private monopolization of living organisms,
preserving biodiversity and farmers' rights.
2. Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001 (PPVFR):
o Instead of patents, this law provides protections for plant varieties while
ensuring that farmers retain the right to save, use, sow, and exchange seeds.

76
 oIt recognizes farmers as breeders and allows for benefit-sharing in case
traditional knowledge is utilized for commercial development.
3. Supreme Court's Role:
o The court's interpretation reinforces the policy to balance innovation in
agriculture with equitable access for farmers.
o This approach ensures that corporations cannot claim ownership over naturally
occurring seeds, plants, or animals, maintaining a safeguard for traditional and
indigenous knowledge.

Significance:

• Protecting Farmers' Interests: Farmers retain their age-old practices of seed saving
and sharing, crucial in countries like India, where small and marginal farmers
dominate agriculture.
• Encouraging Indigenous Research: It promotes public and indigenous research
institutions by reducing dependency on costly patented resources.
• Biodiversity Conservation: Prevents biopiracy and unauthorized commercial
exploitation of native flora and fauna.

Global Perspective:

India's stance contrasts with some Western nations, where patenting genetically modified
organisms (GMOs) and certain biotechnological inventions are allowed. The Indian
framework focuses on equity and sustainability, ensuring food security and safeguarding
traditional farming practices.

This ruling reflects India's commitment to its agrarian roots and the ethos of protecting
communal and natural resources from privatization.

FARMER'S RIGHTS, GENETIC MEDIFICATION IS A

METHOD NOT A PRODUCT
The distinction between genetic modification as a method and the product resulting from
it is a fundamental argument in the context of farmers' rights and intellectual property laws,
especially in India. Here’s how this perspective is framed and its implications:

Genetic Modification as a Method, Not a Product:

1. Methodology Focus:
o Genetic modification (GM) involves altering the genetic makeup of an
organism, often using biotechnological tools.
o The process itself can be patented in some jurisdictions if it is novel, non-
obvious, and has industrial applicability.

77
 o In India, however, products of nature (e.g., plants, seeds, or animals) are
explicitly excluded from patentability under the Patents Act, 1970, even if
they result from a GM process.
2. Non-Patentable Products:
o Seeds, plants, and animals, including those derived through genetic
modification, cannot be patented under Indian law.
o This ensures that farmers have access to these resources without being
restricted by corporate control or royalties.

Farmers’ Rights Under Indian Law:

1. Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights (PPVFR) Act, 2001:

o Farmers are recognized as contributors to biodiversity and are entitled to
use, save, exchange, and even sell seeds, including those developed through
genetic modification, as long as they don’t market them under a brand name.
o The Act balances innovation with farmers’ traditional practices.
2. Rights Against Biopiracy:
o Genetic resources and traditional knowledge used in GM methods are
protected against unauthorized exploitation.
o Farmers are considered custodians of biodiversity, and their contributions
cannot be appropriated by corporations through patents.

Why This Distinction Matters:

1. Empowering Farmers:
o Farmers remain free to use seeds without being locked into expensive
proprietary systems.
o They are not burdened by royalties or lawsuits over alleged violations of
intellectual property.
2. Preservation of Biodiversity:
o Genetic modification often utilizes traits from indigenous plants. By
classifying GM as a method, the biodiversity used remains a common resource
rather than corporate property.
3. Food Security:
o Preventing monopolies on seeds ensures affordability and availability,
especially in a country like India, where the majority of farmers are
smallholders.

Challenges and Considerations:

1. Global Pressure:
o Multinational companies often lobby for patent rights on GM products, citing
high R&D costs.

78
 o India's stance differs from countries like the U.S., where patents can cover
both the method and resulting products (e.g., GM crops).
2. Incentives for Innovation:
o Critics argue that excluding GM products from patentability could reduce
incentives for biotech innovation.
o India addresses this by supporting public sector research and benefit-
sharing mechanisms.

Conclusion:

By treating genetic modification as a method, India safeguards farmers’ rights, promotes

biodiversity conservation, and ensures equitable use of genetic resources. This approach
emphasizes community ownership over natural resources and strikes a balance between
innovation and the well-being of its agrarian population.

