The Department Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Commerce (“Committee”) presented a report titled “161^st Report: Review of the Intellectual Property Rights Regime in India” (“Report”) in Rajya Sabha on 23^rd July, 2021. The Committee, headed by Shri V. Vijayasai Reddy, reviewed various Intellectual Property related statutes, practices and regulations and recommended measures to improve the current landscape relating to IPR. It included a chapter on IP-based financing and discussed how the same can be implemented in India.

The Report highlights the nature of IP assets and the pros and cons of using IP as a collateral while raising funds. The Report mentions that as opposed to tangible assets, the value of IP keeps increasing over time whereas value of tangible assets either remains stagnant or depreciates. This makes IP-based assets a valuable means for credit and finance. The government too has given credence to this system in its National IPR Policy of 2016 wherein it pushed for valuation of IP-based assets and using it as collateral. But then the lack of awareness, lack of infrastructure for valuation and the fear of inconsistency associated with valuation of IP is preventing the Indian economy from adopting this system.

The Report highlights that SARFAESI Act already includes intangible assets in its definition of property, thereby putting in place the basic foundation for the system. Therefore, better implementation and appropriate amendments can help bolster the infrastructure for IP-based financing in India. The Report features the Chinese and Singaporean models for IP-based financing as illustrations for India to adopt. In the Singaporean model the burden of credit extended to IP-owners is shared by the banks and the government. Under the Chinese model, the government extends help to financial institutions that accept IP as a collateral.

The Report has made the following recommendations:

1. Legislation needs to be put in place providing for uniform standards of IP valuation, mandatory maintaining of IP portfolio by businesses and spreading awareness about the effectiveness of IP-based assets as collateral.
2. The Government needs to indulge in discussions with and recommendations from financial institutions and other stakeholders for creating a mechanism for governing and facilitating IP-based financing in the country. A specific legislation for the same needs to be brought in place.
3. IP-based financing and transactions need to be promoted at the earliest by the government for rapid adoption of this system.    

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP

As opposed to an esoteric legal notion, intellectual property should be viewed as a powerful instrument for economic progress instead. A growing number of business choices are being made based on the use of intellectual property (IP). Invention and imagination are at the heart of new goods, brands and designs that come on the market practically every day. Many of these inventions are the result of small and medium-sized companies (SMEs). However, obtaining consumer recognition and loyalty is a challenging task for these SMEs. The use of IP like Geographical Indications and Certification Mark can help minimize the marketing related challenges. The author is of the opinion that GIs are better options for businesses than Certification marks for an effective way to gain market access.

A certification mark can be obtained by establishing a standard trade mark or adopting appropriate licensing arrangements. But the rules governing the use of the certification trade mark often acts like additional burden over the administration in registration process and over the regulation. Additionally, it can be revoked by third parties if the authorized users do not meet standards and certification marks are not recognised outside of specific geographic areas.

On the other hand, Geographical Indication can also be used to describe a brand’s reputation due to its place of origin. Although like certification mark GIs also improve the reputation and value of local products but GIs also boost the local economy by supporting local businesses. And since these items have a better reputation for quality, their manufacturers, many of whom are small and medium-sized businesses, can sell them to get higher profit.

Unlike Certification Mark, a GI label guarantees the origin and particular features of a product. Also, it helps consumers to understand the quality and origin of the items they buy by providing extensive information on where the goods that carry a GI label were manufactured and how they were created. As quality control and assurance of a quality output are intrinsic features of GI in many situations it helps in developing trust between product manufacturers with consumers and getting a high return on their investment with a GI. Along with the fact that GIs provide local job opportunities and help improve region’s international reputation, it’s clear that unlike certification marks which just support producer objectives and profit, GIs not only encourage producer goals but also the well-being of a whole region’s economy. Hence, GIs can become a more beneficial source for enhanced market value by business.

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP

Genome editing technologies (GET) have the potential to revolutionize biological research since they are precise, relatively affordable, and simple to apply. Also, new methods of gene editing like CRISPR-Cas9 allow scientists to add, remove, or change genetic material to add a positive characteristic or remove a detrimental one, which is regarded as safe since, in most situations, no foreign genes are utilized to change the plant genome. The author opines that the use of such GET is required for transgene-free better crop plants with features such as disease resistance, nutritional enhancement, tolerance to diverse abiotic stresses, and increased yield, for which the Government of India should approve genome editing sooner.

Although there are numerous concerns and debates about rising population rates, weather extremes, limited agricultural land availability, and rising abiotic and biotic stresses, all of which are significant constraints for food production and farming, the ability of gene-edited plants to address such key policy issues by developing pest-resistant or high-yield crops might hasten the adoption of GET. Further, India’s food security problems are much too serious to dismiss emerging technologies like gene editing, which might assist boost agricultural output, on principle.

