What's New

Comments & Summaries
October 20, 2021

Summary: ‘Strategies For Geographical Indications Protection: Takeaways From India’ By Ananthu S Hari & Prof. (Dr.) K.D Raju

Author: Intern – Ashley George

Strategies for Geographical Indications Protection: Takeaways from India is a paper published in 2021 [Ananthu S Hari & Prof. (Dr.) K.D Raju, Strategies for Geographical Indications Protection: Takeaways from India. National University of Advanced Legal Studies Law Review (2021)]. The paper highlights that the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 (GIGA) is a relatively new IP legislation, having only been enacted in late 2003. As a result, there are still areas of worry and confusion over the legislation’s execution in order to achieve the fundamental goals set forth when it was drafted. GIGA is an important legislation that goes well beyond simply meeting TRIPS responsibilities. Despite the fact that GIGA has been in effect for two decades, there is still a significant dearth of knowledge regarding the law.

In India, GI protection is not the same as it is in the EU and other developed countries. Wine and spirit protection is viewed as more crucial in the EU, whereas agricultural products and handicrafts are prioritised in India. As a result, GI protection measures must target these challenges independently. It is critical to have regional agreements among developing countries in order to properly preserve agricultural and handicraft exports. The author suggests that a similar agreement among Asian countries, akin to the EU Regulation on Geographical Indications, could be a viable option. This type of collaboration could help to bolster attempts to extend product protection.

In a developing country like India, where farmers and artisans are unable to adequately secure the GI-tagged items on their own, the government has a key role to play in terms of exporting, marketing, and infringement prevention. Since GI is regarded as “a poor man’s IPR,” government intervention is necessary to defend the collective rights and interests of GI holders. The establishment of a producer’s collective under government supervision, such as the INAO in France, may benefit the producers. In addition to the challenges of preventing infringement at the domestic level, the Government also has the extra responsibility of registering and marketing Indian products in foreign jurisdictions.

The paper concludes by putting forth the idea that enacting a comprehensive GI policy, forming a strong producer collective, and actively participating in regional agreements with GI protection measures are some of the positive initiatives India might pursue for greater GI protection. Apart from these steps, negotiating a bilateral trade agreement with the EU that focuses purely on GIs would also be undoubtedly helpful to Indian GIs. The paper can be accessed here: http://ciprnuals.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/III_01.pdf

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

  • Non Solicitation
  • Data Privacy & Protection
  • Conflict of Interest Policy
  • Data & Document Retention Practice
  • Firm Management Policy
  • Liability
  • Disclaimer
  • Privilege
  • Copyright
  • Billing Policy
  • Pro Bono