IPR AND INDIAN AGRICULTURE

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and Indian Agriculture is a critical intersection that
involves balancing innovation, farmers' rights, and biodiversity conservation. India’s
approach to IPR in agriculture is unique and rooted in its socio-economic and cultural
context, prioritizing equitable access over corporate monopolies.

Key Aspects of IPR in Indian Agriculture

1. Exclusions Under the Patents Act, 1970:

o Non-Patentability of Life Forms: Section 3 of the Act explicitly excludes
seeds, plants, animals, and biological processes from patent protection.
o Impact: Prevents monopolization of agricultural resources, ensuring access
for farmers and public research institutions.
2. The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 (PPVFR Act):
o Introduced to comply with TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights) while safeguarding farmers’ interests.
o Key Provisions:
▪ Farmers can save, use, sow, re-sow, exchange, and sell seeds,
provided they don't sell branded seeds.
▪ Recognizes farmers as breeders, enabling them to register new
varieties and claim benefits.
▪ Supports benefit-sharing when indigenous resources are used in
commercial varieties.
o Significance: Protects traditional farming practices and ensures equitable
sharing of benefits from biodiversity.
3. Geographical Indications (GI) in Agriculture:
o GIs protect products linked to specific regions, promoting local agricultural
diversity and traditional practices.

79
 o Examples: Basmati rice, Darjeeling tea, Alphonso mangoes, and Nagpur
oranges.
o Impact: Boosts rural economies and adds value to indigenous crops.
4. Biodiversity Act, 2002:
o Regulates access to genetic resources and prevents biopiracy.
o Requires companies to share benefits when utilizing traditional knowledge or
indigenous resources.

Challenges in IPR and Indian Agriculture

1. Corporate Dominance:
o Multinational companies often push for patents on genetically modified (GM)
crops, potentially restricting access for small farmers.
o Example: Legal disputes over Bt cotton and royalties.
2. Biopiracy:
o Misappropriation of traditional knowledge and genetic resources by foreign
entities.
o Case Study: Turmeric, neem, and basmati rice patents were contested
successfully by India.
3. Access vs. Innovation:
o Balancing the need for affordable seeds with the incentive for private-sector
research and development.
4. Small and Marginal Farmers:
o Majority of Indian farmers rely on traditional practices and cannot afford
patented seeds or GM technologies.
o Policies must ensure that innovation does not marginalize these farmers
further.

Advantages of India’s Approach to IPR in Agriculture

1. Preservation of Farmers’ Rights:

o Farmers maintain their traditional practices without being burdened by royalty
payments or legal restrictions.
2. Promotion of Indigenous Knowledge:
o Traditional agricultural practices and biodiversity are protected and
incentivized through benefit-sharing mechanisms.
3. Food Security:
o By preventing monopolies, India ensures affordable access to essential
agricultural inputs for its large agrarian population.
4. Support for Public Sector Research:
o India emphasizes investment in public agricultural research (e.g., Indian
Council of Agricultural Research, or ICAR) to develop new technologies
accessible to all.

80
Looking Ahead: Strengthening IPR in Agriculture

1. Capacity Building for Farmers:

o Awareness and training on registering plant varieties and claiming benefits
under the PPVFR Act.
2. Encouraging Collaborative Innovation:
o Partnerships between public institutions, private firms, and farmers to develop
and commercialize sustainable technologies.
3. Strengthening Enforcement of GI and Biodiversity Laws:
o Prevent unauthorized exploitation of India's genetic and traditional resources.
4. Sustainable Use of GM Technology:
o Promote GM research under public institutions, ensuring accessibility and
affordability without compromising biodiversity or farmers’ rights.

India’s IPR framework in agriculture reflects a pro-farmer, pro-biodiversity ethos,

prioritizing equitable access and traditional knowledge preservation while encouraging
innovation. It provides a model for balancing development with sustainability and inclusivity.

TURMERIC, NEEM, COTTON, BASMATI IPR

India has faced significant challenges regarding Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) over
key agricultural products like turmeric, neem, cotton, and basmati rice. These products
have often been at the center of disputes over biopiracy and the protection of traditional
knowledge and biodiversity. Here's an overview of each:

1. Turmeric (Curcuma longa)

• Background: Turmeric has been used for centuries in India for medicinal and
culinary purposes. Its anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties are well-known,
especially in Ayurvedic medicine.
• Biopiracy Issue: In the 1990s, U.S.-based patenting of turmeric was a significant
issue. A patent was granted for the use of turmeric in wound healing, despite the
fact that this knowledge was part of India's traditional medicinal practices.
• India's Response:
o India successfully challenged the patent. The European Patent Office
revoked the patent in 1997, acknowledging that the use of turmeric for healing
wounds was traditional knowledge.
o The case highlighted the need for stronger protection of traditional knowledge
under Intellectual Property laws, leading to more robust advocacy for
Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL), a database aimed at
preventing biopiracy.

2. Neem (Azadirachta indica)

81
 • Background: Neem is a tree native to India and is widely known for its medicinal
and agricultural properties. It has been used for thousands of years for pest control,
skin treatments, and in Ayurvedic medicine.
• Biopiracy Issue: In the 1990s, a patent was granted by the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) for the use of neem oil as a natural pesticide. This was
based on the traditional knowledge of Indian farmers, who had used neem for
centuries for pest control.
• India's Response:
o India, through The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR),
successfully contested the patent.
o In 2000, the European Patent Office revoked the neem patent, recognizing
the long-standing indigenous knowledge of neem's uses.
o This victory led to the establishment of the National Biodiversity Authority
(NBA) and the Biodiversity Act, 2002, which specifically aimed at protecting
India's genetic resources and traditional knowledge from misappropriation.

3. Cotton (especially Bt Cotton)

• Background: Cotton, a major crop in India, has been at the heart of debates around
genetically modified (GM) crops. Bt Cotton, a genetically modified variety, was
developed by Monsanto (now Bayer) to resist bollworm pests.
• Biopiracy and IPR Issues:
o India’s Bt Cotton was introduced with a patent owned by Monsanto, leading
to concerns about seed patenting and seed control by multinational
corporations.
o Indian farmers, who had traditionally saved and reused seeds, were now
required to buy new seeds every season, often under royalty agreements with
Monsanto.
o There were concerns that the intellectual property around Bt Cotton allowed
multinational corporations to dominate the seed market and restricted farmers'
ability to save and exchange seeds.
• India's Response:
o While Bt Cotton was officially approved in India in 2002, the Monsanto case
has raised concerns about monopolies in the seed industry.
o The Indian government has taken steps to regulate seed prices and prevent
excessive royalty payments through agreements like the Technology
Agreement with Monsanto.

4. Basmati Rice

• Background: Basmati rice is a premium long-grain rice variety that is primarily

grown in India and Pakistan. It is known for its unique aroma, texture, and flavor.
• IPR Issues:
o In the early 2000s, U.S.-based companies sought to patent basmati rice,
particularly focusing on the export of "basmati rice" grown outside of India
and Pakistan.

82
 o The RiceTec case (U.S.) sought to patent basmati rice strains and branded
them with names like "Texmati" and "Kasmati," leading to a controversy over
the use of the term "basmati".
• India’s Response:
o India argued that basmati rice is an integral part of Indian culture and history
and cannot be patented by foreign entities.
o India secured Geographical Indication (GI) status for Basmati rice under
the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act,
1999. This recognition prevents the use of the term "basmati" for rice grown
outside the recognized geographical region.
o This GI protection ensures that only rice grown in specific regions of India
and Pakistan can be marketed as Basmati rice and prevents unauthorized use
of the term by foreign companies.

Conclusion

India’s battles with IPR regarding turmeric, neem, cotton, and basmati rice underscore the
importance of protecting traditional knowledge and ensuring that biological resources are
not misappropriated by foreign entities. These cases have led to the establishment of
mechanisms like the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL), National
Biodiversity Authority (NBA), and Geographical Indications (GI), which aim to safeguard
India’s biodiversity, agriculture, and indigenous knowledge.

The outcome of these cases highlights the importance of international cooperation and the
need for stronger protection of traditional knowledge within IPR frameworks to prevent
biopiracy and ensure the economic and cultural rights of local communities and farmers.

WIPO
WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) is a specialized agency of the United
Nations that promotes the protection of intellectual property (IP) across the world. It plays
a central role in developing and harmonizing international IP laws, offering services, and
supporting member countries in creating effective IP systems.

Key Functions of WIPO:

1. Global IP Protection:
o WIPO works to develop international agreements to protect IP rights globally.
This includes overseeing treaties such as the Patent Cooperation Treaty
(PCT), Madrid Protocol (for international trademark registration), Berne
Convention (for copyright), and the Hague Agreement (for industrial
designs).
o It seeks to simplify and harmonize IP rules and procedures across different
countries to make the system more efficient for businesses and creators.
2. Providing IP Services:

83
 o WIPO offers registration services for patents, trademarks, and designs
through its global filing systems.
▪ PCT: Facilitates international patent filings in multiple countries
through a single application.
▪ Madrid System: Allows for the international registration of
trademarks.
▪ Hague System: Enables the international registration of industrial
designs.
3. Promoting Innovation:
o WIPO encourages innovation and creativity through the development of
international norms and the provision of technical assistance and training to
help countries improve their IP systems.
4. Advocacy and Policy:
o WIPO plays a role in shaping IP policy globally. It holds discussions and
forums where member states, organizations, and stakeholders can engage in
dialogue about the future of IP protection and its role in global trade,
development, and social welfare.
o It also addresses the public interest by facilitating discussions on the balance
between IP protection and access to knowledge, including access to
medicines and the protection of traditional knowledge.
5. Dispute Resolution:
o WIPO offers alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services for resolving IP-
related disputes, particularly in domains such as trademarks and domain
names. The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center helps settle conflicts
out of court, offering arbitration, mediation, and expert determination services.
6. Capacity Building:
o WIPO provides training and capacity-building programs for IP offices,
businesses, and individuals, particularly in developing countries. These
programs help countries better understand and manage IP to stimulate
innovation and support economic growth.

WIPO’s Role in Agriculture and Biodiversity:

WIPO is also involved in initiatives related to intellectual property in agriculture and the
protection of biodiversity:

• Traditional Knowledge and Genetic Resources: WIPO works to address

biopiracy—the unauthorized exploitation of traditional knowledge and genetic
resources by foreign entities—by facilitating international dialogue and promoting
legal tools to protect such knowledge.
• International Legal Frameworks: WIPO collaborates with other organizations like
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and World Trade Organization
(WTO) to ensure the protection of farmers' rights and the equitable sharing of
benefits derived from genetic resources.

Controversies and Criticisms:

84
While WIPO’s role in promoting IP protection globally is widely recognized, it has faced
criticism on several fronts:

• Access to Medicines: Critics argue that strong IP protection, particularly for

pharmaceutical patents, can limit access to essential medicines in low-income
countries.
• Biopiracy and Traditional Knowledge: There are concerns about how WIPO
addresses issues related to the patenting of indigenous knowledge and biodiversity,
with some advocating for stronger protections for traditional practices and genetic
resources.
• Equity and Development: WIPO has been urged to focus on the needs of developing
countries to ensure that IP systems are accessible and fair, rather than
disproportionately benefiting wealthy nations and multinational corporations.

WIPO and India:

India is an active member of WIPO and participates in various international IP negotiations

and agreements. The country has played a significant role in advocating for:

• Balanced IP Laws: India’s approach to IPR in agriculture emphasizes farmers’

rights and the protection of traditional knowledge. India has used its position in
WIPO to promote a framework that balances innovation with access to knowledge
and genetic resources.
• Access to Medicines: India has been a leading voice in advocating for flexibilities in
patent laws to allow for the production of generic medicines, particularly for diseases
like HIV/AIDS and cancer.

Conclusion:

WIPO is crucial in shaping global IP norms and providing support to member states to create
effective IP systems. For India and other developing countries, WIPO’s role in ensuring fair
and equitable IP laws is critical to fostering innovation while protecting local resources,
cultural heritage, and biodiversity.

FUNDING OF WIPO AUDIENCE

The funding of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) comes primarily
from its member states, who contribute to the organization’s budget based on a set of
financial rules. Additionally, WIPO generates revenue through its services and fees. Here's a
breakdown of WIPO's funding sources and the audiences that benefit from its activities:

Funding Sources of WIPO

1. Member States' Contributions:

85
 o WIPO’s budget is largely funded by assessed contributions from its member
states. These contributions are determined based on the gross national
income (GNI) of each country.
o Each country’s contribution varies depending on its financial capacity,
meaning wealthier countries contribute more than lower-income countries.
o Contributions fund WIPO's core activities, such as policy development,
research, and capacity-building programs.
2. Fees from IP Services:
o WIPO generates significant income through its various IP registration and
service systems:
▪ PCT (Patent Cooperation Treaty): Fees are paid by applicants
seeking international patent protection.
▪ Madrid System: Fees are paid for international trademark registration.
▪ Hague System: Fees are collected for international industrial design
registration.
▪ WIPO Arbitration and Mediation: Fees are charged for dispute
resolution services.
o These services are used by businesses, governments, and IP professionals
globally, contributing to WIPO’s revenue.
3. Private Sector and Donor Funding:
o WIPO also receives funding from private sector entities (companies and
individuals) for specific projects, partnerships, or initiatives.
o In addition, donor contributions are sometimes directed to specialized
projects, particularly those aimed at supporting developing countries or
addressing specific global IP challenges (e.g., protecting traditional knowledge
or building IP capacity in low-income regions).
4. Grants and Special Contributions:
o WIPO occasionally receives special grants or extra-budgetary
contributions from governments, international organizations, or philanthropic
entities, aimed at supporting specific programs or projects.

Audience Benefiting from WIPO’s Activities

WIPO's work is aimed at various global audiences, with a focus on facilitating IP protection,
innovation, and development:

1. Governments:
o National IP Offices: WIPO helps national governments establish and
strengthen their intellectual property systems through training, capacity-
building, and policy development.
o Governments rely on WIPO’s services for creating robust legal frameworks
for IP protection, including the implementation of international treaties and
agreements.
2. Businesses and Corporations:
o Global Corporations: WIPO supports multinational companies in securing
and managing IP, especially through its global filing systems (PCT, Madrid,
Hague).

86
 o WIPO’s IP services are crucial for businesses looking to expand
internationally and protect their innovations, brands, and designs across
multiple jurisdictions.
o WIPO also assists in promoting the role of IP as a tool for business growth
and economic development.
3. Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs):
o SMEs, especially in developing countries, benefit from WIPO’s programs
designed to lower barriers to IP protection. This includes providing
resources and training on how SMEs can leverage IP to enhance
competitiveness, enter global markets, and protect innovations.
o WIPO runs initiatives to help SMEs understand and navigate the IP system,
often offering free resources or subsidized services for those in low-income
economies.
4. Researchers and Innovators:
o Researchers, scientists, and inventors use WIPO’s patent and technology
services to protect their inventions globally. The PCT system, in particular, is
designed to support individuals and institutions in seeking international patent
protection.
o WIPO provides training and resources for researchers on how to protect their
intellectual creations, including access to databases and international
networks.
5. Developing Countries and Indigenous Communities:
o WIPO focuses significant efforts on building IP systems in developing
countries and assisting these nations in accessing IP tools to protect cultural
heritage, traditional knowledge, and genetic resources.
o Through initiatives like the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL)
and other capacity-building programs, WIPO supports indigenous
communities in protecting their traditional knowledge from biopiracy and
unauthorized exploitation.
6. International Organizations and NGOs:
o WIPO works with various international organizations (like the United
Nations and the World Trade Organization) to shape global IP policy.
o Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) also collaborate with WIPO on
projects related to IP awareness, sustainable development, and fair access
to IP, especially in the areas of health, education, and environmental
protection.
7. Legal Professionals and IP Experts:
o IP Lawyers and patent agents benefit from WIPO’s education programs,
certification services, and the dispute resolution systems it provides for IP-
related conflicts.
o WIPO offers extensive training on international IP laws and systems to help
legal professionals stay updated on global IP standards.
8. Public Sector and Academia:
o WIPO provides research grants and data resources for academia to study
the intersection of IP and development, promoting public policy research that
informs IP legislation and practice.
o Universities and research institutes utilize WIPO’s tools to understand and
manage IP rights related to academic inventions and innovations.

87
Conclusion

WIPO’s funding comes from a mix of member state contributions, service fees, and
donations, supporting a broad audience that spans governments, businesses, researchers, and
indigenous communities. By providing a range of services and resources, WIPO plays a
crucial role in facilitating global intellectual property protection and ensuring that the IP
system benefits a diverse range of stakeholders, particularly those in developing regions.

MCQ

1. Which of the following inventions are not patentable under the Patents Act,
1970 in India?

(Select all that apply)

a) A new variety of plant

b) A genetically modified microorganism
c) A mathematical formula
d) A new method of preparing a known chemical compound
e) A product derived from traditional knowledge
f) A new method for cultivation of crops

Answer:
a) A new variety of plant
c) A mathematical formula
e) A product derived from traditional knowledge

Explanation:
Under the Patents Act, 1970, certain inventions are not patentable:

• A new variety of plant: Plant varieties are excluded under the Act. However, they are
protected under the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001.
• A mathematical formula: Abstract ideas like mathematical formulas or algorithms
are excluded from patentability.
• A product derived from traditional knowledge: Traditional knowledge, such as
folklore or indigenous practices, is excluded from patentability to prevent biopiracy.

2. In India, which of the following are covered under the Geographical

Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999?

(Select all that apply)

a) Basmati rice
b) Himachali apples
c) Kashmiri shawls

88
d) Mysore silk
e) Madhubani paintings
f) Kashmiri saffron

Answer:
a) Basmati rice
b) Himachali apples
c) Kashmiri shawls
d) Mysore silk
f) Kashmiri saffron

Explanation:
The Geographical Indications (GI) Act protects goods that have a special quality or
reputation due to their geographical origin. Products like Basmati rice, Mysore silk, and
Kashmiri saffron are GI-protected.

• Madhubani paintings: These are typically considered cultural or artistic heritage and
do not fall under GI protection as they are considered artistic works, which fall under
copyright.
• Himachali apples and Kashmiri shawls are examples of products with specific
geographic ties, making them eligible for GI registration.

3. Which of the following are exceptions to the exclusive rights of a copyright

holder under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957?

(Select all that apply)

a) Private and non-commercial use of a copyrighted work

b) Reproduction of a copyrighted work for educational purposes without permission
c) Use of a copyrighted work in judicial or legislative proceedings
d) Reproduction of a work for profit without authorization
e) Fair use for criticism, review, or news reporting
f) Use of a work for parody or satire

Answer:
a) Private and non-commercial use of a copyrighted work
b) Reproduction of a copyrighted work for educational purposes without permission
c) Use of a copyrighted work in judicial or legislative proceedings
e) Fair use for criticism, review, or news reporting
f) Use of a work for parody or satire

Explanation:
The Indian Copyright Act, 1957 allows certain exceptions where the use of copyrighted
works does not require the permission of the copyright holder:

• Private and non-commercial use: Copyright is not infringed when works are used
for private, non-commercial purposes.

89
 • Educational purposes: Use of works for teaching or research is allowed under
certain circumstances.
• Judicial or legislative proceedings: Reproduction of a copyrighted work for these
proceedings is allowed under fair use.
• Fair use: This includes criticism, review, and news reporting.
• Parody or satire: These uses are often allowed as they involve transformation of the
original work for humor or social commentary, which qualifies under fair use
exceptions.

4. Which of the following are requirements for obtaining a patent under the
Indian Patents Act, 1970?

(Select all that apply)

a) The invention must be novel

b) The invention must involve an inventive step
c) The invention must be capable of industrial application
d) The invention must be a product and not a process
e) The invention must be publicly disclosed after filing the application
f) The invention must not be a mere discovery of scientific principles

Answer:
a) The invention must be novel
b) The invention must involve an inventive step
c) The invention must be capable of industrial application
f) The invention must not be a mere discovery of scientific principles

Explanation:
The Patents Act, 1970 outlines the following key requirements for patentability:

• Novelty: The invention must be new and not previously known.

• Inventive step: The invention must not be obvious to someone skilled in the relevant
field.
• Industrial applicability: The invention must be capable of being made or used in
some kind of industry.
• Not a mere discovery: The law excludes the discovery of scientific principles or
abstract theories.
• Product or process: Both products and processes can be patented, so the restriction is
not solely on product-based inventions.

5. Which of the following are protected under the Protection of Plant Varieties
and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 in India?

(Select all that apply)

90
a) New plant varieties developed by farmers
b) Traditional plant varieties
c) Genetically modified crops
d) Innovations in plant breeding methods
e) Farmers’ rights to save and exchange seeds
f) Hybrid crops developed by public institutions

Answer:
a) New plant varieties developed by farmers
b) Traditional plant varieties
e) Farmers’ rights to save and exchange seeds
f) Hybrid crops developed by public institutions

Explanation:
The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 protects:

• New plant varieties developed by farmers or breeders, encouraging innovation.

• Traditional plant varieties if they have a significant role in agriculture and local
economies.
• Farmers’ rights to save, use, exchange, and sell seeds without infringement.
• Hybrid crops developed by public institutions are also eligible for protection if they
meet specific criteria.

Genetically modified crops are generally excluded from plant variety protection unless they
meet certain environmental and safety regulations, and innovations in plant breeding
methods are typically covered under patent laws, not this Act.

6. Which of the following are included in the WIPO-administered systems for

the international protection of intellectual property?

(Select all that apply)

a) Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)

b) Hague Agreement for Industrial Designs
c) International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)
d) Madrid Agreement for International Registration of Marks
e) TRIPS Agreement
f) The Berne Convention for Copyright Protection

Answer:
a) Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)
b) Hague Agreement for Industrial Designs
d) Madrid Agreement for International Registration of Marks
f) The Berne Convention for Copyright Protection

Explanation:
WIPO manages several important international agreements:

91
 • PCT facilitates international patent applications.
• Hague Agreement allows for international registration of industrial designs.
• Madrid Agreement facilitates the international registration of trademarks.
• The Berne Convention provides international copyright protection.

The UPOV Convention is administered by a different organization, UPOV (International

Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants), and the TRIPS Agreement is a
WTO agreement, not directly administered by WIPO.

1. Which of the following are significant IPR-related issues concerning

Basmati rice in India?

(Select all that apply)

a) Patent disputes with foreign companies over Basmati's unique qualities

b) Geographical Indication (GI) registration for Basmati rice
c) Export restrictions based on GI registration
d) Patent on the use of Basmati rice for medicinal purposes
e) International attempts to trademark Basmati rice by non-Indian entities
f) Use of genetic modification in Basmati rice varieties

Answer:
b) Geographical Indication (GI) registration for Basmati rice
e) International attempts to trademark Basmati rice by non-Indian entities

Explanation:

• Geographical Indication (GI) registration: Basmati rice has been registered as a

Geographical Indication (GI) in India, protecting its specific geographic origin and
quality.
• International attempts to trademark: There have been disputes, particularly with
companies outside India (such as in the U.S. and Europe), attempting to trademark
Basmati rice, which raised concerns about the protection of India’s traditional
product.

Basmati rice is not patented, nor is it genetically modified under the GI system. Export
restrictions are typically not enforced due to GI registration but might be linked to the quality
standards of the rice.

2. Which of the following issues are associated with Turmeric and its
Intellectual Property rights in India?

(Select all that apply)

92
a) Patent on turmeric as a medicinal compound
b) Geographical Indication (GI) registration for turmeric varieties
c) Traditional knowledge claims over the medicinal use of turmeric
d) Trademarking turmeric as a unique agricultural product
e) Biopiracy claims concerning turmeric's antimicrobial properties
f) Patent on turmeric cultivation techniques

Answer:
a) Patent on turmeric as a medicinal compound
c) Traditional knowledge claims over the medicinal use of turmeric
e) Biopiracy claims concerning turmeric's antimicrobial properties

Explanation:

• Patent on turmeric: There have been patent disputes over turmeric’s use in
medicinal products. The U.S. Patent on turmeric’s healing properties raised concerns
of biopiracy as it was an ancient traditional practice in India.
• Traditional knowledge: India’s traditional knowledge of turmeric’s medicinal uses
has been a significant point of IPR concern, with many countries attempting to patent
it.
• Biopiracy claims: These concerns relate to unauthorized exploitation of traditional
knowledge regarding turmeric’s medicinal and antimicrobial properties.

Turmeric is not typically trademarked but may be part of GI concerns in certain regions.

3. Which of the following IPR-related challenges have been raised regarding

Neem in India?

(Select all that apply)

a) Patent granted on neem’s pesticidal properties

b) Geographical Indication (GI) registration for neem-based products
c) Biopiracy accusations related to neem’s medicinal uses
d) Trademark on neem as a specific pesticide formulation
e) Patent for neem oil as a cosmetic product
f) Global commercialization of neem without compensation to Indian farmers

Answer:
a) Patent granted on neem’s pesticidal properties
c) Biopiracy accusations related to neem’s medicinal uses
f) Global commercialization of neem without compensation to Indian farmers

Explanation:

• Patent granted on neem: There were instances, particularly in the U.S., where
patents were granted for neem’s pesticidal properties, leading to claims of
biopiracy.

93
 • Biopiracy accusations: Neem has been part of biopiracy claims, where foreign
companies attempted to patent its medicinal uses without considering India’s
traditional knowledge.
• Global commercialization: There have been concerns that foreign companies have
commercialized neem-based products without compensating Indian farmers or
recognizing the source of knowledge.

Neem has not been granted a Geographical Indication (GI) registration but is a subject of
patent disputes and biopiracy claims.

4. What are the key IPR-related issues surrounding Cotton in India?

(Select all that apply)

a) Patent on genetically modified (GM) cotton seeds

b) Biopiracy claims related to traditional cotton varieties
c) Geographical Indication (GI) registration for Indian cotton
d) Patent disputes over cotton cultivation techniques
e) The impact of patents on seed saving and farmer rights
f) Trademark on cotton as an agricultural product

Answer:
a) Patent on genetically modified (GM) cotton seeds
b) Biopiracy claims related to traditional cotton varieties
e) The impact of patents on seed saving and farmer rights

Explanation:

• Patent on GM cotton seeds: Bt cotton (genetically modified cotton) has been

patented by multinational corporations, causing concerns about the monopolization of
cotton seeds.
• Biopiracy: Traditional cotton varieties in India have been the subject of biopiracy
claims, with foreign entities attempting to patent and commercialize them.
• Impact on seed saving: Patents on GM cotton seeds have restricted farmers' ability
to save seeds for the next season, leading to farmer rights issues in India, where
seed-saving is a common practice.

Cotton is not typically registered under Geographical Indications (GI), and while
trademarks can be applied to specific products, cotton itself is generally not trademarked.

5. Which of the following IPR-related issues have been raised in the context of
Basmati rice and patent disputes?

(Select all that apply)

94
a) U.S. patent on Basmati rice cultivation methods
b) The conflict over the geographic origin of Basmati rice
c) Trademarking of Basmati rice by non-Indian entities
d) Patent granted to Indian farmers for traditional Basmati rice cultivation techniques
e) Use of Basmati rice in food products as a trademark
f) Biopiracy claims on Basmati rice cultivation practices

Answer:
a) U.S. patent on Basmati rice cultivation methods
b) The conflict over the geographic origin of Basmati rice
c) Trademarking of Basmati rice by non-Indian entities
f) Biopiracy claims on Basmati rice cultivation practices

Explanation:

• U.S. patent on Basmati rice: There were patent disputes between Indian entities
and companies in the U.S. attempting to patent cultivation techniques or the rice itself.
• Conflict over geographic origin: Basmati rice is traditionally grown in India and
Pakistan, and there were attempts to trademark Basmati rice in other countries
without recognizing its geographic origin.
• Trademarking: Some foreign companies have attempted to trademark Basmati rice,
which India successfully fought against by securing a Geographical Indication (GI)
registration.
• Biopiracy: There have been concerns about the use of traditional cultivation
techniques and the biopiracy of Basmati rice without compensating traditional
farmers.

6. Which of the following IPR issues have been raised regarding the
commercialization of Neem-based products globally?

(Select all that apply)

a) Patent on neem oil for use in cosmetics

b) Geographical Indication (GI) for neem-based products
c) Biopiracy allegations against foreign companies for neem’s medicinal properties
d) Trademark on neem as a pesticide formulation
e) Farmers’ rights to benefit from neem’s commercialization
f) Patent on neem’s antimicrobial properties

Answer:
a) Patent on neem oil for use in cosmetics
c) Biopiracy allegations against foreign companies for neem’s medicinal properties
e) Farmers’ rights to benefit from neem’s commercialization

Explanation:

95
• Patent on neem oil: There were disputes about patents granted on neem oil for use
in cosmetics and pesticides, even though neem is traditionally used for these
purposes in India.
• Biopiracy allegations: Neem’s medicinal properties were exploited without the
recognition of Indian traditional knowledge, which led to biopiracy accusations.
• Farmers’ rights: The commercialization of neem globally raised questions about
how farmers in India could benefit from the intellectual property generated from
neem-based products.

96