Introduction:

Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) are legal rights, which result from intellectual invention, innovation and discovery in the industrial, scientific, literary and artistic fields. These rights entitle an individual or group to the moral and economic rights of creators in their creation.

India continues to be on the ‘Priority Watch List’ of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) for lack of adequate intellectual property (IP) rights protection and enforcement, the USTR said in its Annual Special 301 Report, released recently.

Body:

The National IPR Policy (2016) is a vision document that aims to create and exploit synergies between all forms of intellectual property (IP), concerned statutes and agencies. It sets in place an institutional mechanism for implementation, monitoring and review. It aims to incorporate and adapt global best practices to the Indian scenario.

Some of the long standing issues of IPR regime in India:

• Innovators being able to receive, maintain and enforce patents particularly in the pharmaceutical sector; concerns over copyright laws not incentivizing the creation and commercialization of content
• India has an outdated trade secrets framework.
• India also further restricted the transparency of information provided on state-issued pharmaceutical manufacturing licenses, continues to apply restrictive patentability criteria to reject pharmaceutical patents.
• India has still has not established an effective system for protecting against the unfair commercial use, as well as the unauthorized disclosure, of undisclosed test or other data generated to obtain marketing approval for pharmaceuticals and certain agricultural chemical products
• India maintains extremely high customs duties directed to IP-intensive products such as medical devices, pharmaceuticals, Information and Communications Technology (ICT) products, solar energy equipment, and capital goods. These goods categories have been persistent challenges in trade talks between US and India.
• weak enforcement by courts and the police, lack of familiarity with investigative techniques and no centralized IP enforcement agency.
• The USTR also noted that India was ranked among the top five source economies for fake goods by the Organization of Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD) in 2019.
• The government’s 2019 draft Copyright Amendment Rules, if implemented, would have “severe” consequences for Internet-content rights holders as the proposed rules broadened the scope of compulsory licensing from radio and television broadcasting to online broadcasting.
• Trademark counterfeiting levels were “problematic” and there are “excessive delays” in obtaining trademarks due to a lack of examination quality.

Measures taken to strengthen the IPR regime in India:

• The statutes governing different kinds of IPRs in India are Patents Act, 1970; Trade Marks Act, 1999; Designs Act, 2000; Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999; Copyright Act, 1957; Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001; Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout-Design Act, 2000 and Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
• The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) is entrusted with matters concerning the specialized UN agency on IPRs, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), including coordination with other concerned Ministries or Departments.
• The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM) under the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Ministry of Commerce and Industry is entrusted with the responsibility of administering the laws relating to Patents, Designs, Trade Marks and Geographical Indications within the territory of India.
• The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001 is a sui generis legislation in India providing protection for plant varieties and rights of farmers and is under the aegis of the Ministry of Agriculture.
• The preservation of biological diversity in India is under the Ministry of Environment and Forests; the Biological Diversity Act 2002 provides mechanism for regulating access and ensuring fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the use of biological resources and associated traditional knowledge.
• India has always been conscious of its obligations in the international arena, and has acceded to a number of international conventions to further the cause of IPRs globally.
• India was the first country to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty 2013 for Access to Published Works by visually impaired persons.
• The accession to the Madrid Protocol in 2013 is a step towards global alignment for proprietors of marks.
• The Indian Patent Office has been recognized as an International Search Authority and an International Preliminary Examination Authority.
• The Intellectual Property Appellate Board hears appeals arising from the decisions of Controllers of Patents as also Registrars of Trade Marks and GIs.

Way forward:

• Fostering an environment where innovation flourishes and a knowledge economy is built, is the key idea. Hence, the policy should have a balance.
• It should encourage patenting and at the same time ensure that patentability of a product/process does not deter further innovation and progress.
• Intellectual Property must not be about patents on paper but dearth of application in reality. T
• The organizations such as CSIR and others must be encouraged to work upon socially useful applications of their patents.
• Support for innovation has to be accompanied with instruments that guard local companies against the misuse of market power, coercive bargaining and aggressive acquisition strategies.
• India needs to spread awareness on IPR in public and for its traditional industries to enable fair monetization of IP Rights.
• It needs to safeguard its patents, copyrights and traditional knowledge by ensuring easy IPR rules.