Furthermore, gene-editing methods like CRISPR-Cas9 have opened up a new universe of possibilities for creating desirable variations in agricultural plants and microorganisms. Expansion of this technology will not only aid in the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), but will also provide nutrition, greater yields, and environmental security. This might also be a crucial strategy for acquiring ‘suitably modified’ plants that would assist in the attainment of the zero hunger goal objective and the long-term feeding of the nation’s growing population. Even according to recent research by NAAS, the genome editing business is a billion-dollar sector, and there has to be a clear strategy in place to benefit economically from such advancements.

As some countries, notably Japan, the United States, and Australia, have exempted such new crop varieties developed using advanced gene editing methods from regulations since they do not include foreign genetic material. On the same line, India’s approach to gene-editing technology must strike a balance between our national objectives and the potential of reaping economic benefits by solving critical challenges. For this reason, regulatory agencies should be proactive in promoting and establishing clear regulatory frameworks for the advancement of modern plant breeding technologies through an inclusive regulatory approach and public awareness campaigns.

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP

A sound intellectual property system is one of the key drivers in a knowledge-based economy, as it offers some form of monopoly control to creators in order to incentivize them to create original pieces of work. As per copyright law, when an individual expresses his work in a tangible form and obtains a copyright, he has the sole authority to determine its access parameters. However, the Covid-19 crisis has resulted in a sudden shift from classroom education to virtual learning, which has caused quite a few problems in the intellectual property realm. One of them is the newfound friction between IP barriers in accessing copyrighted content and the need for a more flexible system to facilitate online education.  

The concept of ‘open access’ in the digital space, which work by supplementing existing IPR frameworks and allowing access to content that would otherwise be restricted, has evolved along those lines, and has gained significant traction during these times. But even though many leading publishers have revised their licenses and allowed users to circumvent their paywall-based restrictions to access educational material for free, the author believes that such a system is premature and impractical in its approach, for many reasons.

Firstly, such a measure can only be temporary. Developing and implementing open access policies is a very time and resource-intensive affair. Since people are working from home during the pandemic and organizations are trying to cut costs, it is not a permanent solution to accessing educational resources. Another problem with implementing such policies is that it becomes difficult to follow the circulation of such open materials online, making them very easy to reproduce and copy. This not only affects a copyright holder’s right to litigate, which demotivates and disincentivizes them but also does not guarantee subsequent knowledge creation.

Furthermore, improving public access and innovation requires access to digital technology, which exacerbates the wealth divide. Instead, wider availability of infrastructure for knowledge creation along with open access would serve the purpose better. The issue of legal jurisdiction is yet another barrier when it comes to a copyright holder’s right to litigate, as the licenses in different jurisdictions would depend on the IPR laws there. Altogether, this would disincentivize knowledge creation.  

In spite of being a novel concept, the open access model presents a number of glaring problems that cannot be overlooked. The author thinks that other avenues have to be explored and that changes must be made to create a fair and equitable literary system that allows everyone to access information easily.

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Commerce, under the chairmanship of Mr. V Vijayasai presented a report titled ‘Review of the Intellectual Property Rights Regime in India’ in the Rajya Sabha on 23^rd July 2021. The Report was based on the intellectual property landscape in the country, and highlighted that several changes had to be made to overcome the shortcomings in the existing IPR regime. The report also laid down a list of detailed recommendations for different types of intellectual property rights, and addressed the issue from a public interest perspective, by delving into the amendments to the existing IP legislations, the need to improve IP awareness, and the importance of active government involvement to further the goal of strengthening the IPR framework in India.

One of the key aspects that the report dealt with was the issue of counterfeiting and piracy. Counterfeiting can be defined as the fraudulent imitation of things to deceive others, whereas piracy occurs when an original work is illegally copied and marketed at cheaper rates. Both counterfeiting and piracy have been established as criminal offences under a number of Indian legislations, which work in conjunction with each other to combat the spread of such practices.

The report highlights that it is essential to spread awareness about the trends and challenges surrounding counterfeiting and piracy among law enforcement agencies as well as the public. They proposed to do this through a myriad of schemes ranging from training programmes, street plays, social media campaigns, developing IP toolkits for the police, as well as multi-party webinars. The report also stressed on the importance of capacity building and inter-departmental collaboration to facilitate law enforcement agencies in implementing IP laws more stringently and efficiently. Additionally, the report features a recommendation that a special legislation be formulated and a central coordination body on IP enforcement be established in order to restrain the growing menace of IP crimes in a coordinated manner. 

The report mentions that development of a method that could estimate the revenue losses that the Indian government incurs due to counterfeiting and piracy is needed. This would then act as a tool in analysing the adverse effects of such crimes on the Indian economy, and aid the government in implementing corrective measures accordingly. 

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP