Babina Apat - Roll No - 4112021005 - PMLC - 4TH Sem LL.M Dissertation

Similarity Report ID: oid:26404:48247249
PAPER NAME
BABINA APAT_ROLL NO_4112021005_P

MLC_4TH SEM LL.M DISSERTATION (1).
docx
WORD COUNT CHARACTER COUNT
39771 Words 223127 Characters
PAGE COUNT FILE SIZE
118 Pages 179.2KB
SUBMISSION DATE REPORT DATE
Dec 23, 2023 1:22 AM GMT+5:30 Dec 23, 2023 1:24 AM GMT+5:30
9% Overall Similarity
The combined total of all matches, including overlapping sources, for each database.
6% Internet database 2% Publications database
Crossref database Crossref Posted Content database
8% Submitted Works database
Excluded from Similarity Report

Bibliographic material Quoted material
Cited material Small Matches (Less then 10 words)
Summary
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AN INDIAN
PERSPECTIVE
61
A SELECT ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
DISSERTATION
SUBMITED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIRMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF
MASTER IN LAW L.L.M
2021-2023
BY
BABINA APAT
ROLL NO. – 4112021005
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
DR. BIMAL PRASAD MISHRA (LECTURER)
DEPARTMENT OF MASTER IN LAW MADHUSUDAN LAW

UNIVERSITY CUTTACK (ODISHA)
2023
40
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the work contained in the dissertation

entitled INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS submitted by
BABINA APAT for the award of the degree of MASTER IN LAW to
19
the PRAVAS MANJARI LAW COLLEGE KEONJHAR is a record
of bonafide research works carried out by him under my direct
supervision and guidance.
I considered that the dissertation has reached the standards and

fulfilling the requirements of the rules and regulations relating to the
nature of the degree.
Date:
Place:
Signature of Supervisor
18
Acknowledgement
I am deeply grateful to my advisor,Bimal Prasad Mishra, for their unwavering
support and guidance throughout my master’s program. Their expertise and
patience have been invaluable to me and have played a crucial role in the success
of this dissertation.
22
I am grateful to P.M.Law College for providing me with the opportunity to
conduct my research and for all of the resources and support they provided. I
would like to extend a special thanks to K.T.Das Mohapatra.who went above
beyond to help me with my work.
10
I would also like to thank Dr. Tanuja panda for serving on my dissertation
committee and providing valuable feedback and suggestions. Their insights and
guidance were instrumental in helping me to shape my research and write this
dissertation.
I am deeply thankful to my friends and family for their love and support
during this process. Without their encouragement and motivation, I would not
have been able to complete this journey.
Finally, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to all of the participants

in my study. Their willingness to share their experiences and insights has been
invaluable to my research and has helped to make this dissertation a success.
Thank you for your time and contribution.
I am grateful to everyone who has supported me throughout this process.

Without your help and guidance, this thesis would not have been possible.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
S. No. Abbreviations Description
1 ABC Accessible Books Consortium

2 ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution
3 AICTE All India Council for
Technical Education
4 AIIMS All India Institute of MedicalSciences
5 AMU Aligarh Muslim University

6 APCTT Asian and Pacific Centre for
Transfer of Technology
3
7 ARDI Access to Research for Development and
Innovation
8 ASPI Access to Specialised Patent
Information
9 AU Annamalai University
10 AYUSH Ayurveda,YogaandNaturopa
thy,Unani,Siddhaand
Homeopathy
11 BARC Bhabha AtomicResearchCentre
12 BHU BanarasHinduUniversity
13 BIRPI BureauxfortheProtectionofIntellec
tualProperty
14 CBD ConventiononBiologicalDiversity
15 CDRI CentralDrugResearchInstitute
16 CD-ROM CompactDisc-ReadOnlyMemory
17 CEAC CopyrightEnforcementAdvisoryCouncil
18 CFTRI CentralFoodTechnologicalResearchInstitute
19 CGPDTM ControllerGeneralofPatents,Designsand Trademarks
20 CICS CentreforInternationalCooperationinScience
21 CIPAM CellforIPRPromotionandManagement
22 CL CompulsoryLicensing
23 CLRI CentralLeatherResearchInstitute
24 CSIR CouncilofScientificandIndustrialResearch
25 CSMCRI CentralSaltAndMarineChemicals
ResearchInstitute
26 DAE DepartmentofAtomicEnergy
27 DIPP DepartmentofIndustrialPolicyandPr
omotion
28 DPIIT DepartmentofPromotionofIndustry
andInternalTrade
29 DRDO DefenceResearchandDevelopmentOrganization
30 DST DepartmentofScienceandTechnology
31 DU DelhiUniversity
32 DUS Distinctiveness,UniformityandStability
33 EDV EssentiallyDerivedVariety
34 EPO EuropeanPatentOffice
35 FAO FoodandAgricultureOrganization
36 FER FirstExaminationReport
37 FTA FreeTradeAgreements
38 GATT General AgreementonTariffsandTrade
39 GDP GrossDomesticProduct
40 GI GeographicalIndications
41 GIR GeographicalIndicationsRegistry
42 Govt. Government
43 GU GujaratUniversity
44 HEI HigherEducationInstitutions
45 IARI IndianCouncilofAgriculturalResear
ch
46 ICMR IndianCouncilofMedicalResearch
47 ICT IndianInstituteofChemicalTechnolo
gy
48 ID IndustrialDesigns
49 IEEE InstituteofElectricalandElectronicsEngineers
50 IFC InnovationFacilitationCentres
51 IGC IntergovernmentalCommittee
52 IICT IndianInstituteofChemicalTechnolo
gy
53 IIP IndianInstituteofPetroleum
54 IISc. IndianInstituteofScience
55 IISER IndianInstitutesofScienceEducationand Research
56 IIT IndianInstituteofTechnology
57 ILO InternationalLabourOrganization
58 IMTECH InstituteofMicrobialTechnology
59 InPASS IndianPatentAdvancedSearchSystem
60 IOC International Olympic Committee

61 IP Intellectual Property
62 IPAB Intellectual Property Appellate Board
63 IPAIRS Improvised Version of Previous Search Engine
64 IPAS IndustrialPropertyAutomationSystem
65 IPD IntellectualPropertyDivision
66 IPEA InternationalPreliminaryExamination Authority
67 IPFC IntellectualPropertyFacilitationCentre
68 IPIC IntellectualPropertyinRespectofInte
grated Circuits
69 IPM IntellectualPropertyManagement
70 IPO IndianPatentOffice
71 IPR IntellectualPropertyRights
72 IPRSL IndianPerformingRightSocietyLimited
73 ISA InternationalSearchingAuthority
74 ISRO IndianSpaceResearchOrganization
75 IT InformationTechnology
76 IUCN InternationalUnionforConservationofNature
77 IVRI IndianVeterinaryResearchInstitute
78 JNCASR JawaharlalNehruCentreforAdvanced ScientificResearch
79 JPO JapanPatentOffice
80 KFC KentuckyFriedChicken
81 MCC MicrobialCultureCollection
82 MHRD Ministry of Human
ResourceDevelopmentnowMinistryofEducation
83 MoE MinistryofEducation
84 MSME Micro,SmallandMediumEnterprises
85 MTCC MicrobialTypeCultureCollection
86 NBA NationalBiodiversityAuthority
87 NCL NationalChemical Laboratory
88 NDA Non-DisclosureAgreement
89 NDUS Novelty,Distinctiveness,Uniformity
&Stability
90 NIF NationalInnovationFoundation
91 NII NationalInstituteofImmunology
92 NIIH National Institute ofImmunohaematology
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER - I
INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 12
CONCEPT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ................................................................. 14
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS IN INDIA ............................................................. 15
ROLE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

................................................................................................................................................... 17
ROLE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN ECONOMY ............................................. 19
TYPES OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ........................................................................ 20
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM..................................................................................... 20
INDIAN SCENARIO .............................................................................................................. 22
HYPOTHESIS ......................................................................................................................... 25
OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ....................................................................... 26
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ....................................................................................... 26
RESEARCH QUESTIONS .................................................................................................... 27
REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................................................................................ 27
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: CONCEPT AND DEVELOPMENTS ............. 28
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND RIGHTS .... 29
GENESIS OF PATENT LAW ........................................................................................... 29
THE GLOBAL SCOPE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF COPYRIGHTS LAW ......... 32
EVOLUTION OF LAW OF TRADEMARKS ................................................................. 33
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW .............................. 34
INVENTION AND DISCOVERY ......................................................................................... 34

CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 35
CHAPTER - II
INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: AN
ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................. 36
20
THE PARIS CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDUSTRIAL
PROPERTY (1883): THE PROLOGUE............................................................................... 38
THE BERNE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF LITERARY AND

ARTISTIC WORKS: THE PROLOGUE............................................................................. 39
MADRID AGREEMENT AND PROTOCOL RELATING TO THE MADRID

AGREEMENT (1891) ............................................................................................................. 39
THE MADRID AGREEMENT OF 1891 .............................................................................. 40

17
THE HAGUE AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE INTERNATIONAL
REGISTRATION OF INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS (1925) ..................................................... 40
NICE AGREEMENT (1957) ON THE UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS

AND SERVICES FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE (NICE Agreement). ....................... 41
24
THE LISBON AGREEMENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF APPELLATIONS OF
ORIGIN AND THEIR INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION (1958) ............................. 41
THE ROME CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERFORMERS,

PRODUCERS OF PHONOGRAMS AND BROADCASTING ORGANIZATIONS
(1961) ........................................................................................................................................ 41
WIPO CONVENTION (1967)................................................................................................ 42
THE EVOLUTION OF WIPO........................................................................................... 42

17
TRADEMARK LAW TREATY (1994) ................................................................................ 43
THE WIPO COPYRIGHT TREATY (WCT), 1996 ............................................................ 43
THE WIPO PERFORMANCES AND PHONOGRAMS TREATY (1996) ...................... 45

91
PATENT LAW TREATY OF 2000 ....................................................................................... 46
THE SINGAPORE TREATY ON TRADEMARKS, 2006 ................................................. 47

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 48
CHAPTER - III
84
INDIA’S ENDEAVOURS TOWARDS THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY RIGHTS ................................................................................................................ 49
DIMENSIONS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION IN THE

CONSTITUTION .................................................................................................................... 50
AN OVERVIEW OF INDIAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS REGIME ..... 51
THE DEVELOPING INDIAN PATENT SYSTEM ............................................................ 52
FEATURES OF INDIA'S Strong PATENT SYSTEM ........................................................ 53
INTRODUCTION TO INDIA'S COPYRIGHTS LAW...................................................... 53
CHANGES TO INDIAN COPYRIGHT LAW AS OF 2012 PER THE COPYRIGHT

(AMENDMENT) ACT ............................................................................................................ 54
INTRODUCTION TO INDIA'S TRADEMARK LAW ...................................................... 55
THE DESIGNS ACT, 2000 .................................................................................................... 55

53
THE GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS OF GOODS (REGISTRATION AND
PROTECTION) ACT, 1999 ................................................................................................... 56
PROTECTING PLANT VARIETIES AND FARMERS' RIGHTS IN A GLOBAL

ECONOMIC DOWNTURN Act of 2001 .............................................................................. 66
INDIA'S PROCEDURES FOR ENFORCING RIGHTS TO INTELLECTUAL

PROPERTY ............................................................................................................................. 67
MECHANISM OF THE LAW............................................................................................... 67
INTERPRETATIONS BY THE COURTS........................................................................... 68
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 69
CHAPTER - IV
NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN INDIA
................................................................................................................................................... 70
IMPORTANT IP DEVELOPMENT IN INDIA IN LAST 12 MONTHS .......................... 72

RELEVANCE TO INTERNATIONAL PHARMACY OF EMERGING IP CASE LAW
................................................................................................................................................... 78
THE GOVERNMENT'S EFFORTS TO STRENGTHEN THE PROTECTION OF

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ............................................................................................ 82
STEPS TAKEN BY FICCI..................................................................................................... 83
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 84
CHAPTER - V
PROBLEMS OF PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE
INFORMATION SOCIETY .................................................................................................. 84
PRINCIPAL DUTIES RELATED TO THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL

PROPERTY RIGHTS ............................................................................................................ 86
THE STRUGLES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST PLAGIARISM AND THEIR ISSUES ... 89
THE ISSUES IN THE STRUGGLE AGAINST PIRACY .................................................. 91
THE COMMERCIALISATION OF SCIENCE AND THE PROBLEMS CONCERNING

PATENTS ................................................................................................................................ 92
PERSONNEL TRAINING AND THE ISSUES OF STIMULATING INNOVATIVE

THINKING .............................................................................................................................. 96
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS ................................................................................ 97
CHAPTER - VI
THE ANACHRONICITY OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ........................................ 98
ENCRYPTATION OF TRADEMARKS ............................................................................ 106
OFFERINGS OF ADVICE .........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
SUGGESTIONS .................................................................................................................... 108
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PATENT APPLICATIONS IN ELECTRONIC FORM .......... 110
SUGGESTIONS REGARDING TRADEMARKS IN E -FORM ................................. 113

INTRODUCTION
Intellectual property (IP) has to do with how the human brain is used to create and invent. To
invent or develop something new, a variety of inputs such as labour, time, energy, skill, money,
etc. are needed. The legislation recognizes and rewards creatives and innovators by granting
them monopolies or the right to legally benefit from their works. These intellectual property
rights (IPR) are territorial rights, similar to physical property, that can be registered with a legal
body in a tangible form that can be bought, sold, or licensed. IPR offers a safe space for
merchants, scientists, artists, investors, and others to promote creativity and scientific temper.
IPR is the main focus of international trade practises and means of subsistence in the current
globalisation scenario. One of the most important tools for assisting the nation's goals for
innovation and growth is a well-balanced IPR system. Any society's growth is directly
influenced by IPR and its regulatory environment. IPR ignorance leads to the death of
inventions, increased infringement risk, financial loss, and the downfall of the nation's
intellectual age.1
78
People and organizations often have rights to intellectual property (IP) when it comes to things
like innovations, literary and artistic works, names, symbols, photographs, and designs that are
utilized for business. For a limited while, they enable the artist to prohibit unauthorized use of
their creations. Artistic and literary works (i.e., cultural productions) and industrial innovations
(i.e., commercial developments) are the two main types of intellectual property. New norms for
business, trade, and the administration of post-industrial societies emerged during the industrial
revolution.2
The global information and communication revolution that is currently underway is upending
long-standing organisations and customs in ways that are hard to understand. Unprecedented
shifts in the political and socioeconomic systems are forcing governments to establish legislation
pertaining to the management of information in society. The phenomenal growth of the Internet
and computers, along with the growing popularity of online shopping, has elevated the
1
1
Spiers, Duncan. “INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.” Property Law Essentials, Edinburgh University
Press,
8
2008, pp. 23–56. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g09zfv.7. Accessed 20 Oct. 2023.
2
Lu, Louis Y. Y. “PROTECTING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.” Research Technology Management,
6
vol. 50, no. 2, 2007, pp. 51–56. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24135076. Accessed 2 Oct. 2023.
significance of intellectual property rights to a new level.3 One disadvantage of this upward trend
in reliance on ICT and the Internet is the difficulty in detecting and preventing IP infringement in
the digital realm. Problematically, there is no clear solution to the question of how to prevent
unauthorized use of intellectual property on the internet. Online intellectual property crimes are
more common than offline ones due to the anonymity and accessibility of accessing, copying,
and transmitting material over the internet. An infringement of intellectual property occurs in
cyberspace whenever someone uses someone else's trademark, trade name, service mark,
photograph, or audio or video content without permission or a license. Various forms of online
copyright infringement, including framing, meta-tags, deep hyperlinking, and similar concepts,
have emerged due to the unique nature of the internet.
The Indian legal system as it currently exists is immature and cannot handle a range of
difficulties pertaining to domain name protection, electronic copyrights, "e" patens, and "e"
5
trademarks. Additionally, India's current legal system is unable to offer remedies for violations
of intellectual property rights. The Information Technology Act of 2000 attempts to protect
property owners' rights and provide security through provisions pertaining to digital signatures;
however, it falls short in handling cases involving the exploitation of intellectual property on the
internet. Furthermore, India's current intellectual property laws are insufficient to address the
issue of electronic property, which is being utilised without permission everywhere in the globe
outside of the legal system's physical borders. A number of wealthy nations have laws protecting
intellectual property in virtual form, including the United States of America and Japan. India
must create legislation to address a number of concerns with digital or electronic property,
domain names, and other associated matters. Consequently, there has been an endeavor to trace
2
the development, transition, and outcomes of intellectual property law in the digital era. The
protection of intellectual property rights in the digital domain has also been the subject of efforts
to coordinate worldwide developments. It draws attention to the necessity of regulations in India
protecting intellectual property in electronic form.4
4
3
Hettinger, Edwin C. “Justifying Intellectual Property.” Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 18, no. 1, 1989, pp. 31–
52. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2265190. Accessed 29 Oct. 2023.
49
Shiva, Vandana. “Agricultural Biodiversity, Intellectual Property Rights and Farmers’ Rights.” Economic and
Political Weekly, vol. 31, no. 25, 1996, pp. 1621–31. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4404305. Accessed 27 Oct.
2023.
CONCEPT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Ideas are not the same as things. A concept gives something specific a new meaning. The legal
definition of possession modifies the significance of objects such as buildings, cars, books, etc.
This possession makes me very happy to own property. The idea of property and ownership is
meaningless without legal rights. The term "property" refers to anything that a person can legally
own. The most basic definition of ownership is the unalienable right to possess, use, and transfer
property. An owner of intellectual property (IPR) has multiple legal rights, one of which is the
exclusive right to prohibit others from using their work, similar to how a car owner can restrict
others from using their vehicle without their permission.5
Not every property has the same physical presence as houses, vehicles, and books. Intangible
property (IP) includes items that can be owned but are not tangible, such stories, mathematical
formulas, etc. The notion of intellectual property is particularly reliant on cultural beliefs.
In order to get a better grasp on the meaning of the word "Intellectual Property Rights," let's
break it down. The mind, and more specifically the intellectual pursuits, are what the word
"intellectual" alludes to. The present area of law, which is concerned with human ingenuity,
innovation, and uniqueness, is set free by this clause. There are three main branches of IP law.
The first deals with safeguarding industrial property, which encompasses both the secrecy of
knowledge and patents for new discoveries. Second only to copyright and design in protecting
form and appearance are moral rights. Second, the law safeguards one's good name and likeness
via trademark registration and the tort of passing off.6
Consequently, it has more to do with the kind of property that an individual makes by using his
imagination than it does with already-existing property that an individual purchases. Like other
types of property, intellectual property is described by the term "property," which refers to a
collection of rights held by the owner. As a result, the owner of intellectual property can handle
it much like the owner of real property; that is, it can be transferred in whole or in part, used for
commercial purposes, and subject to the owner's exclusive use. In essence, intellectual property
1
5
Stith, Clark D. “International Intellectual Property Rights.” The International Lawyer, vol. 31, no. 2, 1997, pp.
311–15.
11
JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40707312. Accessed 18 Oct. 2023.
6
Antia, N. H. “Intellectual Property Rights.” Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 27, no. 27, 1992, pp. 1374–76.
rights are negative rights. If others are eager to obtain the innovation or product, then value
might be added to that property.7
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS IN INDIA
Aspects of the 1995 Agreement on Post-Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights

67
India has the Patents Act of 1970, Trade Marks Act of 1958, and Copyright Act of 1957 in effect
38
on the date the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement came into
effect. They were thought to be the fundamental components of intellectual property defence.
The 1911 Designs Act was also in force. On the other hand, new subjects like Geographical
Indications (GIs) and Lay-Design of Integrated Circuits were introduced and covered additional
20
territory in the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement. The Trade-
Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement also defined "undisclosed
information" and outlined the conditions for its protection. In these sectors, India lacked laws
66
and rules. "Members shall give effect to the provisions of this Agreement," according to Article 1
of the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement, as was previously
mentioned. Nonetheless, as long as "more extensive protection than is required by this
Agreement is implemented in domestic law and does not contravene the provisions of this
Agreement," members of the WTO were not forced to do so. The Members were also "...free to
determine the appropriate method of implementing the provisions of this Agreement within their
legal system and practise," according to Article 1.
In ancient India there was no need of copyright protection, because low population and honesty
between the people, but now a days due to development in technology, peoples try to use others
work for wrongful benefits. In India the Copyright law is firstly enacted by British Government
which is known as Indian Copyright Act of 1847 (Act XX of 1847) enacted. This legislation was
not sufficient for give eth effective protection to the Ownres, but in the period of 1847 to 1911
many developments in the country in copyright related subject matters.13 Thereafter again many
chances enacted in the old Act and new law codified in England and it is known as Copyright
Act, 1911 of England.
7
7
Väisänen, Tuire Anniina. “Competition Law and Intellectual Property Rights.” Enforcement of FRAND
Commitments under Article 102 TFEU: The Nature of FRAND Defence in Patent Litigation, 1st ed., Nomos
Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 2011, pp. 27–32. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv941w6t.6. Accessed 29 Oct.
2023.
An immediate criticism might be leveled against India for having portions of its patent law that
36
conflicted with the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement, even
though the country had a full decade to adopt or change these provisions. Copyright and
100
trademark laws were largely respected by the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
Rights Agreement. Protecting designs for integrated circuit layouts and geographical markers
was not an oversight in India back then. It was also necessary to pass new legislation to save
plant types. India had time to amend or enact new intellectual property legislation between 1995,
38
when the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement came into effect, and
2005.
In today's oversaturated market, standing out from the throng can be challenging for businesses.
Fortunately, Trademark is here to rescue the day. A trademark or brand is a powerful commercial
communication tool that may draw in customers and set a company's goods and services apart
from the competition. People who see the trademark are immediately familiar with the company
and its products or services, which makes them less likely to seek out alternatives. A customer's
purchase decision could be influenced by the brand.
Businesses may make better use of the web and social media with trademarks. When people are
seeking for a product or service, the first thing they type into a search engine or social media site
is the brand. When more people use a website or social media platform, it rises in the rankings,
which in turn attracts more people, more consumers, and more awareness of the business. It can
be easier to hire with a trademark. Positive emotions can be evoked by brands. Jobs become
more appealing to potential employees because of this. When workers have good impressions of
the company and its offerings, they are more likely to stay put.
The Indian Patent legislation was passed by the Indian Parliament with specific modifications
21
and was updated three times (in 1999, 2002, and 2005) in accordance with the Trade Related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement. The main objective of the Third Patent
(Amendment) Bill, which was passed in 2005, was to eliminate section 5 of the 1970 law and
establish a product patent regime in the chemical and pharmaceutical industries The third
amendment's main components are the provisions pertaining to "compulsory licencing" for
26
medications that are truly life-saving, as well as the definition of "new entities" (with reference
to chemicals) to limit the "ever greening" of patent applications for any new uses of the products
that are already on the market. Pre-grant and post-grant oppositions have been made available in
order to prevent undesired and unjustified patent applications from being filed at the application
stage and to give those engaged in relevant work or research the opportunity to contest the
"invention" at that same stage.
The Indian Copyright Act of 1957 has undergone five amendments, the most significant of
70
which was in 1994, to make it consistent with the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
5
Rights Agreement. Significant modifications to the Indian Copyright Law were made in 1994
and went into force on May 10, 1995. In the context of copyright in India, the June 1994
revisions to the Copyright Act were historic in and of themselves. The Copyright Law in India
clarified for the first time the following:8
55
(i) the rights of a copyright holder;
(ii) the position on software rentals;
(iii) the user's right to make backup copies; and
(iv) the amendments imposed severe penalties and fines for software copyright
infringement.
106
ROLE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Intellectual property encompasses all creations that result from the application of human
intelligence and thought processes. All significant scholarly, creative, specialized, and logical
achievements in human knowledge are governed by intellectual property (IP). The creator has
the legal authority to validate their idea through intellectual property rights (IPR).
A limited right to use an item or invention for a limited period is granted to the creator or
producer by these legal rights. A nation can't advance without safeguarding its intellectual
property rights (IPR). Intellectual property rights (IPRs) can facilitate the launch of new
businesses, the consolidation of inefficient industries, and the acquisition and development of
innovative technology. Innovation in technology, better market organization to promote
production and consumption, and the establishment of enabling institutions are all components of
a flourishing economy.
4
8
52. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2265190. Accessed 29 Oct. 2023
The GDP and employment rates of both developed and emerging countries are heavily
influenced by industries that revolve on intellectual property. Businesses dependent on
intellectual property are essential to any contemporary economy, and they are on the rise as
countries move away from producing low-value commodities and services in sectors like mining
and agriculture.
Intellectual property rights are one of several elements that affect the development and
advancement of economic processes. Expanding intellectual property rights might theoretically
help or hurt economic growth. In the end, it's starting to look like a stronger and more assured
system of intellectual property protection may improve economic growth, social change, and
formative opportunities if it were designed to encourage interesting and evolving problems.9
In order to build some degree of sustainability, a nation at a crossroads in its development, like
India, must keep a close watch on how to combine economic progress with welfare
considerations. Every nation may benefit economically, socially, and culturally from intellectual
property if there is a framework in place that protects it fairly and efficiently.
Particularly in the terrible circumstances of today, development has become the cornerstone of
any organisation trying to carve out a space for itself. Advancements in technology serve to
protect intellectual property rights (IPR), and your company can gain a significant advantage
over the competition by making use of this innovation.
Businesses that invest heavily in research and development to create distinctive products and
services stand to gain substantially from protected innovation.
Intellectual property rights (IPRs) can either hinder or help economic progress, according to
standard economic theory. While there may be a positive correlation, the scant data imply that it
is contingent upon other arguments in favor of IP protection. Finally, IPRS has the potential to be
a market-based, realistic answer to issues plaguing information distribution and production
marketplaces.
Ensuring the well-being of the population and the sustainable growth of all economies,
intellectual property will assume a more significant role in the information economy of the
8
9
6
twenty-first century. In fact, IPR has developed into an intellectual currency that supports
business competition, innovation, and global economic progress. The European Union, several
individual countries, and the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) all took action to
protect IP-based businesses in response to different developments in local and national
economies.
Advancements in technology serve to protect intellectual property rights (IPR), and your
company can gain a significant advantage over the competition by making use of this innovation.
Businesses that invest heavily in research and development to create distinctive products and
services stand to gain substantially from protected innovation.
Intellectual property rights (IPRs) can either hinder or help economic progress, according to
standard economic theory. While there may be a positive correlation, the scant data imply that it
is contingent upon other arguments in favor of IP protection. Finally, IPRS has the potential to be
a market-based, realistic answer to issues plaguing information distribution and production
marketplaces.
Ensuring the well-being of the population and the sustainable growth of all economies,
intellectual property will assume a more significant role in the information economy of the
twenty-first century.
ROLE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN ECONOMY

The ability to legally restrict the use of one's creations or even outright ban their use is what
intellectual property rights give. Offering customers competitive, creative products and services
that they desire and need is the end purpose of intellectual property rights. New products,
businesses, and entire sectors can spring up thanks to publically financed basic research that is
incentivized to be developed and commercialized through an intellectual property rights (IPR)-
based innovation system.
Any system put in place to safeguard intellectual property should have two main economic goals.
The initial stage in attracting investments in research and development and commercial
innovation is to provide first-mover rights to utilize and sell newly-produced technology,
commodities, and services. The second objective is to encourage the widespread use of
innovative technology for economic development by providing incentives for IP owners to
commercialize their works.10
TYPES OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

A. COPYRIGHT:
The idea that a creator should possess exclusive "Copyright" over his work solidified at the
start of the 18th century as a result of new technological advancements that made mass book
replication feasible.
The phrase "Copier of words" is the source of the word copyright. The definition of "copy" is
simply "transcript, imitation, reproduction of an original work of art, picture, or similar
material." Therefore, the light in literary property that is authorised and recognised by
positive law is the copyright. The creator of a work of literature or art is granted an intangible
incorporeal right that gives him the exclusive right to reproduce it in multiple copies for
publication and sale for a predetermined amount of time.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, "Copyright is an exclusive right given by law
for a certain ten of years to an author, composer etc to print, publish and sell copies of his
original work"11
Copyright only applies to ideas expressed. An idea, concept, subject, or plot are all free of
copyright. The original expression of a notion or piece of information in a tangible form is
what is protected, not the original idea or information. The ideas themselves are not protected
by copyright; only the manner in which they are expressed is. The original author's words,
musical notation, colours, shapes, and other creative expression are all protected by copyright
law. Copyright law shields the owner of creative works from those who "Copy," or take and
use the form in which the author originally expressed their work. Violation of copyright is
limited to the form, manner, alteration, and expression of the author's idea. Copyright is a
beneficial interest in movable property. Any beneficial interest in movable property may be
transferred in accordance with it.
The exclusive right of the copyright holder to let others to utilise their creations is known as
copyright. However, copyright laws typically specify the actions related to the work that the
1
10
Stith, 4Clark D. “International Intellectual Property Rights.” The International Lawyer, vol. 31, no. 2, 1997, pp.
311–15. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40707312. Accessed 18 Oct. 2023.
11
copyright owner is only permitted to take. It essentially means that others are prohibited from
doing the same thing because doing so would violate copyright. Reproduction, adaptation,
and publication rights are the three fundamental rights of a copyright holder. Literary,
104
theatrical, musical, and creative works, as well as motion pictures, recordings, and
broadcasts, are all protected by copyright. The creation of a work gives rise to copyright, a
proprietary right. Copyright denotes the exclusive right to utilize the work in a specific way,
which can vary across different types of works. There will be no lapse in copyright protection
for as long as the author is alive, plus an extra sixty years if published during their lifetime.
Copyright law only protects works that are uniquely an author's; nevertheless, a work does
not have to pass an imitation test to be protected. No matter how good or valuable the
work is, it is still protected.
B. PATENT: "Letters Patent" is where the term "patent" first appeared. The term "Letters
Patent" refers to open letters as opposed to closed letters.
A plethora of new inventions appeared in the realms of art, manufacturing, mechanical, and
101
more towards the end of the nineteenth century. There was a subsequent upsurge in the level
of anxiety among innovators about the possibility of technique infringement. To protect the
inventors' interests, the then-ruling British government passed the Patents and Design Act.
The definition of "patent" is simply the gift of any right, property, or jurisdiction to one or
more people by the national government or sovereign. The term "Patent" refers to the tool
used to make such an award.
Another way of looking at it is that the government grants people the right to own certain
ideas and then they can't make, use, or sell anything that has those ideas in it. The same rules
that apply to the sale or licensing of any other kind of property also apply to patents.
B. TRADE MARK
Products and services offered by different companies can be easily distinguished from one
another through the use of trademarks. "Visible signs" refers to a broad range of indicators.
When a customer purchases a product believing it to have come from a specific source when
in fact it did not and discovers later that the product is subpar, he has been deceived. In the
process, traders' reputations suffer if fake goods are passed off as coming from them. The
interests of the trader and the customer can be protected if there is a clear indicator that
indicates the source of goods coming from such a source. One term for such a symbol is
"trademark."
C. BUSINESS DESIGNS
An article is differentiated not only by its functionality but also by its aesthetic appeal, which
typically influences the buyer's preference for the item. Therefore, from a business
perspective, the way an item is designed and packaged matters. The creative process of
giving industrially manufactured goods a formal or beautiful appearance is known as
industrial design. The term "design" refers exclusively to the form, arrangement, pattern, or
embellishment that is given to an object through any industrial process, whether it be manual,
mechanical, chemical, separate, or mixed, and that is evaluated exclusively by the viewer's
eyes in the final product. It's obvious that design refers to an article's application of shape,
texture, and other elements rather than the article itself. The features originate in the mind.
He provides the concepts he has conceptualised a tangible, visible shape, such as a picture,
specimen, porotype, or model. The notion or idea that makes up the design could be
something that can be represented in two or three dimensions. The phrase "industrial design"
also describes the requirement that products be able to be produced industrially or that their
designs may be used to make goods.12
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

88
Problems with protecting intellectual property have arisen as a result of the expansion of
information technology and the shifting focus of IP online. This study will identify areas where
the fighting mechanism has to be strengthened in light of the Indian context.
INDIAN SCENARIO
In terms of total Internet usage, India is among the world's top ten countries. Despite having a
low rate of Internet penetration, India has emerged as the global centre for software creation and
is now a sought-after travel destination. Due to the rise in Internet usage, copyright protection
issues pertaining to digital transmission have gotten worse. It's an illogical circumstance.
Stronger legal protection for technical measures with restricted exceptions for fair use would
ultimately deplete public domain and undermine the public interest basis of copyright in India.
7
12
2023.
The Internet might seriously disrupt copyright enforcement if it does not offer legal protection
for technological methods.
In order to resolve issues pertaining to the conduct of electronic business arising from
"cyberspace," India passed the Information Technology Act, 2000. The IT Act does not establish
a formal structure for handling Internet copyright breaches. As Section 43 of the Information
Technology Act of 2000 makes clear, several clauses may be interpreted as attempting to address
specific aspects of copyrights. This section deals with the penalty for causing harm to a computer
system.
Copyright holders have good reason to be concerned about the dangers the digital revolution
poses. At the expense of public domain, technical protection methods have tipped the scales in
favour of right holders. It established a novel and potent "Access right" that is used to stop
infringement on reproduction that is allowed by current copyright exceptions. Reproductions that
are allowed for archival and educational purposes, as well as reproductions required for research
that are allowed under fair dealing principles, can all be prevented with the application of
technical protection methods. In relation to India, additional clauses will be incorporated into the
current copyright legislation to offer legal defence for "digital rights management" and
"technological protection measures." Even though the Copyright Act of 1957 has been amended
in some ways, it is crucial to take into account how beneficial these changes will actually be
when it comes to electronic copyrighted content. The Centre for Internet and Society has offered
a succinct review of the current Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012.13
The viewpoint of a developing nation informed the creation of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957. It
has consistently made an effort to strike a balance between diverse interests. It has always aimed
to make sure that the rights of creators of creative works are scrupulously upheld in conjunction
with the public interest that is served by the material's widespread availability and usefulness.
Our Copyright Act, for example, includes provisions for:
(i) compulsory and statutory licencing, acknowledging the value of making works
available, particularly at a reasonable price;
(ii) cover versions, acknowledging that more participants foster a more active music
8
13
6
industry;
(iii) a broadly construed right of fair dealing for private use, acknowledging the
distinctions between individual use and widespread commercial misuse; and
(iv) conformity with WIPO internet treaties necessitates the implementation of anti-
circumvention and digital rights management measures.
As a result, given how quickly and consistently markets and technology are evolving, it is
imperative that the legal system be modified to respond to these innovations in a way that is both
suitable and effective. By doing so, we can ensure that copyright and related rights will continue
to uphold the following principles, which are relevant irrespective of technological
5
developments: encouraging the creation and sharing of new creative materials; acknowledging
the worth of their contributions by giving them some say over how those materials are used and
letting them profit from it; finding a fair balance between private interests and the public interest,
especially in research, education, and information access; and finally, promoting cultural,
scientific, and economic progress.
On top of that, additional Indian regulations regarding IP protection do not address the
safeguarding of IP in digital form. These present laws do not address online infringement of
patents and copyrights, sometimes known as cyber squatting. As was previously established,
Indian law clearly excludes business methods from patentability. The protection of intellectual
property in electronic form, including peer-to-peer file sharing, phishing, caching, online
copying, metatagging, linking, and framing, is not addressed in any way by the Information
39
Technology Act of 2000. This is becoming an increasingly important issue in the context of
regulating intellectual property rights, particularly in relation to the Internet. The Act doesn't
address the consequences of any online copyright infringement. It contains no clauses that would
penalise "pirates," or people who violate copyright, for their online actions. One significant issue
that this Act does not address is internet piracy. Furthermore, the Information Technology Act of
2000 releases a network service provider from liability in the case that it can demonstrate that it
acted with due diligence and ignorance; nevertheless, the act does not state who would be held
accountable for the violation in that scenario. When a third party information or data provision
crime is committed, this clause will undoubtedly lead to issues.
All things considered, intellectual property law has significantly changed in reaction to shifts in
the market and in technology. Central to the new structure are the monetary considerations of IP
rights. The primary goal is to reward investors, not to foster individual creativity or the public
distribution of knowledge. The context for policy discussions involving intellectual property
protection is now modern economic analysis, with its distinctive concentration on efficiency.
Occasionally, arguments will reference ideals of fairness and equity.
Certain new sectors covered by the Indian legal framework are not covered by the previous IP
regulations and institutions. This is the situation, for example, when business procedures,
databases, domain names, and computer software are patentable and then the intermediary
liability is imposed. In accordance with several national legal precedents, computer software is
now eligible for copyright protection as literary works. All members of the TRIPs Agreement are
expressly required to follow that strategy. Even though this has demonstrated how copyright can
be applied to new contexts, a great deal of disagreement persists because of the usefulness of
software and its difficult integration with literary works.14
Even while many of the new issues were addressed by these legislation, technological
advancements have left intellectual property law facing new and more complicated challenges.
Convergence of various application kinds based on the shared infrastructure of digital technology
has been one of the key directions of these advances.
Because of the rapid increase in the migration of intellectual property online and the present
status of the information age, it is essential for an IT hub like India to provide adequate
protection for intellectual property in electronic form. India must increase the legal protections
for intellectual property if it wants to reach its ultimate aim of creating a free and unfettered
environment for IP protection and promotion.
HYPOTHESIS
Beyond traditional scholarly limitations and reductionist methodologies, we require a fully
nuanced understanding of legal protection in order to evaluate the strengthening of protection to
intellectual property in technological circumventions. A world devoid of needs is by definition
unreal and incapable of being improved upon.
11
14
Thus, the hypothesis suggests that, in the analogy of research and development by large
companies as assignees of the intellectual property rights, attention to changing parlance and
techno legal needs is urgently needed. A balance must be struck to prevent us from becoming
victims of neo colonialism. Electronic forms of intellectual property are not adequately protected
by the current Indian legislation governing IP rights.
OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

When analysing how best to safeguard intellectual property online, researchers will likely stress
the need for stronger legal protections. The current system is inadequate to safeguard intellectual
property in digital form. Furthermore, in this age of digitization, information, and technology, the
cyberspace intellectual property rights arena is mostly saturated, leaving little room for
improvement. In particular, the worldwide disparity in the protection of Indian IP rights is an
example of how Indian law is falling behind international trends in the field. Given the nearly
90
universal protection mechanisms in the field of digital intellectual property rights in Japan,
Europe, and the US, it is imperative that Indian law conform to developed-world standards and
incorporate explicit provisions for protecting digital versions of IP.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

In this age of rampant piracy, the present research would provide a foundation for outlining how
to safeguard intellectual property rights in digital formats. Business software Alliance recently
released a survey stating that in 2014, 43% of all computer software was pirated, up from 41% in
2013. Piracy costs the IT industry $50 billion annually and affects 3 million employment. Out of
a total of 900 units deployed in 2009, 530 million were pirated, with 30% of all piracy occurring
83
in Asia. According to reports, the United States has the lowest piracy rate (20%), followed by
Japan (21%). With a rate of 67%, Bangladesh ranks first. The paper also states that a drop of
only 10% in global piracy would lead to the creation of 435,000 employment, the generation of
$5.4 billion, and the injection of $41 billion into local economies.
Thus, the study is highly relevant in light of the current situation, as it sheds light on how Indian
legislative efforts might be made compatible to provide a workable solution to the matrix of law
and technology.15
4
15
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The current investigation will try to find rational solutions to the following questions:
(i) To what extent, given the current state of the information infrastructure, can legal
protection be extended for IPRs in electronic form?
(ii) Do you think Indian law is adaptable enough to preserve the fine balance between IP
protection and the public interest?
(iii) How far can the Intellectual Property/Information Technology conundrum be resolved?
(iv) What measures might be implemented to guarantee international IP rights protections are
consistent?
(v) To what extent can changes in the law in India accommodate advancements in the field of
standard essential patents elsewhere?
(vi) How do we determine the responsibility of intermediaries and online service providers for IP
theft on the internet?
(vii) What effect has the ongoing discussion about network neutrality had on efforts to safeguard
IP online?
(viii) In the absence of sufficient legal protection in the field of e-trademarks, can we rely solely
on court interpretations to safeguard the interests of consumers and manufacturers?16
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Articles, books, amendments, international conventions, and JSTOR contributions by eminent
jurists have been studied and analyzed in a respectful manner as part of the research on the
subject. A regulatory framework has been suggested for the Indian situation based on an analysis
of rulings from Indian, US, UK, Japanese, Australian, and EU courts. Other great journals to
87
peruse are the International Journal of Communications Technology, the International Journal of
Law and Technology, and the Indian Journal of Intellectual Property Law.
16 9
2023.
This research could pave the way for a formalised call to action to improve India's current legal
environment for IP protection. Given that existing Indian laws make no mention of protecting
intellectual property rights in their electronic manifestations, this opens the door to investigating
whether or not such protection is possible. This research aims to bridge the gap in legal
protection that has arisen as a result of technological developments. The research would pave the
way for future experts in the field, as this is likely to be a major focus of IP law in the near
future.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: CONCEPT AND DEVELOPMENTS
Copyrights and patents protect the written expression of ideas and the embodied execution of
those ideas in physical form. The phrase "intellectual property rights" (IPRs) refers to the legal
protections afforded to works of creativity. The 'intellect' is the primary source of its value
creation. The protection of this value added at the time of idea conception is the goal. Intellectual
property law governs the making, using, and profiting from of works of the mind or the
imagination. Different types of intellectual property1 confer ownership rights on abstract
concepts or ideas that cannot be physically touched. Non-material property that results from
mental activity and derives its worth from an idea or set of ideas is what we mean when we talk
about intangible assets. The most common form of I.P. The majority of rights are regarded as
private property.
Intellectual property rights often pertain to the management of the concrete manifestations or
14
expressions of the abstract non-physical entity, or res, of intellectual property. The right to create
and exercise control over material manifestations of an idea is safeguarded by intellectual
property systems. Legally speaking, there would need to be more in place to give such protection
to a thought. The notion of property and the various legal relationships that surround it gives rise
to the idea of a thing's legal protection. Real, tangible, and tradable property is what the law is
meant to protect. Intellectual property includes things like the ownership of ideas and the ability
to convey those ideas. It's anything that someone thought up, like a new piece of technology, a
poem, or a piece of artwork. There was a time in the evolution of thought when it was believed
that life-altering concepts and methods may also take on the status of property. The law had to
develop in order to provide such safeguards for intangibles. In the early days of IP protection, the
state sought to ensure that different craftsmen's work could be easily identified by their unique
structures and designs. The current body of intellectual property law can be traced back to these
steps.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND RIGHTS

From the onset of industrial capitalism until today, the evolution of bourgeois IP regimes can be
111
broken down into three distinct but interconnected phases:
(i) the national level,

(ii) the international level, and
(iii) the global level.
14
The central idea of the territorial age is the principle of territoriality, which asserts that
intellectual property rights do not extend beyond the realm of the sovereign who originally
granted the rights. The idea stems from the interdependencies between political jurisdiction,
private property, and physical space. In the name of international goodwill, the courts had
acknowledged this idea. In a global context where states frequently asserted authority over the
property rights created by other nations, the concept of negative comity would have mostly
vanished. A law protecting intellectual property in one country would have no bearing in another
country due to the principle of territoriality. As is common with IP owners, some nations profited
from positive externalities while others suffered, leading to the classic free-rider problem.
In the next chapter, we'll dive into the international era of intellectual property protection, which
governments entered because of free-riding and positive externalities.17
GENESIS OF PATENT LAW
At least as far back as ancient Greece, there is a body of legislation known as intellectual
property law. Protections for intellectual works have become increasingly nuanced as national
legal systems have developed and evolved. During this same time period, numerous schools of
thought, including the Lockean, the utilitarian, and the personality-based schools of thought,
gave moral justifications for intellectual property. The Greek colony of Sybaris granted a
1
17
yearlong monopoly to certain chefs in 500 B.C. to prepare certain culinary delights, which is
94
considered one of the first examples of intellectual property protection. The concept of
intellectual property is mentioned in no less than three further ancient texts.
Thus, the "openess" involved had nothing to do with the presentation of an invention;
nonetheless, misconceptions about this etymological nugget linger to this day. The concept of
letters patent as a social device to encourage creative expression did not arise until much later.
Edward II's patent letters of 1331, two Brabant weavers' protection to settle at York in 1336, and
three clock-makers from Delft with a similar grant in 1368 were examples of fourteenth-century
grants that encouraged the emigration of skilled artisans from abroad, thus introducing foreign
technologies. With its technological backwardness compared to the rest of Europe, it was
inevitable that England would attempt to "borrow" some of Europe's more advanced production
methods.
Many of the patent's foundational elements are better suited to the invention's original function
27
and historical context than to its current application. For example, the disclosure requirements of
modern patent regimes were an integral and inevitable aspect of the process to entice foreign
artists to reveal a "mystery" and train local craftspeople to pursue it. The patent's granting of the
27
right to practice the trade or skill—and the training of subsequent apprentices and journeymen—
was a logical step. The spillover problem was solved by granting instructors a monopoly on the
industry, as the only way their students could benefit from learning the "mysterie" would be to
immediately begin competing with them. The 14-year term of these first English patents was not
chosen at random, and neither was the option of a 7-year extension.
A typical apprenticeship would continue for 7 years, meaning that the benefits would extend
60
over at least two generations of learners. No known Roman law protects intellectual property,
although Roman jurists did discuss the various ownership interests connected to codification and
intellectual works (e.g., who owns a painting and who owns the table the picture is displayed on).
From the time of the Romans until the Florentine Republic was formed, however, several
franchises, privileges, and royal favours were granted in relation to intellectual property rights.
14
Filippo Brunelleschi, a famous architect, received one of the first statutes protecting authors'
rights from the Republic of Florence on June 19, 1421. A feature of intellectual property
protection in Anglo-American legal systems, this statute established property rights for authors
and inventors and also incorporated an incentive mechanism. Guild pressure was one of several
factors that led to the 1421 Florentine Patent Statute limiting Brunelleschi to just one patent. In
1474, the Venetian Republic passed a law that laid the groundwork for what would become the
first modern patent system and system for protecting intellectual property. This law was about
150 years before England's Statute of Monopolies, and it had a far more complicated legal
framework. A period limit was set on inventors' rights, together with recognition of those rights,
an incentive system, and compensation for infringement.
In 1474, the Venetians created the world's first sophisticated patent law. All monopolies in
England were abolished in 1623 by the Statute of Monopolies, with the exception of those
granted to the "true and first inventor" of a "method of manufacture." Outside of Europe, the
United States created a Patent statute in 1790, while in 1791, revolutionary France recognised the
rights of inventors. These patent regulations were much simpler than the modern ones. In the
first half of the nineteenth century, patent law extended from its roots in Europe.
The English Statute of Monopolies laid the groundwork for patent law, and its concepts were
eventually adopted by other countries. The original statute safeguarding designs was established
by the English in 1787, but it was amended in 1839 in response to influences from the French
design statute of 1806.Along the paths of colonization, intellectual property outside of Europe
flourished. For instance, the copyright and patent rules enacted by the independent Australian
colonies were heavily influenced by those of England.
16
The English system of protecting intellectual property dates back to 1624 with the Statute of
Monopolies and 1710 with the Statute of Anne. Usefulness, originality, and lack of obviousness
were all prerequisites for obtaining a patent under the United States Patent Act of 1790. If the
invention serves at least one of its planned functions, it is generally accepted as meeting the
utility condition. A more stringent criterion for patent subject matter is that the innovation
claimed for patent protection must be new or inventive. Various statutory provisions can be
24
invoked to anticipate and invalidate a patent claim. If the innovation was already in the public
domain before the patent applicant produced it, the patent claims will be invalidated due to the
novelty requirement.
Thus, we hear requests for copyright and trademark protections, demonstrations against what
some see as patent laws' endorsement of genetically modified products, efforts to expand access
to critical medications, accusations of anti-development bias in the rule-making process
regarding intellectual property, and so on.
THE GLOBAL SCOPE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF COPYRIGHTS LAW
Copyrights, like innovation patents, have their origins in Renaissance Italy. By the 1460s' end,
printing had been introduced to both Rome and Venice. However, it was during the years 1469-
1517—when the Venetian Cabinet, Senate, and other government bodies issued a series of
privileges relating to books and printing—that Venice quickly rose to the forefront of Italian
5
printing. Among these were import franchises, the first of which was granted to the German
printer Johan of Speyer in 1469 in exchange for five years of monopoly on printing in the city.
Copyright privilege's late-medieval roots have little to do with fostering innovative thought or
expression.
Europe did not start taking measures to prevent the theft of authors' and publishers' intellectual
property until the printing press was established in the fourteenth century. The printing
revolution widened the price disparity between the initial copy and each subsequent copy, which
changed the copying industry's economics.18 The economics of "publication" rather than those of
"authorship" have always been more influential in shaping copyright legislation.
From England, where the first privilege was granted in 1504, the privilege system quickly
expanded to the rest of Italy, Germany, and beyond. Additional regulation was needed as the
printing business flourished in order to achieve its initial goals. Only newly published books
might be awarded special treatment, and even then, only if produced within a year would the
benefits remain in effect. The flourishing book industry's prosperity also brought forth the
unavoidable consequences of free-riding and falsification. Such copying was considered a threat
to public safety and was thus punishable by a monetary fine paid to the government.
The most prevalent type of copyright was granted to editors and publishers for individual works;
these minor monopolies barred anybody from publishing the work without the grantee's
approval. A scarcity of titles occurred in 1517 when publishers flocked to the government to
4
18
secure popular titles for future publication or sale of the rights to another printer. In response, the
Senate abolished copyright privileges for all newly printed and unprinted works.
EVOLUTION OF LAW OF TRADEMARKS

Legislative trademark laws did not emerge until the second part of the nineteenth century,
despite trademarks' longer history of use. The trademark protection statute, the tort of passing
off, was codified by English law. But this wasn't enough, so legislative trademark registration
systems started popping up all over Europe.
Intellectual property laws were established on a national level throughout Europe throughout the
second part of the nineteenth century. During this time period, many states' intellectual property
laws borrowed from one another and influenced one another.
64
The first recorded use of Anglo-Indian trademark law was in 1266. The Bakers Marking Act was
another name for it. Loaves of bread sold in stores had to bear a mark that identified the bakery
that made them, as the name suggests. Before 1275, according to the Usages of Winchester, all
bread had to be stamped with the baker's official seal. Wooden or metal marks, featuring
straightforward flower motifs, were registered with the municipal official.
Trademarks have been there since the very first times items were sold and bought. Marks have
been used for centuries, making their history nearly as old as that of humanity and religion.
Archaeologists studying artefacts from ancient civilizations like Egypt's have uncovered
examples of religious and superstitious symbols engraved into their surfaces. Artefacts from the
Greek and Roman eras sometimes include "potters marks" that can be used to determine which
potter created a given piece. However, it's not easy to classify these symbols as trademarks in the
contemporary sense. Although these marks were useful in setting apart products, it would be a
stretch to call them trademarks in the modern sense. Having said that, there was no trademark
system based on property rights even during that time. During the 10th century, traders and
merchants began using a distinctive mark known as a "merchants mark," and the use of symbols
in commerce rapidly spread.
The law honours a congressman who worked tirelessly for its passage in the spirit of American
precedent. Both English trademark law and the Lanham Act are founded on use-based principles.
In contrast to the original English law, the Act requires not just an intention to use the mark but
also its actual usage in order to register a trademark. This attention, however, has now changed
in response to developments on a worldwide basis. It is important that customers be able to tell
one "undertaking" (business)'s goods and services apart from another. Therefore, trademarks
should act as "badges of origin," or markers of the country of manufacture. They shouldn't be
considered on the books if they aren't going to do what's expected of them. A trademark holder
has the legal authority to forbid anyone from using their trademark or any mark that is
confusingly similar to it.
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

High-quality items made in a certain place and distinguished by their quality and uniqueness
have made an impression. The importance of these markers increased to the point where
producers in those areas began to focus exclusively on making the distinctive items for which
they had become known. The concept of "Geographical Indications" emerged out of efforts to
protect legitimate manufacturers and customers against phoney goods.
The first appellation system in the world was created in 1756 by the Portuguese to protect their
ancient winemaking traditions. But the appellation d'origine controlee (AOC) system, which
protects geographical indications, was first implemented in France. Unions now have the legal
right to seek trademark protection for geographical indications (GIs) as a result of a 1919 statute
that officially recognized GIs as a type of collective intellectual property.
14
INVENTION AND DISCOVERY
The topic of whether invention and discovery should be considered synonymous is becoming
more important as the definitions of patentability are being expanded to encompass new and
developing technologies like biotechnology. As a result, it is crucial to recognise the differences
between invention and discovery. An invention is something completely new, most often the
result of human intellect.19
Invention is defined as "creation by thought, devise, or organise" in the Oxford Concise

Dictionary. Instead, "to find out or become aware of" is what we mean when we say that
someone has made a discovery. A discovery, then, is the act of first becoming aware of
something that already existed. For example, many species of life may still be out there waiting
8
19
6
to be discovered, or their true value may not be understood. Including pre-existing organisms in
the potentiality criterion without taking into account the level of human interference is a huge
no-no. Cases involving the patenting of living organisms blur the lines between invention and
discovery. With enough human interaction, an existing living entity may take on new
characteristics. It is challenging to pin down the precise level of human interaction needed to
assess patentability criteria objectively. Transgenic animals, unusual plants, and, last but not
least, changed microbes have all been made possible by gene manipulation in recent years.
U.S. patent law recognises live creatures as patentable subject matter as of the 1980 decision in
Diamond v. Chakrabarty. Animal and plant types, as well as essentially biological techniques for
the production of plants and animals, were explicitly excluded from patentability under the
European Patent Convention (1973). In the case of microbial processes and their byproducts,
however, it made an exception.
In the European legal system, it was common practise to grant patents on genetically engineered
bacteria and other unicellular organisms. It also made it possible to patent newly discovered
proteins, polypeptides, and even DNA precursors. However, when it came time to iron out the
specifics, these discoveries frequently hit rocky seas. However, the concept of intellectual
property is not completely abandoned, which is an important point to note regarding these
assertions. Indigenous intellectual property rights are instead asserted and called for.
CONCLUSION
One can draw the conclusion that IP rights allow individuals to hone their skills and earn a living
from their creative endeavours. The fruits of labour are realised when the state recognises it by
bestowing Intellectual Property rights. According to a system of intellectual property law,
however, certain works may be "propertized," which means that they are supported by a claim
that is "good against the world." This means that they can be enforced by bringing the whole
weight of the state to bear on anybody who dares to infringe against the work. Such a boast is a
significant indication that the underlying work is of high quality. Not easily is an effort's worth
turned into a publicly enforceable legal claim that can grow in value over time and be sold for a
profit.
There are alternative methods to acknowledge and reward public service. If praise or approval is
due, why does it have to come in the form of a claim you can enforce in court? For the simple
reason that rights belong to particular people. The creation of works deserving of intellectual
property should be acknowledged, and a personal reward claim is the best way to do so. Most
creative work is still done in isolation. Individuals should be compensated for their innovative
efforts through a state-backed claim. There is a time and a place for monetary prizes, as well as
public and professional acclaim. However, a creative professional should also be able to apply
for and receive a state-backed grant that gives them exclusive control over how their creative
work is used. The created thing is worthy of protection, hence a property right should be
provided. Even though Locke's labor-based argument for original appropriation is extensive, it is
reasonable to discuss IP rights since his reasoning is moderated by the similarly expansive
provisos, sufficiency, spoliation, and charity.
The need for private property is equally counterbalanced by Kant's Universal Principle, which
places fundamental limits on private possessions. Property, in Rawls's view, is incidental to the
larger institutional framework whose goal is distributive justice. These philosophers agree that
property is a system that strikes a fair balance between individuals. As the chapter comes to a
close, I've done my best to demonstrate how theories like the technological gap theory and the
discovery-invention dichotomy are consistent with one another by combining three of them into
a unified framework that is more balanced than either of them individually. It has been possible
to trace the development of certain IP rights in correlation with shifts in geographical scope.
Worldwide shifts in IP legislation within the last several years are the subject of the section that
follows.
INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: AN

ANALYSIS
Intellectual property rights have evolved and had philosophical foundations throughout history,
and the previous chapter sought to sketch the geographical historical landscape for their
establishment up until the 18th century. In this chapter, we will look at how IP law has changed
over the world, starting with the first multilateral and bilateral treaties and ending with the
current situation, where an IP agreement pertaining to trade is an essential part of the new
economic order established by the World Trade Organization. It is one of the fundamental
features of IP rights that they are confined to the area of the country that grants them and have no
effect outside of that country.
For a long time, the territorial character of IP rights has been a source of frustration for owners of
works (inventions, brands, trademarks, artistic expressions) that are accessible to global
commerce. There was a lot of pressure on many countries in the nineteenth century to set up
legal safeguards to protect its writers, designers, inventors, and brand owners abroad since they
became prominent sources of intellectual property. International treaties and conventions
eventually superseded bilateral treaties as the primary means of protecting intellectual property
95
around the world at the close of the nineteenth century. The intellectual property laws outlined in
the more than a century-old Berne and Paris Conventions lay the groundwork for the global
character of contemporary international treaties and conventions.20
These international conventions and accords establish a general framework of protection for
IPRs that shares certain elements, hence providing international protection for IPRs. Domestic
law is the primary source of regulation for IPRs within a country. In the next chapters, we will
examine Indian law to better understand the rules and regulations rules that control the protection
of IP rights. Nevertheless, the substance of these domestic statutes is substantially influenced by
treaties and conventions on an international level.
Importantly, the practice of bilateralism in IP in the nineteenth century provided both the impetus
3
for the need for an international framework to govern IP and the substance, in the shape of
82
principles, to underpin that framework. The Paris Convention of 1883 and the Berne Convention
of 1886 were two multilateral accords that signaled a turning point towards true intellectual
3
property cooperation on an international level. Paris saw the formation of the Union for the
Protection of Intellectual Property, while Berne saw the establishment of a comparable
organization to safeguard literary and artistic works. This section looks ahead to potential
enhancements to the system that protects intellectual property on a global and national level.
79
Beginning with the Cold War's demise and continuing through the establishment of IP bodies
like the World Intellectual Property Organization and TRIPS, this chapter traces the history of
intellectual property worldwide. Exhibited Here is the Post-TRIPS and Present Global Era.
20 9
2023.
3
THE PARIS CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY
(1883): THE PROLOGUE
Anxieties over the potential loss of patent protection due to disclosure of patent applications and
presence at international exhibitions before national patent applications were the driving forces
behind the Paris Convention, which aimed to standardize patent laws across different countries.21
Because the laws of different countries were so different in the 19th century, it was difficult to
get protection for industrial property rights. This was due to the fact that industrial property was
not a subject of any international convention. In addition, patent applications had to be filed
nearly simultaneously worldwide to prevent the invention's uniqueness in other nations from
being compromised due to a publication in one country. The need to find solutions to these
problems inspired determination. Bilateral treaties were mostly negotiated between European
countries and concerned themselves with the many aspects of industrial property.
By 1883, there were already 69 international agreements, the most majority of which concerned
trademarks. They functioned in accordance with the national treatment principle, which had
77
emerged as a result of governments making concessions to one another. The origins of the Paris
Convention can be traced back to dissatisfaction in the United States over plans for an
international inventions exhibition to be held in Vienna in 1873. These global gatherings served
a similar function to mediaeval European trade fairs. Inadequate legal protection offered to
16
exhibited inventions hampered international participation when the Government of the Empire of
Austria Hungary invited the other countries to participate in an international exhibition of
inventions held in 1873 at Vienna.22
This resulted in two changes: first, all international participants in the show had their
innovations, trademarks, and industrial designs granted temporary protection under a special
Austrian statute enacted for the occasion. Second, in 1873, there was a gathering in Vienna
called the Congress of Vienna for Patent Reform. It laid forth a set of guidelines for what
34
21
1
2023.
22
constitutes a good patent system and encouraged states to work towards a global consensus on
patent law.23
23
THE BERNE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF LITERARY AND
ARTISTIC WORKS: THE PROLOGUE
The possibility of international collaboration on intellectual property began to garner increased

attention from states in the eighteenth century. At initially, this enthusiasm was expressed
through bilateral pacts. National copyright laws were typically only a few decades old in 1886.
The only safeguard was monopolies or rights granted for the exclusive printing of certain works.
As a component of individual rights, the new revolutionary legislation recognized writers' rights
to their works.
Most of the time, states' signed bilateral copyright treaties didn't amount to much more than
paper. Moreover, they caused a lot of complexity. If a writer wanted to know how far his work
would be protected internationally, he or she would have had to research a complex web of
treaties and national regulations. The International Literary Association was established in Paris
in 1878 by well-known authors whose readerships and careers spanned national lines like Victor
Hugo. This group started having annual conferences across Europe. In 1883, at a conference in
Berne, it drafted the first version of a global copyright agreement. To create a multilateral
convention on copyright, this draught text was used to convince the Swiss government to host an
international conference.
The idea of national treatment and a list of minimum rights which governments had to recognise
formed the basis of the Berne Convention, as they did for the Paris Convention. The age of
multilateral international cooperation in intellectual property was ushered in by the Paris and
Berne Conventions.
81
MADRID AGREEMENT AND PROTOCOL RELATING TO THE MADRID
AGREEMENT (1891)
It regulates the process of registering trademarks on an international level. The Madrid

Agreement of 1891 and its revisions. The method makes it possible to secure mark protection in
4
23
3
many countries by obtaining an international registration that is effective in all of the designated
Contracting Parties.
An international registration application can only be submitted by an individual or legal

organization that has a presence, residence, or nationality in one of the Contracting Parties to the
Agreement or Protocol.
3
The trademark office of the Contracting Party that the applicant has the necessary connections to
(the office of origin) must have registered the mark before it may be included in an international
application. Registration applications filed with the office of origin alone may form the basis of
an international application, provided that all designations are in line with the Protocol. The
originating office is responsible for submitting an international application to the WIPO
International Bureau.
THE MADRID AGREEMENT OF 1891
In Order to Avoid Deceptive Beginnings Product Labeling: Any goods that import into a country
that does not actually belong there could be confiscated, banned, or subjected to additional
3
actions and penalties as outlined in this Agreement if they falsely or misleadingly state that one
of the Contracting States or a place situated therein is the country or place of origin.
In addition to outlining the conditions for the request and execution of seizure, the Agreement
restricts the use of any advertising or other signals in relation to the sale, exhibition, or offer for
sale of any items that might deceive the public about their provenance. For reasons of generality,
3
the courts of each Contracting State will have to decide which exclusions and appellations do not
apply to the Agreement. The Agreement does not contain any terms pertaining to unions,
governing bodies, or finances.
71
THE HAGUE AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE INTERNATIONAL
REGISTRATION OF INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS (1925)
3
A person's domicile, nationality, or, as of the 1999 Act, habitual residence with the other
Contracting Party is the sole way for a resident of one of the Contracting Parties to either Act to
receive International Design Registration.
Owners of designs can get their creations protected in several jurisdictions through the Hague
Agreement with a single application to the International Bureau of WIPO. The Hague Agreement
also makes it easier to keep an industrial design registration current by combining the steps
needed to renew the international registration with those to record changes.
29
NICE AGREEMENT (1957) ON THE UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS AND
SERVICES FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE (NICE Agreement).
37
For the purposes of trademark and service mark registration, the Nice Agreement specifies a
classification of goods and services. When a trademark is registered, the trademark office in the
37
Contracting State must specify the number of the Classification class to which the products or
services in question are assigned. The 1957 Agreement and its subsequent revisions. All
63
signatory states to the 1883 Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property are eligible
23
to join the Agreement.
THE LISBON AGREEMENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF APPELLATIONS OF

ORIGIN AND THEIR INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION (1958)
The Lisbon Agreement protects appellations of origin. A registered appellation retains its
protection against usurpation and imitation regardless of translation or use of words like "kind,"
"type," or similar terms. It is not considered generic in a Contracting State so long as it maintains
its protection in the place of origin.
30
THE ROME CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERFORMERS,
PRODUCERS OF PHONOGRAMS AND BROADCASTING ORGANIZATIONS (1961)
Performance artists, phonogram manufacturers, and broadcasting organisations are all afforded
legal protections because to the Convention.24
Performers are shielded from:
(i) activities that were conducted without their consent. This includes not only the public
dissemination of a live performance through broadcast and other means, but also its recording
and subsequent reproduction for purposes unrelated to the original intent or made without the
performer's consent.
1
24
(ii) Record labels can decide whether to permit or prohibit copying of their recordings. In
13
situations when secondary uses arise from a commercially published phonogram, the user is
obligated to provide one fair compensation to either the performers or the creators of the
phonograms.
(iii) Rebroadcasting, repairing, reproducing, and disseminating one's television broadcasts to the
public are all acts that broadcasting organizations have the authority to permit or forbid.
The Rome Convention recognizes certain exceptions to copyright in literary and artistic works
that exist in national law. These exceptions include private use, using brief excerpts in news
13
reports, temporary fixation by broadcasting organizations for their own broadcasts, use
exclusively for educational or scientific purposes, and any other use. The duration of protection
74
for phonograms and performances contained within them must be at least 20 years, calculated
from the end of the fixation year. In the case of performances that are not included in
phonograms, the duration of protection must be at least the performance's year. As for
broadcasts, the duration of protection must be at least the broadcast's year.
WIPO CONVENTION (1967)
29
Establishes the World Intellectual Property Organisation. The World Intellectual Property
Organisation (WIPO) Convention was signed on July 14, 1967 in Stockholm, went into effect in
1970, and was revised in 1979. In 1974, the United Nations established WIPO as a specialised
agency, making it an international organisation.
THE EVOLUTION OF WIPO

33
The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property and the Berne Convention for the
Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, both of which were signed in 1883 and 1886, are the
earliest antecedents of the present-day World Intellectual Property Organisation. The creation of
21
a "International Bureau" was mandated by both Conventions. In 1893, the two agencies merged
into one, and the WIPO Convention of 1970 led to the creation of the World Intellectual Property
Organisation. The two primary goals of WIPO are
(i)to promote IP protection on a worldwide scale; and (ii)to ease IP protection treaty-based
administrative cooperation among IP-regulated Unions.
In furtherance of these aims, WIPO undertakes a number of additional projects, such as
managing the Unions' bureaucratic tasks.
(i) normative activities, like inking international treaties to set standards for IP protection and
enforcement; (ii) programmatic activities that provide legal and technical assistance to states in
IP matters; (iii) international categorization and standardization operations involving
3
collaboration among IP agencies; and (iv) registration and filing activities, including services
related to IP applications for inventions, trademark registration, and industrial design
registration.
Any country that is part of one of the Unions can also apply for membership in WIPO, as can
any other country that meets specific criteria.68 Membership in WIPO does not impose any
duties on a country with respect to any of the other treaties handled by WIPO. A country can
21
formally join WIPO by filing an instrument of accession to the WIPO Convention with the
organization's Director General.25
TRADEMARK LAW TREATY (1994)
Harmonizing and streamlining trademark registration procedures on a national and regional level
is the goal of the Trademark Law Treaty. A number of aspects of trademark applications and
trademark registration maintenance across jurisdictions have been standardized to make the
processes easier to understand and implement.
Most of the TLT's rules are focused on what happens when someone applies to register a
trademark, what happens when someone makes changes to an existing registration, and what
happens when someone renews their registration. Each Contracting State also agrees to the
possibility that an application may involve products or services from more than one Nice
Classification subclass.
3
THE WIPO COPYRIGHT TREATY (WCT), 1996
The World Trade Treaty is an ancillary agreement to the Berne Convention. All Contracting
Parties, including those not otherwise bound by the Berne Convention, should observe in all
8
25
6
28
material respects the requirements of the 1971 Act of the Berne Convention for the Protection of
Literary and Artistic Works (1886).
(i) any form or medium used to express computer programmes; and
(ii) collections of information ("databases") that, due to the deliberate selection or arrangement
of their constituent parts, can be considered works of art in their own right.
The Treaty covers three categories of author's rights:
a) The ability to legally sell or transfer ownership of both the original and copies to anyone else
is known as the distribution right.
b) The right to rent out, includes both the original and copies, is the legal right to rent out for
profit the following three classes of works:
1) software (unless the software is incidental to the rental's primary purpose);
2) films (but only if widespread duplication due to commercial rental has seriously impaired the
exclusive right of reproduction); and
3) phonograms that contain works that have been legally recognised under the national
legislation of the contractual Parties.
This includes "the making available to the public of works in a way that the members of the
public may access the work from a place and at a time individually chosen by the members of the
public," which includes on-demand, interactive communication through the Internet.
Such restrictions and exemptions as established in national legislation in accordance with the
The Agreed Statement that accompanies the WCT allows for the possibility of extending the
13
Berne Convention to the digital realm. Contracting States have the authority to create new
exceptions and limitations in light of the specific features of the online realm. Expanding the
scope of existing restrictions or adding new exceptions is possible if the "three-step" rule is
satisfied.
To guarantee the Treaty's effective implementation, each Contracting Party shall undertake what
is necessary by its domestic law. If a violation of a right guaranteed by the Treaty occurs, each
Contracting State must take the appropriate legal action to remedy the situation. These measures
should include both immediate measures to stop the infringement and longer-term ones to
discourage future violations. The Assembly of the Contracting Parties is established under the
Treaty to handle issues related to the Treaty's upkeep and evolution. The Treaty's Secretariat at
WIPO is given responsibility for its administration. The treaty went into effect on March 6, 2002,
after being finalised in 1996.
3
Members of WIPO and the European Community can sign the Treaty. The Treaty's governing
body, the Assembly, has the authority to invite more international organisations to join as parties.
THE WIPO PERFORMANCES AND PHONOGRAMS TREATY (1996)
The Treaty provides phonogram producers with four types of commercial rights in their
recordings:26
108
 The exclusive right to reproduce audio or video recordings in compliance with the laws
13
of the Contracting Parties (except countries that have implemented a system for fair
payment of such rentals since April 15, 1994) and
 The right to authorise the public's access to a phonogram via wired or wireless means, at
any time and from any location of the user's choosing, is known as the "right of making
available." This privilege includes the ability to access Internet-based, interactive content
whenever you like.
 You have an exclusive right to the rights listed above, with a few caveats. Regarding the
36
rights specifically granted to performers and phonogram producers in the Treaty, each
Contracting Party must treat the nationals of the other Contracting Parties in the same
manner as it treats its own nationals. However, there are a number of exceptions and
limits to this rule.
Additionally, the Treaty states that phonogram creators and performers are entitled to one fair
payment for any phonogram that is commercially published, transmitted, or communicated to the
public. This right may be limited or denied by any Contracting Party by adding a reservation to
the Treaty. National treatment ("reciprocity") may be withheld from the reserving Contracting
Party if and to the extent that it is reserved by that Contracting Party.
4
26
Following the lead of the Berne Convention, the WPPT expands the scope of the "threestep"
process for identifying exceptions and restrictions to all rights. Contracting States have the
authority to create new exceptions and limitations in light of the specific features of the online
realm. Expanding the scope of existing restrictions or adding new exceptions is possible if the
"three-step" rule is satisfied. You need at least fifty years of protection. To fully benefit from the
rights guaranteed by this Treaty, no superfluous formalities should be in the way.27
If a violation of a right guaranteed by the Treaty occurs, each Contracting State must take the
appropriate legal action to remedy the situation. These measures should include both immediate
measures to stop the infringement and longer-term ones to discourage future violations. The
Assembly of the Contracting Parties is established under the Treaty to handle issues related to
the Treaty's upkeep and evolution. The Treaty's Secretariat at WIPO is given responsibility for its
administration. The Treaty went into effect on May 20, 2002, after it had been signed in 1996.
3
Members of WIPO and the European Community can sign the Treaty. The Treaty's governing
body, the Assembly, has the authority to invite more international organisations to join as parties.
3
PATENT LAW TREATY OF 2000
The Patent Law Treaty's (PLT) stated goal is to streamline and harmonize the processes by
which patents are granted and renewed on a national and regional scale. The Patent Law Treaty
lays forth the most stringent regulations that a Contracting Party's office can implement, with the
exception of filing date limits. Although a Contracting Party may set more accommodating
conditions for owners and applicants, the requirements outlined in the Patent Law Treaty are the
highest and final limit that any office can impose. To ensure that applicants do not lose the filing
date—an essential part of the patent procedure—the Treaty standardises the processes for
acquiring the filing date. Any Contracting Party's office is obligated to issue a filing date under
the Patent Law Treaty if an application meets the three minimal formal standards.
(i) A statement that the materials submitted to the office constitute a patent application for an
invention;
1
27
(ii) Identification or contact information for the office (one or both may be required by a
Contracting Party); and
(iii) That part that seems to be an overview of the innovation. It is not possible to add further
criteria for determining the filing date. To be more specific, neither the amount of the filing fee
3
nor the quantity of claims may be used by a Contracting Party to determine the filing date. A
Contracting Party is not required to specify a filing date unless specific circumstances are
satisfied, as mentioned before. Rather than being merely necessary, these conditions must be
satisfied.28
THE SINGAPORE TREATY ON TRADEMARKS, 2006

The purpose of the Singapore Treaty is to standardise administrative trademark registration
51
processes around the world in a way that is both efficient and equitable. The Singapore Treaty
expands on the Trademark Law Treaty (TLT) of 1994 by including recent changes in the realm
of communication technologies. The Singapore Treaty encompasses all trademarks that can be
registered according to the laws of the Contracting Parties.
Electronic or electronically transmitted form is just one of many acceptable forms of

communication between the offices of the Contracting Parties. In addition to establishing an
Assembly of the Contracting Parties, the document incorporates time limit relief measures and
standards for trademark licencing recordkeeping. Nevertheless, when it comes to other aspects,
3
such as the necessity of enabling multiclass applications and registrations and the utilization of
the International ("Nice") Classification, the Singapore Treaty adheres closely to the Trademark
Law Treaty. Either treaty can be ratified or implemented independently of the other.
86
If a mark is registrable under the law of a Contracting Party, then the Singapore Treaty will
encompass it, unlike the Trademark Legislation Treaty. For trademark law-related international
treaties, this is a first: the explicit recognition of non-traditional marks. All trademarks are
103
protected by the Treaty, even the ones that aren't always visible—like holograms, three-
dimensional marks, color, position, and movement marks—and the ones that aren't always
visible—like sound, smell, taste, and feel marks. The Rules specify how applications must depict
these marks, which might be either graphic or photographic reproductions.
11
28
CONCLUSION
69
As a result, it is safe to say that the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) and the
World Trade Organisation (WTO), via the TRIPs agreement, were instrumental in establishing
IP protections at international forums around the turn of the 20th century. We have covered some
typical solutions to the ethical problems that arise from this type of agreement and given an
overview of them in this chapter. There has also been an emphasis on the significance of a
standardized method of IP protection, which includes the creation and application of comparable
administrative processes.
Prior to the establishment of universal minimum standards of protection, the Principle of

National Treatment posits that countries were free to design their IP systems according to their
own priorities, so long as they treated foreigners equally with their own citizens. The degree of
universal harmonisation of intellectual property rights (IPRs) has reached unprecedented levels,
with minimum standards adopted under the TRIPS Agreement reducing national freedom and
39
increasing it in areas such as the definition of protected subject matter, terms of protection,
extent of exclusive rights, etc. This process necessitates that developing countries implement
safeguards that are functionally identical to those in industrialized countries.
A common goal of WIPO and the United Nations Intergovernmental Organization (UNIPO) is
the advancement and protection of intellectual property laws. The World Trade Organization's
45
institutional antecedent, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, negotiated the Agreement
on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights in 1986. This agreement integrated
strong and consistent protections of IP into the international trade system. Intellectual property
rights on socially valued items, such as crucial medications, have been the subject of several
recent Supreme Court decisions that raise serious moral concerns. The emphasis in this chapter is
on description. While this chapter does provide a personal perspective on the topics at hand, its
primary goal is not to advocate for and support any one particular course of action. The goal here
is to help policymakers and other stakeholders form their own opinions by highlighting,
explaining, and putting into context a number of key International Conventions in the discussion
about the nature of intellectual property rights. The idea of centralised procedures, defined as the
existence of consistent legislation and of a common authority to be constituted for such
procedures, has also been elucidated in this introductory chapter. This would ensure that a single
title issue would include as many separate national rights as there are member countries. The
next chapter analyses India's efforts in the realm of intellectual property law, covering protection,
promotion, and practise.29
INDIA’S ENDEAVOURS TOWARDS THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL

PROPERTY RIGHTS
Beginning in the 20th century, the concept of rewarding the expression bearing uniqueness and
commercial capability gained pace while tracing international trends for intellectual property
rights. The changes to the Indian context regarding India's IP regime, however, were not
addressed in the preceding section. In this section, we will speculate on the Indian prolegomena,
complete with judicial interpretations of IP rights. There has also been an effort to remove the
Constitutional protections for IP that now exist.
102
The evolution of Indian law on intellectual property rights has been tracked in the context of
international agreements like the World Trade Organisation. TRIPs is a required part of the
WTO agreement, which India just joined. TRIPs gave all developing countries a 10-year grace
period to meet their responsibilities. The protection of intellectual property has been the subject
of multiple legislative initiatives in India. During India's colonial era, several laws were enacted.
It is widely believed that George Alfred De Penning filed the first patent application in India in
1856. It was agreed when the country gained its freedom that new or revised
Regulating the ownership of ideas. Adopted by the Indian Parliament in 1970, the Indian Patents
80
Act did not enter into force until 1972. The Trade and Merchandise Act of 1958, which was
succeeded by the Trademarks Act of 1999, was also drafted and passed in 1957. In India,
intellectual property protection was historically underpinned mostly by patents, trademarks, and
56
copyrights. With the advent of the WTO, all of that was suddenly different. As part of the World
Trade Organization's agreements, the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
(TRIPs) Agreement was established to protect intellectual property. The WTO Agreement was
5
signed and ratified by India. It is important to remember that the WTO Agreement imposed firm
responsibilities on the Member States and included provisions for speedy implementation. A
binding dispute settlement procedure is available to WTO members if their agreements are not
properly implemented. In response, the Indian government has enacted new Intellectual Property
8
29
6
laws and revised others. The TRIPs Agreement itself established a 10-year grace period. This
chapter examines the constitutional foundation of India's efforts to preserve intellectual property
rights both before and after the TRIPs agreement. In addition, judicial interpretations of the
statute have provided support for the law's stated enforcement mechanism.30
DIMENSIONS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION IN THE

CONSTITUTION
50
Many international human rights documents, like the Indian Constitution, the European
Convention on Human Rights, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, guarantee
citizens' freedom of speech and access to information because these are cornerstones of a
functional democratic society. The right to freely express oneself is fundamental for numerous
reasons.
To begin, the ability to freely express oneself is a powerful means to both personal freedom and
success. Second, it encourages participation in discussions on ethical and social issues. As a third
benefit, free speech facilitates the political debate that is essential in any nation with democratic
aspirations. Fourth, the ability to speak freely is a boon to creative and academic endeavours of
all stripes. Indians have seen the limits placed on free expression and have worked tirelessly to
remove those barriers. A reasonable compromise between preserving order and adjusting to
changing circumstances can be achieved through the freedom to free speech.
The preamble to the Indian Constitution emphasises the significance of this freedom. Here,
intellectual and artistic liberties take the front seat. It's considered the "mother" of all other
liberties, thus it's high up on the list. When people are allowed to speak their minds freely, they
flourish as individuals. The Indian Supreme Court has always upheld the value of unrestricted
free speech. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "no idea should go unheard" is the ultimate goal
of every democratic state. Freedom of expression is beautiful because it allows us to explore the
myth underlying any thought we wish to communicate and, in doing so, arrive at the truth.
1
30
Press, 2008, pp. 23–56. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g09zfv.7. Accessed 29 Oct. 2023.
Strictly speaking, this right is the physical manifestation of all other democratic freedoms,
including the freedoms of speech, assembly, association, mobility, residence, and occupation.31
AN OVERVIEW OF INDIAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS REGIME
India has a number of laws regarding intellectual property. There are a number of well-
established laws pertaining to copyright, patents, and trademarks (designs). During the time
when these two IP regimes were in power, their respective laws were passed. These laws were
essentially an expansion of existing English laws. Even though it was merely an extension of
British law, patent legislation was adopted in India as early as 1856. The main reason for this
extension was to safeguard colonial interests. Copyright's legislative history had a similar origin,
though it was less fraught than patent law. Similar to the English Trademarks Act of 1938, the
Indian Trademarks Act was enacted in 1940. All other IP laws, including those protecting GIs,
plant varieties, semiconductors, and biological diversity, were enacted after the World Trade
Organisation was established. This means that India's new laws came about as a direct result of
the TRIPs Agreement. Some of these laws were enacted to satisfy WTO/TRIPs mandates.
CONCERNS WITH TRIPS'S IMPLEMENTATION IN INDIA

54
India signed the WTO Treaty on April 15, 1994, after the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade (GATT) Uruguay Round Negotiations concluded and the World Trade Organisation
(WTO) was established. On January 1, 1995, the WTO Treaty became legally binding. On the
same day that the WTO Treaty took effect, the TRIPs Agreement did as well. Article 1 of the
TRIPs Agreement mandates that signatory countries enact the treaty's norms.
In addition, it required signatory nations to implement the TRIPs Agreement's numerous

minimum criteria. For developing nations, the transition period began on January 1, 1995 and
lasted for a full decade. Therefore, India has a decade to adopt the TRIPs Agreement's base
requirements. However, some obligations needed to be incorporated immediately, such as
exclusive marketing rights and some immediate acceptance of product patent application for the
protection of chemicals and agricultural chemicals in those countries that do not provide product
7
31
2023.
patent protection to these areas. To implement these rules, India issued an Ordinance and revised
its patent law in 1999. These changes were removed from the Indian Patent Act, 1970, once
India instituted patent protection for products in 2005.
THE DEVELOPING INDIAN PATENT SYSTEM
The British instituted the patent system in India to safeguard British inventions within "colonial
territory." It was implemented without considering the feelings of the natives in any of their
colonies. Act of 1856 Granting Exclusive Privileges to Inventors was the first such law to be
passed. Inventions in India are now safeguarded thanks to this legislation. In 1859, a new law
26
was enacted that was based on the English Patent Act of 1852. An inventor of a new manufacture
who submits a specification of his invention to the relevant government agency is eligible to
receive the "exclusive privileges of making, selling, and using the invention in India and
authorizing others to do so for a term of fourteen years from the time of filing such
specification." This is one of the provisions of the Act. In 1872, the goal of passing the "Patents
and Designs Protection Act" was to provide legal protection for designs.
In 1883, lawmakers enacted a new law to safeguard creators who wanted to show off their work
at expos. After that, in 1888, the three Acts of 1859, 1872, and 1883 that had continued the law
were merged into a single Act. The Indian Patents and Designs Act of 1911 is a revision and
replacement for the earlier law. With the passage of this law, India finally has a centralised
patent office, headed by a Controller of Patents. Between 1911 and 1970, several changes were
made to this Act. India has been working on developing its own patent law ever since its
independence. The analysis of the local circumstances was extensive so that a legislation and
5
policy could be developed. The Bakshi Tek Chand Committee, established in 1949 after India
gained its independence, found that the colonial Indian Patents and Designs Act of 1911 did not
encourage innovation. In 1957, a committee headed by Justice Rajagopala Ayyangar was formed
to consider updating India's patent laws. In 1959, this Committee handed in its findings in a
Report. The recommendations of this Committee formed the backbone of the Indian Patent Law
of 1970, which stated:32
8
32
6
"The patent law of an underdeveloped country like India should be so designed to enable the
country to achieve rapid industrialization and to attain, as quickly as possible, a fairly advanced
level of technology giving inventors and investors sufficient inducement and protection by patent
grants and at the same time safeguarding its national economic and social interest."
FEATURES OF INDIA'S Strong PATENT SYSTEM
Briefly, the following are the most important aspects of the Indian Patent Law:
(i) The phrase "innovation" and others are defined; inventiveness, practicality, and novelty
are the three requirements for a patentable invention.
(ii) It specifies "what is not patentable," including abstract concepts, minor improvements,
non-essential innovations, agricultural practises, and indigenous knowledge.
(iii) It lays out the fundamentals for filing for and receiving patents;
(iv) it enables and facilitates the submission of patent applications on a global scale;
(v) The patent office, the Controller General, the examiners, and other administrative
personnel are all established;
(vi) It allows for opposition to patent applications both before and after they are granted;
(vii) It allows for the implementation of patents and the mandatory licencing or revocation of
patents where necessary for the public good; and
(viii) To settle disagreements over IP-related procedures and technical details, an IP Appellate
Board was established.
INTRODUCTION TO INDIA'S COPYRIGHTS LAW
As printing became more widely available, copyright legislation developed in modern India.
Although book printing in India dates back to 1557, copyright legislation has only been in effect
for slightly over 150 years. This is because the initial printing endeavours were primarily
motivated by Christian missionary work rather than profit. Once commercial publication took
off, however, the need for copyright legislation to safeguard authors' and publishers' rights
became clear. The Indian Copyright Act of 1847 was a direct result of this situation. Thus, when
12
the United Kingdom passed the Copyright Act, 1911—"the first British legislation to bring the
various copyrights within a single text"—it was deemed appropriate to also have new legislation
12
for India. Consequently, the Indian Copyright Act of 1914 was enacted, which was essentially a
slightly modified version of the British Copyright Act, 1911, adapted to the needs of India.
This statute remained in effect until 1958, when it was replaced by the Indian Copyright Act of
1957. In addition to the fact that imperial copyright law no longer made sense given India's new
constitutional position, rising levels of public awareness necessitated the passage of a new, self-
12
contained law protecting intellectual property. Until the whims and demands of history drew
India into the legal regime of Great Britain for around one hundred signatories of the Berne
Convention, its copyright laws had remained current with international treaties and the state of
technology in this domain. Of course, this brought Indian law up to par with its international
12
counterparts. At the time of its independence, India's copyright law was fully consistent with
both international copyright treaties and the technology of the cultural industries.
CHANGES TO INDIAN COPYRIGHT LAW AS OF 2012 PER THE COPYRIGHT

(AMENDMENT) ACT
31
By endorsing the Copyright Amendment Bill, 2012 in May 2012, both houses of the Indian
31
Parliament had brought the country's copyright law into conformity with the World Intellectual
Property Organization's "Internet Treaties."
Six amendments to the Copyright Act, 1957 between 1957 and 2012 brought Indian copyright
17
law into conformity with the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and
Phonograms Treaty (WPPT), two of the Internet Treaties.
Additionally, the law's special fair use requirements ensure that fair use continues to exist in the
digital age, even as new technological protection mechanisms are introduced. Many changes
have been made to simplify copyright administration, including those that are more author-
friendly, accessible, and accommodating to people with disabilities.
5
The changes made by the Copyright (Amendment) Act of 2012 can be broken down into the
following categories:
(i) Alterations to the rights to motion pictures, sound recordings, and other works of
creative expression
(ii) Rights Amendments Related to the WCT and WPPT;
(i) Alterations to the manner of Assignment and Licences that benefit authors;
(ii) Changes that Improve Publication of Works;
(iii) Improved law enforcement and safeguards against online piracy;
(iv) Restructuring the Copyright Board and other technical changes
INTRODUCTION TO INDIA'S TRADEMARK LAW
India's statutory Trademarks Law was enacted in 1860, however property protection for marks
has been there for millennia. India did not have a trademark law until 1940. Section 54 of the
Specific Relief Act, 1877 was used to resolve trademark infringement and passing-off disputes,
85
and a declaration of trademark ownership was obtained under the Indian Registration Act, 1908.
There was a growing need for additional trademark protection as trade and commerce expanded
58
significantly after the passage of the Indian Trademarks Act in 1940, which was modelled after
the English Trademarks Act of 1938. In 1958, Congress passed the Trademark and Merchandise
Act, which aimed to stop counterfeiters from using phoney trademarks on goods by making it
97
easier to register them. Another use of this regulation is trademark registration, which grants the
owner the only right to use the registered mark in commercial transactions. Trademark
registration, protection, and the elimination of trademark fraud were all goals of this legislation.
THE DESIGNS ACT, 2000

In India, industrial design protection is governed by the Designs Act, 2000. As was previously
mentioned, the Controller of Designs is also the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and
Trademarks. Important aspects of this legislation include:
(i) It expands the definitions of "article" and "design" to include original works;
(ii) It specifies which designs are not eligible for registration and adopts the internationally used
categorization system in place of the Indian one;
(iii) It allows the registration of designs to be kept electronically and for expired designs to be
restored;
The two-year period of secrecy is now over, and any documentation pertaining to the transfer of
a registered design right must be formally registered;
(v) Cancellation of registration may now occur for a wider variety of reasons, with actions to be
brought before the Controller of Designs rather than the High Court;
The initial registration time has been increased from 5 years to 10 years, and penalties for
violations have been increased.
(vii) It allows for the regulation of monopolistic licence agreements; and
The High Court hears appeals from those who disagree with the Controller's decision.33
28
THE GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS OF GOODS (REGISTRATION AND
PROTECTION) ACT, 1999
Despite being passed by our Parliament in 1999, this law did not become effective until
109
September 2003. The law became effective because it was a requirement of the TRIPs
Agreement, to which India is a signatory. It is worth noting that India has a responsibility under
the TRIPs Agreement to safeguard the GIs of other contracting parties. As of the date of TRIPs'
(and the WTO's) entry into force in 1995, India lacked any legislation on GIs, meaning that
Indian goods were not eligible for such protection on the territory of other WTO Member
nations. To rephrase, TRIPs does not require other nations to provide protection for GIs that are
not protected in the place of origin. On the other side, India would have to protect imports from
nations that offer similar safeguards. In response, the GI law in India was created. The Indian
legal system provides more extensive safeguards.
The historical relationship between trademarks and geographical indications (GIs) has been
characterised by controversy. Registrants are bestowed with the exclusive privilege to employ a
specific symbol within each of these closely related relatives, all of whom belong to the broader
category of legal principles governing unfair competition. In the event that a trademark
proprietor and a Geographical Indication (GI) collective assert ownership over the same symbol
within a particular legal jurisdiction, what would be the resulting outcome? In accordance with
the primary goal of the conference to promote and reconcile differences among legal systems of
different nations, this article explores a developing area that has the potential to offer significant
opportunities for their integration. The motivation for conducting this research and analysis
1
33

originated from the recent Panel Report of the World Trade Organisation ("WTO"), which
outlines the legal basis for cohabitation.
The concept of the "zone of compromise" was first recognised in trademark law as the defence of
"geographic descriptive use." This aligns with the doctrinal advancements that have taken place
alongside the Report on both national and regional scales. The significance of coexistence arises
in the context of the longstanding dispute between trademark regimes and geographical
indication (GI) regimes, which has traditionally been conceptualised in terms of conflicting
priorities. Over a long period of time, the language around this issue has not altered. This article
explains how trademarks and geographical indication tags are causing problems in the industry
and how intellectual property rights infringement is becoming a bigger problem. Through the
utilisation of pertinent examples and the clear delineation and highlighting of the importance of
Geographical Indication (GI) tags and trademarks, this establishes the foundational basis for an
analysis of potential conflicts that could emerge between these two entities. This facilitates the
establishment of a foundation for considering potential conflicts that could emerge between
them. This study examines the diverse range of conflicts that can emerge among the parties
involved as a result of conflicting market assertions, as well as the underlying factors that
contribute to these conflicts. This article also examines the strategies and systems of checks and
balances that have been implemented to effectively manage these conflicts. Moreover, the text
expands upon the need for additional modifications and underscores the importance of the
European Union's recommendations for improving the enforcement and safeguarding of these
rights. Furthermore, a comprehensive enumeration of the rights that are safeguarded by these
measures is furnished. There is a notable and ongoing conflict between trademarks and
geographical indication tags, stemming from the intellectual property applications associated
with both and their expanding scope. The issue of substantial dispute often arises in cases
involving indistinguishable products that bear identical symbols, particularly in relation to
Trademarks and Protected Geographic Indications. One of the main challenges in implementing
these two intellectual property rights (IPRs) is their overlapping subject matter. The utilisation of
geographical indication (GI) tags has facilitated the identification of numerous products that
possess a well-defined geographic origin. However, consumers also benefit significantly from
trademarks, as they aid in differentiating between similar goods produced by different
companies. The increased prevalence of global markets has resulted in an escalation in the
occurrence of disputes that arise from conflicting claims made by the involved parties.
Therefore, it is imperative to implement a comprehensive overhaul of the current dispute
resolution procedures.
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION
A geographical indication (GI) refers to a label that is attached to products, indicating their
specific geographic origin and highlighting the unique characteristics and reputation associated
with that particular region. In order to meet the criteria of a Geographical Indication (GI), a
distinctive sign must explicitly indicate the origin of the product, thereby indicating that it was
produced in a specific geographical location. When evaluating the qualities or reputation of a
product, it is important to take into account the country of origin. The relationship between the
product and the location of its initial production is unquestionable. The influence exerted by the
production site has resulted in the manifestation of these attributes. Through the allocation of a
specific manufacturing site, geographical indications (GIs) facilitate companies in capitalising on
the unique characteristics of their products, thereby enabling them to generate economic gains.
Additionally, GIs serve as a means to educate and entice consumers. This assertion holds true as
GIs serve the purpose of providing information pertaining to the provenance of a given product.
Various types of commodities, including agricultural products, food items, alcoholic beverages,
3
handicrafts, and industrial goods, have the potential to be authorised for the use of the
Geographical Indication (GI) label. The protection of geographical indication tags primarily
relies on the use of sui generis systems, which are unique regimes specifically designed for this
purpose.
Additionally, collective or certification marks, as well as business practices-focused techniques

like administrative product approval procedures, are employed to safeguard geographical
indication tags. It is possible to differentiate between these strategies based on critical factors,
such as the necessary level of security protections and their scope. However, there are certain
similarities between sui generis and certification mark systems, as both involve granting rights
for collective use to individuals who meet specific criteria. Sui generis systems possess
distinctive qualities and do not exhibit shared characteristics. Various methodologies, many of
which have been previously discussed, are employed within different national and regional
frameworks to safeguard the security of geographical indicators. These processes have arisen as
a result of specific historical and economic conditions, as well as diverse legal norms. An
individual who possesses legal authorization to utilise a geographical indicator label has the right
to restrict another person from using it, on the condition that the product in question adheres to
the relevant production criteria. Prominent imported commodities encompass South American
Colombian coffee, Indian Mysore silk, Italian Parma ham and parmesan cheese, as well as
Colombian coffee originating from Parma.
TRADEMARK
Any easily recognizable word, phrase, logo, or symbol that is legally recognized as identifying
and differentiating one product from another in the market is known as a trademark. A sign is an
object that offers distinct identification of a product's ownership by a specific company and
functions as a recognition of that company's brand ownership. Trademarks enhance the ability of
the market, consumers, and the legal system to discern and distinguish between different
products. Traditionally, their primary purpose is to ascertain and safeguard design components
and terminologies that delineate the source, owner, or authorship of a particular product or
service. These components may encompass visual elements or linguistic expressions. These may
encompass corporate slogans, brand identities, musical group names, product designations, or
musical group insignias. The utilisation of a trademark by a business or individual serves to
increase the difficulty of unauthorised replication of goods or services by external entities.
Moreover, there is a strict prohibition on the utilisation of any symbols or signs that present a
substantial likelihood of being misconstrued as a symbol that is already in circulation. This
implies that a corporation is restricted from utilising a symbol or trade name that bears a strong
resemblance or is indistinguishable from a previously registered one, especially when the goods
or services offered are interconnected. For example, a corporation engaged in the production of
carbonated beverages is legally restricted from employing a designation or emblem that bears an
excessive resemblance to that of the Coca-Cola Company. Filing an application and paying the
associated fees with the appropriate trademark office is the first step in obtaining trademark
protection on a federal or state level. At the global scale, there exist two feasible options: one is
to file trademark protection applications with the relevant trademark offices of each country of
interest, while the other is to employ the Madrid System, which was established by the World
Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO). To safeguard their intellectual property, individuals
can choose between two strategies. The regulation of trademark infringement and its
enforcement in India is overseen by the Trade Marks Act of 1999. This legislation also governs
the process of submitting applications for trademark registration, whether through manual or
electronic means. If there are no objections raised within the following ninety days, the
certificate of registration will be granted for the registered name. For instance, when rights are
registered, the legal framework becomes more understandable and the holder's legal standing is
strengthened in case legal action is required. India has a strong trademark law that makes it
illegal to infringe on someone else's trademark and imposes criminal and civil penalties for those
who do. Prominent illustrations of identifiable trademarks encompass McDonald's, Bajaj, Apple,
and Nike.
MAIN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TRADEMARK AND GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION
1. A trademark is a recognisable symbol utilised by a business, regardless of its legal or ethical

standing, with the purpose of distinguishing its goods from those of its rivals. In contrast,
geographic indications (GIs) function as a dependable mechanism for discerning the precise
geographical origin of a product's manufacture. An item's geographical identifier should tell
buyers where their goods came from and what makes them special because of where they were
made. Manufacturers based in the designated area whose wares have distinctive qualities can use
the geographical indicator. Because of the serious risk of misleading customers about the
product's true origin, it is absolutely forbidden for unofficial parties to use protected
geographical indicators (PGIs).
2. A designation of origin, commonly referred to as a "geographical indication," is a term used to

indicate products that possess unique characteristics that primarily or solely originate from the
production facility. The terms "geographical indication" and "geographic indication" are
considered interchangeable in academic discourse. However, trademarks are widely
acknowledged as a mechanism through which an organisation differentiates its goods and
services from those provided by its rivals. A Geographic Indication (GI) can be conceptualised
as a "collective mark" utilised by indigenous artisans and farmers. In contrast to a geographical
indication (GI), a trademark has the ability to undergo de-localization and subsequent transfer to
a different proprietor.
3. In the realm of intellectual property, a proprietor possesses the sole and exclusive ownership
rights over a geographical indication, whereas any producer operating within the designated area
is legally authorised to utilise a trademark. The utilisation of geographical designations is
deemed acceptable for all producers operating within a specified geographic area. Within the
context of the Cameroon Mountains, it is common for a honey producer to utilise the designation
"Mountain" for their product. However, the specific designation of "XTRA" Mountain Honey
can only be used if the producer has formally applied for trademark protection of their honey and
obtained it. This guarantees that only the specific producer is granted the authority to designate
their products as "XTRA" Mountain Honey.
4. In a specific geographical area, only one company is authorised to utilise a registered

trademark that includes the business's name and address. However, other companies are allowed
to employ the same geographical indicator.
A trademark has the potential to encompass a variety of elements, including combinations of

letters, words, numbers, or a single number. Additionally, it may incorporate an acronym, name,
device or symbolic element, hologram, sound, or aroma. In contrast, geographical indications are
restricted to designations of a political-geographical nature and symbols that are linked to
particular geographic areas. 6. The establishment of a trademark necessitates the creative
prowess of individuals. The human mind has the capacity to conceive of a unique and innovative
symbol or phrase that sets apart a specific product or service from others occupying a similar
market position. In contrast, a geographical indication functions as a distinctive label denoting a
particular geographical region that signifies the provenance of a product. Geographic indications
arise from influences such as environmental factors, climatic conditions, or human activities,
rather than being solely attributed to human ingenuity. As a result, geographical indications
highlight the distinct characteristics of a product that are influenced by its geographic origin,
whereas trademarks are utilised to emphasise the producer or manufacturer of a particular
product.
CONFLICT BETWEEN GI TAGS AND TRADEMARK
Disputes often arise when endeavouring to protect goods in the marketplace through the
utilisation of geographical indication labels and trademarks, which are two separate forms of
distinctive identifiers. The primary objective of employing trademarks and tags is to establish a
distinct identity for a particular product in order to distinguish it from other similar products.
Conflicts can arise when multiple parties seek permission to utilise a distinctive symbol, leading
to disputes over the ownership of exclusive rights. Preventive measures have been taken to
minimise the probability of legal disputes arising due to conflicting claims of trademark
ownership. According to the principle of territoriality, trademarks that are employed for identical
goods or services and exhibit a significant degree of resemblance to one another have the
potential to coexist in multiple countries. Nevertheless, due to the escalating globalisation of
trade and the surging prevalence of new, unrestricted communication platforms like the Internet,
the notion of territoriality has undergone substantial erosion, thereby demanding the formulation
of novel methodologies. According to the theory of specialisation, if multiple trademarks are
employed to denote separate goods or services, there is a possibility for them to exhibit
significant similarity. According to the priority principle, the exclusive right to use a trademark is
granted to the entity or individual who first utilises or registers it. The regime governing
international trademarks exhibits a robust intellectual and institutional foundation when
compared to other regimes. Therefore, regardless of an individual's commitment to a trademark
system or a unique registration process, it is not uncommon for conflicts to arise when applying
for a geographical indication (GI) while there is already an existing trademark registration. One
potential approach to addressing these issues is the implementation of the "first in time, first in
right" principle. This phrase offers a succinct way to describe the condition of concepts when
exclusivity and priority are merged.
SOLUTION: The European Union is widely regarded as a leading advocate for the protection of
geographical indications (GIs), and it consistently strives to enhance and reinforce the current
safeguards in place. There have been recommendations put forth to implement further alterations
aimed at enhancing the safety measures for military personnel, specifically in situations of
emergency.
The proposal put forth by the European Union includes the suggestion to create a global registry
for Geographic Indications (GIs) linked to alcoholic beverages and spirits, alongside other
measures. Furthermore, the European Union has provided guidelines for the extension of the
scope of TRIPS Article 23 to include all goods that are classified as Geographical Indications
(GI). Furthermore, the European Union (EU) has identified and advocated for the safeguarding
of forty-one genetically identical (GIs) standards that are widely recognised and accepted in
countries outside the EU. The European Union maintains that the geographical indications (GIs)
in question are not of a generic nature. The amendments will extend the availability of enhanced
safeguards to all Geographical Indications (GIs), in contrast to the current scenario where only
wines and spirits receive such protection.
Without the implementation of appropriate labelling measures, manufacturers would not be

subjected to unjust competition from rival companies, and customers would not encounter any
form of perplexity or ambiguity. Furthermore, the removal of the capacity to affix corrective
labels will serve as a deterrent against unfair exploitation of products bearing geographical
indication labels. This objective holds significant value on its own, as it diminishes the
probability of a geographical indication (GI) losing its distinctiveness as a result of widespread
use. Developing nations would also experience advantages from enhanced protection measures,
as it would streamline and expedite the process of their goods entering the markets of developed
110
nations, resulting in increased simplicity, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness. Hence, for the
purpose of facilitating the impact of Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement on the trade of
commodities originating from developing countries, it becomes imperative to undertake the
global registration of Geographical Indications (GIs) and extend the application of its provisions
in a wider context.
The efficacy of geographical indication (GI) protection can be enhanced by broadening the scope
of TRIPS Article 23 and providing protection for the 41 specific GIs listed. The protection of
Geographical Indications (GI) requires all parties involved to participate in international
discussions in order to reach a practical and agreeable agreement. The realisation of the complete
potential benefits of geographical indications (GIs) relies on the creation of a protective
framework that is both widely acceptable and efficient. Methods for Surface Preparation A
number of sectors, including manufacturing, construction, and the automobile industry, rely
heavily on surface preparation. It involves the treatment and cleaning of The European Union
(EU) has emerged as a prominent figure in safeguarding geographical indications (GIs) within
the industry, displaying a steadfast commitment to enhancing the existing framework of
protection. As a result, additional revisions have been suggested to achieve a heightened level of
protection for geographical indications (GIs).
The European Union has made recommendations that include extending the scope of TRIPS
Article 23 to cover all goods designated as Geographical Indications (GIs) and proposing the
establishment of a global registry for GIs specifically related to wines and spirits. Furthermore,
the European Union has actively advocated for the safeguarding of forty-one genetically
89
identical products (GIs) that are deemed generic in non-EU nations. According to the regulations
set forth by the European Union (EU), it can be determined that these particular geographical
indications (GIs) fail to satisfy the established criteria for attaining generic status. The proposed
amendments seek to broaden the scope of protection for Geographical Indications (GIs) by
encompassing spirits and wines, thereby ensuring equal protection for all GIs. These
amendments aim to enhance the existing framework by offering a more comprehensive and
robust safeguard for GIs. By implementing this approach, the potential for consumer confusion
would be eliminated, and manufacturers would no longer face unjust competition from
companies utilising remedial labelling practises. Furthermore, the removal of the provision for
corrective labelling would effectively eliminate the unethical practise of taking advantage of
products that bear Geographical Indication (GI) labels without proper authorization or adherence
to the associated standards.
The aforementioned objective possesses inherent importance as it reduces the probability of a

geographical indication (GI) losing its distinctiveness due to excessive use. The implementation
of enhanced safeguards would yield advantages for both developed and developing nations, as it
would facilitate a more efficient and streamlined process for the entry of goods manufactured in
developing countries into the markets of developed nations. Hence, it is imperative to adopt a
more comprehensive approach in the implementation of Article 23 of the Trade in Intellectual
Property Act (TRIPS). Developing nations are similarly required to establish their own registry
for international geographical indications (GIs). By expanding the parameters of TRIPS Article
23, comprehensive safeguarding will be provided for all 41 geographical indications (GIs) listed.
As a result, the effectiveness of geographical indication (GI) protection will be improved. In
order to achieve a pragmatic and mutually agreeable resolution pertaining to the safeguarding of
Geographical Indications (GI), it is imperative to engage in international negotiations involving
all relevant stakeholders. The tangible benefits of geographical indications will only be realised
once a comprehensive and effective protective framework is established, which is widely
acknowledged and endorsed by all relevant stakeholders.
Geographical indication tags serve the purpose of distinguishing products based on their specific
geographic origins, while trademarks primarily serve the purpose of distinguishing products
based on the associated company or organisation. These two types of tags are utilised to
distinguish between different products. Disputes arising from the utilisation of intellectual
property for the purpose of distinguishing products and services in the marketplace are an
inevitable outcome. Despite the existence of various strategies and concepts that are currently
being implemented and have demonstrated their efficacy in resolving such disputes, there is still
ample opportunity for further advancement in this area. The Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
framework is currently in its early stages, indicating that there is still room for further
advancement and improvement. Some decisions are made hastily due to a lack of clarity, while
others are made after careful consideration. The task of delineating the boundaries and
differentiating between the two entities is a highly complex undertaking, necessitating further
time to arrive at a conclusive resolution. Trademarks fulfil the function of distinguishing
products based on the manufacturer or organisation, whereas geographical indication labels seek
to achieve the same objective with respect to specific geographical areas.
Inevitable future conflicts may arise concerning the utilisation of these two forms of intellectual
property, as they serve as means to designate commercially accessible goods and services.
Despite the existence and implementation of various protocols and standards aimed at effectively
resolving disputes of this kind, there is still significant potential for improvement. In order to
broaden the scope of TRIPS Article 23 and establish a global framework for the registration of
geographical indications, it is imperative to adopt the European Union's suggested measures for
these provisions. The implementation of these modifications will not only enhance the reputation
and demand for the aforementioned products, but it will also facilitate the expansion of market
share in developing nations.
The Central Government of India is authorised to establish a GIs Registry in any area it sees fit
in accordance with Indian law. The proposed protected items' names, addresses, and other
5
descriptions must be included in the GI Register created under Section 6. This register can be
stored in whole or in part on computer floppies, diskettes, or any other electronic form, as long as
the necessary precautions are in place. There are restrictions on the registration of certain GIs.
These considerations are:
(i) A GI that may be used to mislead or confuse;
(ii) A GI whose usage is illegal under current legislation;
(iii) A GI that is or contains explicit material;
(iv) a GI that includes or is otherwise likely to offend the religious sensibilities of any group
within India's population;34
(v) A GI that lacks standing to seek judicial protection; and
(vi) A GI that is no longer protected in its place of origin because it has been deemed a generic
name or indication of good, or because it has fallen out of use there.
GIs that are technically correct in terms of the territory, location, or locale from where the items
come but mislead consumers into believing that the goods actually came from somewhere else.
As long as the Registrar is convinced that consumers will not be confused or misled as a result of
the registration of a homonymous GI (a GI with a name and origin that is too similar to another
GI), then the Registrar will allow the registration of the homonymous GI.
Individuals, groups of individuals, producers, government agencies, or other entities recognised

by or operating under applicable law may all submit applications for GIs. The interests of the
items' manufacturers should be represented by these types of individuals or organisations. All
applications must be submitted in writing to the Registrar on a form approved by the Registrar
and accompanied by the appropriate fee.
PROTECTING PLANT VARIETIES AND FARMERS' RIGHTS IN A GLOBAL

ECONOMIC DOWNTURN Act of 2001
5
In 2001, India enacted the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act to guarantee
compliance with its TRIPs obligations and to put it into effect. This statute recognizes and
44
safeguards the work of farmers who conserve, enhance, and disseminate plant genetic resources
for the purpose of developing new plant varieties. The legislation's stated purpose is to facilitate
farmers' unrestricted use of seed banks and other plant varieties. Here is a rundown of the main
points of the law:
4
34
Some of the terminology defined therein include:
(i) variety, fundamentally derived variety, 'extant variety breeder, farmer, farmers' variety, seed,
and others;
44
(ii) It creates the Authority for the Protection of Plant Varieties and the Rights of Farmers.
(iii) It allows for the registration of new and existing plant varieties, including those that are
substantially the same;
(iv) Trees and vines have an initial period of protection of nine years, while other crops have a
period of six years. Both of these periods can be reviewed, and the total period of protection
cannot exceed twenty-four years; however, for existing varieties, it cannot exceed fifteen years,
and for all other cases, it cannot exceed fifteen years from the date of registration.;
(v) It protects the rights of farmers and communities.
(vi) It includes a clause shielding innocent infringers from liability;
(v) The law specifies conditions under which a compulsory licence may be issued, such
as where such a licence is needed to serve the legitimate needs of the public or when
doing so is in the public interest.
(vi) It establishes a 'gene fund' to aid farmers and communities in the region of $150
(vii) In the event of a legal disagreement arising from the Act, the Plant Varieties
Protection Appellate Tribunal was established to hear appeals and resolve the matter.
(viii) Infringement, sanctions, and other connected matters are addressed.
INDIA'S PROCEDURES FOR ENFORCING RIGHTS TO INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY
The administrative mechanism, which handles the granting or registering of intellectual property
rights, and the judicial mechanism, which handles challenges to administrative decisions,
infringement, and related issues, make up the bulk of the intellectual property arena's
institutional framework.
MECHANISM OF THE LAW

After carefully planning an administrative framework, the courts have been established to hear
challenges to and ensure compliance with administrative orders. The legal process is as follows:
43
I. Appeal proceedings under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the Patents Act, 1970, and the
Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 are heard by the
Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB).35
II. Appeals from the Registrar of Copyright's decisions will be heard by the Copyright Board.
INTERPRETATIONS BY THE COURTS
The purpose of this article is to evaluate and survey a selection of significant intellectual
property decisions decided by Indian courts. Cases involving trademarks/passing off, copyright,
and patents are on the rise, indicating that something is shifting in these areas. In light of the
increasing volume of litigation involving domain names and other matters pertaining to the
internet, India will need to make certain adjustments to its intellectual property protection
policies. There is a need to address the difficulties brought on by the advent of digital tools.
Improvement is not Invention; the Courts in India on many occasions have held that an
arrangement and re-arrangement of mixture of the materials cannot become an invention, as it
would only be an improvement. But there are examples that address real problems with
copyrights, trademarks, and patents.
The court also ruled that the TRIPs agreement cannot be given retroactive effect. A similar
problem emerged in the context of a now-defunct clause of the Patents Act (related to EMRs),
which had been added in 1999 (but had been removed in 2005). The case has significance
because it will likely influence how courts interpret and apply the Patents Act within the
framework of the TRIPs Agreement. This application was denied by the Patent Office because it
did not constitute an innovation, as required by Section 2 (j) of the Indian Patent Act.
However, the Indian courts have dealt with litigation concerning copyright violations, including
concerns like infringement, originality, and telecasting rights for artistic works. It has also been
noted that uniqueness in judicial rulings cannot be protected by intellectual property laws.
The'swaymvar' case was about a TV reality show. The court ruled that "if the idea is developed
35
Verma, S. K. “BIODIVERSITY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.” Journal of the Indian Law
Institute, vol. 39, no. 2/4, 1997, pp. 203–15. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43953268. Accessed 29 Oct. 2023.
into a concept fledged with adequate details, then the same is capable of registration under the
Copyright Act." Zed TV L.P. v. Sundial Comm. Pvt. Ltd. also addressed the problem of how to
legally safeguard an idea for a TV show. Courts have addressed the extent to which moral rights
apply, and they have ruled that mechanically replicated cartons created during the printing
process can be protected by copyright 201. The Supreme Court first articulated the
idea/expression split in R.G.Anand v. Delux Films, a landmark case. Despite the fact that the
majority of trademark-related cases in India focus on registration formalities and issues relating
to rectification of the register of trademarks, issues like disparagement have also been dealt with
within the framework of trademarks. Equally emphasised is the standard for issuing injunctions
in cases of trademark infringement.
92
In Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solution Pvt. Ltd., the Supreme Court ruled that some domain
names could be protected as trademarks. Ltd, establishing that domain name protection should
follow the same rules as trademark protection. The parties' eligibility for a passing off remedy
was determined by the Supreme Court using the 'essential features' test for imitation. In
Dyechem Ltd. v. Cadbury (India) Ltd., the passing off remedy issue relating to transborder
reputation was standardised.
The 'principle of phonetic resemblance' established in Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo was
affirmed by the Court. In Living Media India Ltd v. Jitender Jain, the question of whether a
descriptive word is able to be protected by passing off remedy was explored.
93
A case involving Colgate Palmolive Company and Anchor Health & Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd
involved a trade dress passing off suit. The Supreme Court confirmed the High Court's injunction
65
ruling in Mahendra and Mahendra Paper Mills Ltd. v. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd, which
had found in favour of the plaintiff and prohibited the defendant from using the trade name
Mahendra and Mahendra. The Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks has
issued India's first-ever compulsory licence, allowing a local drug manufacturer in Hyderabad
62
called Natco to produce and sell a generic version of German pharmaceutical giant Bayer's
patent-protected cancer medicine, Nexavar, at a price about 30 times lower than that of Bayer
Corporation. The highest court in India has upheld this view.
CONCLUSION
Even if the road to a TRIPs-compliant regime was bumpy for India's legal system, the
destination is now well-known: India has become the 21st century's intellectual property
35
investment capital. The transition from a limited term process patent regime to the product patent
regime, as well as the evolution of intellectual property laws in India through different
amendments, can have numerous additional far-reaching consequences, although this chapter
primarily addresses three issues with the new TRIPS compliant Indian IP regime. The value of
this change will become apparent with the passage of time.
Throughout the contemporary era, India's scientific and technological capabilities have grown
substantially. Throughout this chapter, we have stressed the significance of IP rights in building a
strong national infrastructure. The number of trademark and patent applications is up 20 times
from the year 2000, according to a recent poll. As a result of global developments in IP law,
India amended and passed multiple legislation up until 2005. This section also anticipates the
many forums and remedies accessible in India for addressing IP infringement. The law
mentioned herein is supported by the judicial interpretations discussed in this chapter. Legal
disputes involving intellectual property, such as trademark and patent infringement, are
becoming increasingly important in today's society. In the present regime, IPR awareness has a
significant impact. It was previously thought that further work was required to bring IPR up to
57
modern standards and ensure compliance with the IPR regimes of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) and the European Patent Office (EPO). In the following chapter,
we'll examine intellectual property's metamorphosis from the physical to the digital sphere.
42
NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN INDIA
The twenty-first century will be known as the information age or the Age of Intelligence. The
success or failure of a country is in its ability to innovate, turning its accumulated knowledge
into economic and social benefits for its citizens. As a result, innovations are crucial for both
knowledge generation and processing. Ideas and the means by which they are expressed are
considered intellectual property. It's a mental product that grants protections to the people and
companies whose creative efforts have materialised as tangible assets. One example of
intellectual property is a patent, while others include copyrights for books and other literary
works, trademarks, and trade secrets. The researcher will address the following issues in the
study, since the expansion of intellectual property in India has consistently generated heated
controversy and considerable attention on a global scale. Recent years have seen considerable
112
progress in India's efforts to both comply with its obligations under the WTO Agreement on
TRIPs Rights and develop its own intellectual property system, which aims to find a middle
ground between monopoly rights and unfettered access to information. A year has passed
without any new intellectual property legislation going into effect, yet it would be unfair to say
that parliament has made no progress on IP issues.
"What has been India's most significant intellectual property (IP) development over the past 12
months?" is the main question of the project. Which new intellectual property protections are
India implementing? In what ways is Indian case law evolving in domains such as
pharmaceutical patents? Is India going to be taken off the Special 301 Watch List that the US
Trade Representative kept up to date in 2010? What recent actions have been made to bolster IP
enforcement in India, and what new laws are required to raise the nation's intellectual property
regime to worldwide standards? The paper offers several recommendations for enhancing the
efficiency of the apparatus in charge of policymaking and increasing awareness among right
holders in order to bring India's intellectual property law up to par with other nations.
India's knowledge economy cannot flourish unless its intellectual property is safeguarded. The
Indian market for intellectual property has grown rapidly in the last few years. It would be
necessary to update management theories and practises that were created before to the
emergence of the information economy in light of the changing economic climate. Labor, rather
than commodities, may be a more accurate indicator of monetary worth if inventions have
greatly increased man's control over nature. In his efforts to educate the public about intellectual
property rights and strike a balance between their protection and public policy, Alfred Marshall
held this view. The knowledge economy places a premium on and demands top-notch
management of knowledge-based assets like innovations and know-how. Factors such as
41
increasing global competition, high innovation risks, short product cycles, the need for quick
technological changes, large investments in research and development, production, and
marketing, and the need for highly skilled human resources are making intellectual property
48
rights increasingly important in today's trade environment. India has signed the Agreement on
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and is a member of the World Trade
Organization. In an attempt to better protect IP holders, India has been revising its IP laws in
recent years.
The Indian government has attempted to fortify the enforcement and preservation of intellectual
property rights through legislation. Nonetheless, the legal system has advanced intellectual
property rights significantly. Indian courts have incorporated international concepts and rulings,
setting new norms in trademark, copyright, and patent disputes. All things considered, the
accomplishments of the last year have cleared the path for the setting of new IP rights standards
in the years to come.
2
IMPORTANT IP DEVELOPMENT IN INDIA IN LAST 12 MONTHS
The Indian economy has opened up and expanded significantly in recent years. Foreign investors
are now very interested in the Indian market because of India's newly elevated status in the
global economy. Multinational corporations have established operations in nearly every
economic sector in India. This has put the country's IP laws and enforcement mechanisms under
the microscope as people around the world question whether or not they measure up to
international norms.
Global debate and attention have long focused on India's intellectual property system's evolution.
46
To meet its commitments under the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and to establish its own IP regime that balances
monopoly rights with free access to information, India has achieved great progress in the past
few years.
2
On October 15, 2010, the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry formed an
Anti Piracy Coordination Cell with the approval of the Indian government. The three main
components that need to be tackled directly in order to decrease piracy are education,
enforcement, and legislation. Multiple parties will be able to communicate more easily with the
help of the cell. All four of these significant businesses are feeling the pinch of piracy: movies,
music, books, and software. After much deliberation, Justice Muralidhar issued a ruling on
2
November 26, 2010, requiring all parties involved in the cinematic film industry to get the CDs
or DVDs certified by the Central Board of Film and Classification (CBFC) prior to selling them.
Officials were warned to not go after films or other media that had already been released or sold
before the order went into effect because it is only prospective and not retrospective.36
Products that are truly one-of-a-kind in terms of their location are granted Geographical
Indication labels. In this sense, a GI tag is a seal of approval attesting to a product's exclusivity in
terms of its origin, production method, or geographical distribution. In most cases, these labels
improve the item's marketability.
Some Keralan products have been granted GI status by the Geographical Indications Registry in
Chennai since September 2010. These include Central Travancore Jaggery, Wayanad
Gandhakasala Rice, and Jeerakasala Rice. Other examples include the Rajasthani Kota Doria
(Logo) Handicraft, the Maharashtrai Nashik Grapes, the Rajasthani Bikaneri Bujiya, the Punjabi
Phulkari, and the Gujarati Surat Zari Craft. Among the 37 things bestowed GI badges in 2010
were Varanasi-made Bhadohi Carpets. The Joint Director of Industries' office, the Great Bhadohi
Handicraft Society, and the All India Carpet Manufacturers Association (AICMA) are the parties
107
seeking GI for the Bhadohi carpets.
The National Institute of Intellectual Property Rights Management is set to open in Nagpur,
according to official approval. In addition to its primary functions of conducting research,
teaching, and training, the institution also serves as a forum for discussion on pressing issues
related to intellectual property legislation. To make them more competitive on a global scale,
plans have already been developed to upgrade and extend the IP offices.
Each submitted innovation will be accompanied by a report detailing the results of an assessment
by the International Preliminary Examining Authority and a search by the International
Searching Authority. As per the discussions held by the Patent Cooperation Treaty Office, the
2
Indian Patent and Trademark Office may be acknowledged as an international searching
authority and an international preliminary examination authority.
To investigate two matters of patent law, the Indian government established the Mashelkar
Committee. The first concern is whether or not the exclusion of microorganisms from patenting
36 9
2023.
is compatible with the TRIPS Agreement. The second concern is whether or not the restriction of
patenting to new chemical entities or medical devices is compatible with TRIPS.
On August 10, 2010, Parliament approved the Trademarks Amendment Bill, 2009. All proposals
were approved by the Committee with the exception of one, which called for the creation of a
new Section 36H that would have made it simpler for Indian trademark owners to get worldwide
protection for their brands by submitting a single Madrid Protocol application. Furthermore, the
measure adheres to the provisions of the Madrid Protocol by imposing an 18-month timeframe
on the approval of a trademark registration application.
73
The Trade Mark Rules, 2002 were amended by the Trade Mark (Amended) Rules, 2010, which
became operative on May 20, 2010. All 45 foreign classes have been adopted as a consequence
of revisions made to the Fourth Schedule of the TM Rules. Prior to May 20, 2010, services
falling under International Classes 43, 44, and 45 in India had to be registered under Class 42;
2
however, a fresh application was needed. Modification to add a new disclaimer to Rule 62(3)
The Union government has introduced the Copyright Amendment Bill, 2010 in the Rajya Sabha
in an attempt to amend the Copyright Act of 1957. The Bill is the most extensive attempt to
amend the 1957 Act, therefore it will have a significant impact on the music and film industries.
The bill aims to recognise lyricists, composers, and vocalists as the true writers of the film's
literary and musical content and grant them authorship credit as such. If the bill passes into law,
songwriters and other creatives will be able to profit from their work by receiving royalties and
other compensation. The current copyright regime grants the record labels and producers the
exclusive right to collect royalties.
Directors' responsibilities are set to shift in the proposed legislation. "After the commencement
of the Copyright Amendment Act, 2010, the producer and the principal director shall be treated
jointly as the first owner of copyright," the bill states. Only the producer now has this privilege
under the law. In addition, if the producer and the director come to an agreement, the film's
copyright period might be extended by an additional 60-70 years. Broadcasting organisations'
access to works of literature and music as well as sound recordings is another target of the Bill,
which aims to implement legislative licencing. A copyright licencing to use content on fair and
nondiscriminatory terms is known as a statutory licence or compulsory licence. The domestic IP
protection laws in India are developing.
Courts in India have interpreted the country's extensive IP laws in a manner that fairly balances
public and private interests, reflecting the country's present social and economic milieu.
Governments are free to select their own IP regime because international IP enforcement is not
based on the core principles in Berne and TRIPS.
42
To strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the intellectual property management system in
the country, the Indian government has instituted a number of legal remedies, including criminal,
civil, and interim actions. Someone can sue another in a district court or high court for passing
off or infringement if they want to take a civil case against someone they think is infringing on
their rights. For the duration of the patent's validity, an injunction prohibiting the infringer from
further use of the claimed invention is issued by the court in the event of a successful patent
infringement suit. The court may also require the patent infringement to pay damages or account
for the profits. An exclusive license holder has the right to sue for monetary damages in the event
of a license infringement. Additionally, the court might forcibly remove the illicit goods from
circulation by ordering their destruction, without any compensation being demanded.
If the infringer is able to demonstrate that the infringement was unintentional, neither damages
nor an accounting of profits will be granted. A court case involving trademark and copyright
infringement may result in an accounting of earnings, damages, or an injunction. In Time
Incorporated v. Lokesh Srivastava, the court granted civil remedies described above along with
punitive damages for trademark infringement. Regarding punitive damages, the court in this case
embraced American law, which is something that courts do not disapprove of while assessing
foreign jurisprudence. Damages were granted to Whirlpool Corporation by an Indian trademark
proprietor who had unlawfully registered the "Whirlpool" mark. A case involving Allegan
Incorporation yielded a similar decision, determining that a product's or mark's global reputation
96
played a crucial role in the instance of passing off an unregistered trade mark. The court has also
decided that if the claimant can demonstrate that obstructing the search could result in the
destruction of infringing goods, the accused infringer's property may be searched. Even in an ex
parte proceeding, this court is able to order such a thing. As a result, Indian courts are now in
charge of protecting intellectual property. Willful disregard for any court ruling carries criminal
consequences according to the Contempt of Court Act, 1971.
Infringement of a patent does not have any legal consequences. Offenders found guilty of
copyright or trademark infringement face prison terms ranging from six months to three years.
This law carries a fee in addition to jail time as a penalty for breaching it. Penalties for copyright
violations that occur repeatedly may be more severe.
Declaratory judgments of noninfringement are granted by the courts under the Patents Act of
1970. The patent's validity cannot be contested in these proceedings based just on its claims.
Therefore, the finding of non-infringement has no bearing on the patent's validity. By declaring
that someone's allegations of patent infringement are baseless, the court can also make that
determination. A declaratory judgment of this kind is also permitted by copyright and trademark
legislation.
While the matter is being adjudicated, the courts have the authority to grant a temporary remedy.
From the time the lawsuit is being heard or until another order is obtained, the court has the
authority to issue an interim injunction that prohibits the defendant from utilizing the plaintiff's
invention, mark, or work.
To obtain search and seizure orders against Unknown Persons/Firms et al., it is typically
recommended that clients file criminal complaints with the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate
when there is widespread sale of counterfeit goods and violations of trademarks or copyrights in
various locations.37
With the help of the police, raids can be organized after obtaining Search & Seizure Orders from
the court. Any objects found during the operation, including counterfeit or duplicate ones, can be
confiscated. The process of criminal prosecution begins when an individual commits a crime.
The Indian courts also have the authority to issue injunctions and 'Anton Piller' orders, which are
brief remedies that can be used to stop infringement and restrict damages. In the annals of global
copyright enforcement, the achievement of civil proceedings in combating piracy stands alone as
a watershed moment. In line with global practice and to align IP legislation with the Customs
8
37
6
Act 1962, the Ministry of Finance and the Department of Revenue issued the IP Rights
(Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules 2007 on May 8th, 2007. With the new rules in place, the
Customs Authority can now rule on matters involving the export or import of infringing goods.
According to Rule 3, a rightholder can ask a customs official at the port of entry to hold or
release infringing goods if it finds out about their import. Customs shall notify the rights holder
of the request's approval or rejection within 30 business days of receiving it. During this period,
2
Customs will also provide assistance to the rights holder. Under the new rules, whoever has
intellectual property rights that are allegedly infringed upon by a shipment of goods must put up
a bond with Customs to pay for the expenses of seizing, demurraging, or holding the shipment
until the infringement claim's validity is determined.
Customs can also delay releasing the items for sale if it has probable cause to think they violate
intellectual property laws. Ray Ban, a manufacturer of sunglasses, was the first to file a
notification under the new regulations, which were enacted to curb the entry of fake sunglasses
into India. Customs now has broad authority to combat international product piracy and
counterfeiting.
The government has taken numerous initiatives, which has led to a rise in the enforcement of
intellectual property laws in the nation. A more just and equitable process for enforcing
intellectual property rights at India's borders would be greatly advanced by the government's
attempts to embrace these developments, which have been increasing the number of cases filed
over the last several years.38 In 2010, India was included on the USTR's "301" Special Watch
List.
49
In accordance with Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974, the Office of the United States Trade
Representatives compiles an annual report called the Special 301 Report that examines the state
of IP protection and enforcement around the world. This report reflects the administration's
dedication to safeguarding intellectual property rights (IPR) worldwide and ensuring their
effective enforcement. The USTR has established the "Watch List" and the "Priority Watch List"
7
38
2023.
in accordance with the unique 301 requirements. Even in 2010, India is still considered a high
security risk.
India's IPR infrastructure, including its laws, bureaucracy, and enforcement, continues to
improve slowly but steadily. The enforcement situation in India has been steadily improving, and
the country's intellectual property authorities have kept up their encouraging modernization
initiatives. The U.S. is heartened by India's examination of potential revisions to its trademark
law that would pave the way for India's admission to the Madrid Protocol. The United States
supports ongoing initiatives to speed up patent opposition processes and decrease application
backlogs. India's enforcement framework is ineffective, and piracy and counterfeiting, especially
pharmaceutical counterfeiting, persist. The requirements of the WIPO Internet Treaties need to
be implemented, among other changes, in order to bring India's copyright legislation in line with
international norms.39
In addition, legislation to prevent the production and sale of pirated optical discs is still in the
works and is expected to be passed soon. The United States maintains its calls for India to
strengthen patent protection as part of its Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) framework. In this
regard, the fact that patents cannot be issued for specific chemical forms in India until they have
been shown to be more effective is cause for concern. The US also wants India to keep private
information about tests or other documents made to get agricultural chemical and medicinal
items approved for sale from being used unfairly for commercial purposes or leaked without
permission. The United States urges India to alter public opinion about intellectual property
rights (IPR) offences by strengthening its criminal enforcement framework to include swift
judicial disposal of cases and severe sentences. In the coming year, the United States hopes to
continue working with India on these concerns, including encouraging India to improve its IPR
framework.
RELEVANCE TO INTERNATIONAL PHARMACY OF EMERGING IP CASE LAW
Improvements in Indian patent law in recent years are to be applauded. Pharmaceutical

substances in India are now legally protected by patents. Since patent enforcement difficulties
have only lately been brought before the Indian courts, the country is still learning how to deal
11
39
with complicated patent disputes. Interpretation, trial, and injunction enforcement criteria are still
in the works. Since the Patent Office has never been considered by the courts, there are no rules
for how they should issue injunctions. Many international pharmaceutical corporations view
Section 3 of the Indian Patent Act as a barrier to patenting inventions.
On January 1, 2005, pharmaceutical patents were became legally enforceable in India following
2
amendments to the Patent Act of 1970 to reflect the TRIPS agreement. By amending the Indian
Patents Act, 1970 in 2005, patent protection for medicinal articles or pharmaceuticals was
enhanced in India. Nevertheless, the expansion was solely applicable to novel chemical entities.
Because of the modification, there have been more oppositions both before and after the award.
Of these 190 cases, the pharmaceutical sector is the root cause of at least 90%. Section 3(d) of
105
the Patents Act, 1970 states that an invention cannot be patentable unless there is a substantial
improvement in efficacy, a new form of an existing substance, new properties or uses for an
existing substance, or the simple application of an existing process. There are still objections
from both innovator and generic companies, but the area remains.
Among combination products, Roche's Pegasus was the first to get a patent. After the Patent
Amendment Rules 2006 were put in place, administrative delays in litigation and patent award
2
progress were scrutinized more closely. Because of this deficiency, on April 2, 2007, the
Intellectual Property Appellate Board was given the responsibility of hearing oppositions both
before and after patents were granted. As of that day, the Delhi High Court transferred all patent
cases pending there to the board. An other significant change has resulted from the regulations
2
and restrictions: a meteoric surge in patent litigation during the previous two years. In a long-
awaited patent verdict, Novartis was dealt a defeat when the Madras High Court denied their
challenge under India's patent legislation. Novartis argued that the 1970 Patents Act, Section
16
3(d), was null and void since it ran counter to the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights. Novartis challenged the rejection of their patent application for
Glivec under the act's Section 3(d), which restricts patentable subject matter. As far as the court
2
was concerned, the World Trade Organization had the authority to decide whether or not Section
3(d) of the 2005 act violated the TRIPs Agreement; the court itself had no jurisdiction over the
matter.
For instance, Section 3(d) specifies that "shall be considered to be the same substance, unless
they differ significantly in properties with regard to efficacy," meaning that salts and other
derivatives of known drugs are treated identically. Access to affordable medications in
underdeveloped countries was cited as a major concern for those opposing Novartis' challenge to
the legislation. This was due to the fact that India is home to a thriving generic drugs industry.
The court added that the WTO's dispute settlement process should be used to settle any concerns
about TRIPs compliance. Given that India generates $5 billion in medicine sales annually, of
which 65% are exported to developing nations, this move was monumental not just for India but
for the entire world. In order to provide legislative relief and administrative efficiency for the
public, Indian patent law has progressed from its origins to worldwide norms.
2
This historic ruling is likely to have an effect on Indian patent law, as the Indian patent office
found against Roche in a post-grant challenge challenging the validity of its valcyte patent. The
patent held by Roche on L-Valinate Ester of Gancyclovir and all appropriate salts was
2
challenged by Cipla, Bakul Pharma, Matrix Labs, the Indian Network for People Living with
HIV/AIDS, and Ranbax in a section 25(2) action. ‘
It appears that SP Subramaniyan, the Controller, invalidated the patent due to a lack of
innovative step. The Controller maintains that the increased bioavailability touted by Roche does
not necessarily translate to enhanced efficacy. For multinational pharmaceutical corporations,
this lawsuit is just another setback in India. With the exception of Pegasus, it appears that patent
rulings in the pharmaceutical industry are going against MNCs. The patent for Gleevec was
initially rejected by the IPO and the IPAB; an appeal is presently pending before the Supreme
Court. In the second instance, the court did not prevent Cipla from selling a generic version of
Tarceva, which was made by Roche. As for the third case, the IPO has successfully nullified
Roche's Valcyte patent. The generic Valcept can be marketed by Cipla until the IPAB or the
courts reverse the IPO's judgment. All of these decisions show that India is hell-bent on letting
patents on mostly speculative drugs go unchallenged. To align India's IP regime with
international standards, more legislation is needed.
Legislation pertaining to trademarks, copyright, and patents has not been able to fully address the
concerns of piracy, counterfeiting, and so on because the laws pertaining to them and others to
safeguard IP law domestically are scattered throughout the Indian Penal Code, CrPC, CPC,
Customs Act, etc. Consequently, a strong enforcement apparatus is essential to support the strong
IP law. Therefore, steps to prevent IP infringement should be included in any laws passed to
protect IP. Achieving global uniformity requires several steps to guarantee strong, fair, and
nondiscriminatory enforcement of intellectual property rights; this will generate economic
incentives for innovation.
Consciousness among claimants of the right to bring or pursue legal (civil, criminal, or
administrative) action.
 Create a system of mandatory licencing with suitable allowances for government use.
 There has to be swift response from the policy apparatus dealing with these issues.
Nonetheless, the legislation itself offers barrier for quick actions of search and seizure,
such as the necessity that right holders get a certificate from the registrar of trademarks
before commencing such activities.
 In order to attract more pharmaceutical businesses to India, it is necessary to revise
Section 3 of the Patent Act, 1970 and apply high standards of innovation, innovative step,
and industrial application or utility.
 To protect the rights of legitimate owners and deter would-be infringers, judges hearing
IP issues should have a firm grasp of the subject matter at hand and an appreciation for a
broad reading of academic norms.
 Make it possible to challenge patents that include traditional knowledge or biological
materials obtained illegally or in violation of access laws.
A few logistical questions must be answered before India may formally accept the Madrid
Protocol. Just as the criteria for prosecuting trademark applications differ from one jurisdiction to
another, so too may the processes for obtaining and maintaining trademark registrations in
different countries. Moreover, trademark law's underlying principles could differ across nations.
For example, although one country may think a trademark is brilliantly creative, another could
find it insulting. As a result, a standardised method of evaluation should be implemented.
A bill to criminalise the copying of optical discs is still in the works and will hopefully be passed
into law soon.
THE GOVERNMENT'S EFFORTS TO STRENGTHEN THE PROTECTION OF
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
For intellectual property (IP) to be useful to nations and businesses, governments must take
decisive, proactive measures and penalise infringers severely. Offering a clear and enforceable IP
rights ownership system that does not discriminate on the basis of country is one way to
safeguard intellectual property. The availability of national and worldwide IP systems can be
enhanced by the simplification of procedures, the international harmonisation of IP systems, and
the reduction of the price of obtaining IP rights in many countries. Government support for IP
policy and their implementation requires adequate funding, administration, and infrastructure for
IP organisations. It must take on the challenge of informing residents, businesses, and the general
public about the advantages of a well-functioning IP system. Innovators, producers, and artists
would benefit from government guidance on IP use, protection, and commercialization.
Adopting strict anti-counterfeiting and anti-piracy measures and strengthening the legal
environment are necessary for efficient implementation and enforcement against intellectual
property theft. In order to make India's system for managing intellectual property more efficient
and effective, the government has done things like:
The government has hosted numerous seminars and lectures to educate stakeholders,
enforcement agencies, professional users (such as the scientific and academic communities), and
the general public on intellectual property rights (IPR). Free copies of the Handbook have been
distributed to government employees at all levels, law enforcement officers, and attendees of
numerous seminars and workshops focused on intellectual property rights.
The police and customs officials in your area likely attended one of the many copyright law
courses offered by the National Police Academy in Hyderabad or the National Academy of
Customs, Excise, and Narcotics. Their standard training now includes lessons on intellectual
property rights violations.40
The Bihar government reached out to the Union ministry of micro, small, and medium
enterprises (MSME) via the department of science and technology to request the opening of a
facilitation center in Patna. In response, the workshop on supporting and protecting intellectual
40
property rights (IPR) for MSME policy makers, facilitation agencies, and entrepreneurs was held
over the course of two days.
Proprietary rights (IPR) classes should be mandatory for graduation in Madhya Pradesh,
according to the state administration. In the past, the Indian government's education ministry has
implemented several measures to strengthen copyright enforcement. Among these measures are
the following: creating an advisory council to oversee copyright enforcement; setting up
copyright enforcement cells at the state police headquarters; promoting the formation of
collective administration societies; and organizing seminars and workshops to educate law
enforcement on copyright laws.
To investigate the problems with patent law, the Indian government formed the Mashelkar
Committee, which is comprised of technical specialists. The plan to create Nagp as the home of
the National Institute for the Management of Intellectual Property Rights has been given the go
light by the government.
STEPS TAKEN BY FICCI

Workshops for customs officials focusing on border measures for the enforcement of intellectual
property rights were held in Kolkata, Chennai, and Mumbai respectively. Through interactive
events, public relations, and advertising initiatives, the FICCI–NIAPC has raised widespread
awareness about the issues of piracy and counterfeiting. They have produced two short
advertisements on anti-piracy (30 seconds and 60 seconds) that have been broadcast on National
Television (Doordarshan) and Channels such as Star TV, Fox TV, and SONY TV, among others.
They are currently working to enhance the airing frequency of these advertisements and to
engage a greater number of channels.
A FICCI-NIAPC-coordinated working group on optical disc law has produced a strategy. An

effective enforcement strategy to tackle optical disc piracy must address the key areas that this
working group has also identified. (The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting was just
consulted on the issue).
The FICCI-NIAPC is involved with and provides policy recommendations for all federal and
international initiatives pertaining to intellectual property (IP), including those of the World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
CONCLUSION
There has been considerable improvement in the protection and enforcement of IP rights under
India's IP regime. An integral part of the offshore firm concept should be the safeguarding of
intellectual properties. Over the last 35 years, India has made its own way in the world of
intellectual property (IP), trying to do things like expand its local pharmaceutical industry,
increase access to healthcare, and, more recently, try to meet the standards of the international IP
regime. Multinational pharmaceutical businesses have responded to India's efforts to become
TRIPS compliant by increasing the quantity and quality of their foreign direct investment (FDI)
in pharmaceutical R&D and production. When it comes to patenting and commercializing
pharmaceutical treatments in India, however, multinational corporations (MNCs) have been
more cautious. They are eagerly anticipating the interpretation of the new restrictions by Indian
courts and patent offices, as well as the implementation of data exclusivity legislation. There is
still no telling if India's "calibrated approach" to fostering local businesses, expanding access to
healthcare, and meeting international IP responsibilities would be effective. In addition to
implementing measures to protect copyright laws, the government of India should offer financial
incentives, such as tax refunds, in order to develop the country's animation and gaming
industries.
It would appear that intellectual property rights in India have never looked brighter than they do
now, thanks to the substantial advances that the Indian IP regime has achieved in recent months.
Because the Indian judiciary is so committed to protecting intellectual property rights, IP owners
have become more aggressive in asserting their rights and are venturing into unexplored territory
in search of new remedies from the courts. Regardless, the benefits of specialized courts for
intellectual property are still up for debate in India. Despite the fact that India's criminal justice
system is far from perfect, the country's civil framework for safeguarding IP rights is steadily
improving. Intellectual property owners in India have reaped enormous benefits from recent
major developments, yet the global IP pool still has many unexplored territories.
PROBLEMS OF PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE

INFORMATION SOCIETY
Everywhere you look, people are working toward the common objective of creating a truly
global information society. A major consequence of globalization is the direct improvement and
quickening of the transfer of information and knowledge. In the past, advances in science and
technology started on one continent and spread gradually to others. Instead of taking years, these
developments are now dispersed over the globe in a matter of seconds. This is the fundamental
idea of globalization, the engine propelling swift advancement on our globe.
Knowledge and information have become the primary means of generating material wealth in
today's global information culture, and they are the most important types of strategic capital. The
significance of inventions, creative work, intellectual property, and informational products is
emphasized more in the modern economy. In nations that are still regarded as developing, the
portion of a nation's GDP that is composed of goods acquired through information and
knowledge has been gradually increasing. The issues of intellectual property protection and
copyright have grown to be significant ones in these circumstances. Intellectual property, which
comprises scientific publications, discoveries, breakthroughs, ideas for lessening the amount of
effort necessary, and industrial applications, is the result of scientific endeavors. Therefore, the
safeguards provided by copyright and intellectual property rights play a significant role in
guaranteeing that the basic interests of scientists are satisfied.
More and more, products with intellectual property derived from scientific activities have made
use of information technology in recent years. This increase has coincided with the expansion of
the Internet. Scientific publications that were first published in a traditional format are now
available in electronic form thanks to the increasing use of information technologies. These
digital copies of scientific publications comprise intellectual property items including computer
programs, webpages, databases, computing clouds, networks, and the "Internet of things," which
were developed especially for the virtual computer environment. The field of electronic science
was established as a result of these developments, which have created new opportunities for
scientific inquiry. Electronic science is a discipline that encourages researchers to collaborate
internationally, share knowledge, and use geographically dispersed scientific resources like
databases, software tools, and network resources. In these conditions, one of the most crucial
concerns is the intellectual property rights-related protection of items that are the result of
scientific research conducted online.
One nation hoping to lay the groundwork for an information society is Azerbaijan, with its
knowledge-based economy. The United Nations Development Programme's (UNDP)
"Azerbaijan 2020: The Vision of the Future" Development Concept reflects this focus. The
development paths that the nation will follow in the near future are outlined in this notion. In
addition to the advancement of science, the building of human capital, the creation of the
knowledge economy, science-intensive technologies, and the growth of innovative activity, the
text includes measures for the acceleration of product and service production.
The Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (ANAS) is undergoing extensive and

comprehensive reforms based on "The National Strategy on Development of the Information
Society in the Republic of Azerbaijan for 2014–2020," which was formed in compliance with
"Azerbaijan 2020: Envisioning the Future." Promoting the commercialization and marketing of
scientific commodities and contributing to the growth of Azerbaijan's knowledge economy are
the primary objectives of the Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences (ANAS). Goals for both
fundamental and applied research are also laid out in it. Among the new challenges is the need to
enforce copyrights and intellectual property laws, which do not cover the work of Azerbaijani
scientists who are involved in national and international projects. Because copyrights and
intellectual property regulations are becoming more important, this is becoming an increasingly
pressing problem. Without adequate protection of their copyrights and intellectual property,
researchers cannot profit from their work. Furthermore, there's a chance that the nation's
economic stability will be jeopardized.
PRINCIPAL DUTIES RELATED TO THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL

PROPERTY RIGHTS
 Copyrights, patents, and trade secrets are the three primary means by which intellectual
property can be protected all over the world at the present time. Additionally, the
following strategies have been utilised to safeguard intellectual property:
 Norms of a moral and ethical nature;
 Administrative steps (such as the implementation of a staff training programme, the
establishment of security services, and the organisation of a secrecy regime);
 Taking efforts to secure oneself physically (such as securing doors and windows, etc.);
 Protection systems of a technical nature (electromechanical, acoustic, radio-technical,
magnetometric, etc.);
 Méthodes cryptographiques (modifications apportées à l'information dans le but de
dissimuler son essence logique);
 Employment contracts that include the possibility of termination (workers are required to
maintain confidentiality regarding company information).
Protecting intellectual property is more crucial than ever before due to the explosion of the
Internet. This is due to the fact that traditional notions of copyright have been weakened by the
proliferation of the Internet. It is possible to create duplicates of material and send them around
the world for a low price using tools that are readily available online. Those who wish to advance
public knowledge and encourage creative endeavors in society must walk a delicate line with
those who wish to safeguard the creations of individuals who have made them possible through
intellectual property. One of the most hotly debated issues pertaining to the regulation of the
internet is how to put a stop to the unrestricted duplication of content while still ensuring that
chances to make use of that content are maintained.
Scientists and researchers run the risk of not materially profiting from their work when
intellectual property rights are not secured on the Internet. This could lead to a potential loss in
scientific ingenuity. Unifying national legislative frameworks for writers' digital rights is
essential, especially considering that the Internet is a global platform. The most useful
mechanism for harmonizing the various intellectual property rights legal frameworks is an
international treaty.
It has been shown that trying to protect intellectual property rights through traditional means is
unsuccessful. Therefore, strategies based on software and technology must be used with the
utmost priority to protect the rights owners' interests. With the speed at which information
technology is developing, new safety protocols are necessary. Nonetheless, protecting
intellectual property isn't an easy feat, and here are just a few of the many reasons why:
Users are more prone to engage in criminal activities such as plagiarism, piracy, selling goods
protected by intellectual property rights illegally, and buying things through online markets
without authorization. All kinds of mass media are included in the violations, not just the
Internet.
It is possible to violate a wide range of diverse things that are shielded by intellectual property
rights; the violations occur globally; and most of the time, the violations are coupled with other
actions that endanger the public. These actions may involve the distribution of risky software,
spamming, and the infringement of personal data.
People from all around the world must participate in order to develop solutions to the problems
that arise when trying to protect intellectual property because the Internet is available to
everyone. Academic institutions around the world need to coordinate their efforts to safeguard
the copyrights and intellectual property of researchers, and each nation has a role to play in
finding a solution. A further issue is that local IP rights do not mesh well with the worldwide and
virtual character of the Internet. Because of this discrepancy, it is considerably more difficult to
apply existing legal frameworks to the protection of intellectual property. Because the internet is
global in scope, there has to be a set of international rules put in place to bring together the
various national legal systems that are relevant to it. Because of this, Azerbaijan's IP protection
laws should take into account the global and virtual nature of the Internet.
While certain legitimate international agreements do contain copyright protection and intellectual
property regulations, these do not settle all of the disputes that have developed in this field of
law; rather, they just deal with the most prevalent ones. Therefore, there is an immediate need to
establish an international convention for the protection of intellectual property in the digital
realm. The protection of intellectual property rights in online spaces is currently addressed in
three separate ways. In the first plan, writers' works would be free to use as long as they were
properly attributed, and the concept of "copyright" would be scrapped. The second method
involves readers paying the author to access certain pieces of online content. The second choice
takes into account the structure of the law as well as the level of restriction on user rights.
According to Azerbaijani courts, the second most likely explanation is correct.
In the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) document
"Recommendations Concerning the Promotion and Use of Multilingualism and Universal Access
to Cyberspace," member nations are advised to revise their national copyright laws and modify
them to apply to cyberspace while taking into account the rights of authors and society as a
whole. Nevertheless, no country has yet put this balance between those who produce digital
goods and those who use them as consumers into practice. As a methodical state policy for the
advancement of science, Azerbaijan published the "National Strategy for Development of
Science in the Republic of Azerbaijan for 2009–2015". Expanding artistic enterprises, advancing
scientific research, and vigorously defending legal rights are all goals that this plan promotes.
The World Intellectual Property Organization and other international organizations have issued
proposals that should be considered when developing the legal framework to protect the
copyrights and intellectual property of scientific researchers. Additional facets of this procedure
consist of. Conceptual papers and legislation relevant to this topic have been adopted in the
nation of Azerbaijan. There is a part of the UNDP Development Concept named "Azerbaijan
2020: The Vision of the Future" that is especially focused on this topic. By means of an
international digital network, online licencing, and a digital rights management system, some
things protected by intellectual property law will be accessible.
THE STRUGLES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST PLAGIARISM AND THEIR ISSUES
A remedy must exist whenever there is a right, according to the classical dictum of law that has
been in existence since the beginning of time: ubi jus ibi remedium. Every statute pertaining to
intellectual property in India includes a mechanism for the enforcement of one's rights in the
event of infringement, in line with this basic legal belief. However, in a practical world,
enforcement of a remedy in law has always been a result-oriented exercise, with one of the
primary results being a successful monetisation of intellectual property rights by way of grant of
compensation and damages. Therefore, one of the real purposes behind enforcement of a remedy
in law is to reach this fruit of enforcement - the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow! This
chapter attempts to tread the path to that pot of gold. An often-asked question that would arise in
evaluating damages in cases related to intellectual property is - "What damage can be recovered
by the plaintiff from the defendant? A simple answer for a litigant would be - whatever you are
able to prove before a court of law. A bit more complex answer would be - all that you could
have earned, but lost due to the infringing activities of the defendant. The answer to this question
can become more complex if the defendant has not been able to capture the entire market that the
plaintiff may have lost due to the infringing activities. The question becomes even more complex
if the defendant also exits the market, or is put under an interim injunction order, after having
committed the infringing activity. Establishing a projected market loss is replete with
complexities. To determine the plaintiff's losses in this situation, a "but for the defendant"
scenario-based hypothetical market reconstruction would be necessary.
Plagiarism is an illustration of an infringement on copyright rights. This problem has become
much more serious as a result of the proliferation of the internet, the digitization of written
works, and the simplicity with which copies can be made. Students, scientists, and journalists all
too frequently engage in the practise of plagiarism, and the scientific community is particularly
susceptible to the negative effects of this phenomenon.
Plagiarism is the deliberate use of another person's words, ideas, or creations in any field of
study or art. Plagiarism is described as the deliberate taking of another person's literary, cultural,
or scientific works; however, using someone else's ideas, concepts, methodologies, or
information does not constitute plagiarism. Most people agree that plagiarizing someone else's
work means stealing their ideas. When you use someone else's words or ideas and don't cite your
sources, you're committing plagiarism. Plagiarism can also be committed by making a claim of
co-authorship for a piece of work without providing sufficient evidence. However, plagiarism
does not simply pertain to work that has been published. Plagiarism can also be committed when
someone steals someone else's work and passes it off as their own in the form of an unpublished
manuscript. When creating a scientific work, it is imperative that certain criteria be adhered to in
order to prevent plagiarism. That is, whenever one makes use of the concepts and findings
discovered by others, they are obligated to properly credit their sources.
It is required to adopt moral or ethical, legal, and technological safeguards in order to prevent
instances of plagiarism from occurring. In today's information and communications technology
(ICT) world, there are a variety of fresh strategies and instruments at one's disposal to prevent
the act of plagiarism in online spaces. Even though there are several benefits to using anti-
plagiarism software, there are still some literature sources that do not have electronic versions
available. Consequently, there are some instances of plagiarism that cannot be uncovered with
the use of software programmes. In addition, the use of ICT does not make it possible to
automatically recognise instances of unethical behaviour that result in instances of plagiarism.
Examples of this include "ordered" plagiarism, in which one becomes an author or co-author by
paying for another person's ideas, and "agreed" plagiarism, in which one illegally co-authors
ideas with another person, which has arisen for a variety of reasons (including relationships with
supervisors, friends, and relatives). Both types of plagiarism are illegal. "Anonymous"
plagiarism is yet another form of dishonest academic practises that is pervasive. There is no
technological software programme that can be applied that will make it feasible to get rid of
these acts.
The "National Strategy for Development of Science in the Republic of Azerbaijan for 2009–
2015" entails organizing and carrying out programs like publishing scientific works in esteemed
foreign journals, engaging in international markets, and integrating Azerbaijan's scientific
activities with the global scientific environment. These are just some of the projects that will be
planned and executed. Therefore, actions taken regarding instances of plagiarism ought to be
taken with an understanding of the objective of defending the rights of Azerbaijani scientists as
well as the dignity of Azerbaijani scientific achievement.
There are rules in the civil law and criminal law of many nations, including Azerbaijan, that
allocate responsibility for instances of plagiarism. In addition, the regulations of a number of
countries impose the sanction of expulsion for students who have been found to have plagiarised
the work of others. Based on practices that are common worldwide, the evaluation of plagiarism
in scientific research and in Azerbaijani institutions of higher education is an essential problem.
This highlights the critical need for Azerbaijani researchers to adhere to a uniform code of
conduct in their field. To address this problem effectively, we need to establish clear guidelines
for the responsibilities of researchers found guilty of plagiarism.
THE ISSUES IN THE STRUGGLE AGAINST PIRACY

Another instance of intellectual property infringement is piracy, which is especially harmful to
scientists and technical researchers. This is because contemporary ICT technologies make it
simple to copy and resell books and software. Within the legal framework, piracy pertains to the
production and dissemination of goods that have been obtained through unauthorized means.
Illegal copies of books, phonograms, computer software, databases, and audiovisual works might
all fall under this category. The evidence that is now available indicates that the audio-visual and
book publishing industries are the sites of the greatest levels of piracy.
In accordance with the Republic of Azerbaijan's "On Copyrights and Related Rights" law, using
or transmitting software that has been pirated in any format is illegal. Finally enacted into law in
2012, the "Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan on Enforcement of the Intellectual Property Rights
and the Fight Against Piracy" This statute prohibits illegal acts like making and selling
duplicates of intellectual property by regulating the preservation of such rights and the interests
of their owners. This law also safeguards the rights to intellectual property and the interests of
those who own it. Criminal, civil, and administrative penalties are taken into account when
evaluating violations of this law. The Republic of Azerbaijan's Copyright Agency reports that in
2014, the percentage of piracy fell from 61% to 30%. This includes a decline in the market for
software from 96% to 85% and a dip in the market for audio-video devices from 90% to 66%.
Great progress has been made in this area, but there are still many important obstacles to
overcome, especially in the software domain.
Placing an author's works under electronic registration is a great way to prevent plagiarism. On
the flip side, authors can save both time and money by registering their work electronically, as it
is instantaneously registered with the service. It is also transparent and easily available.
Conventional methods of registration are ineffective and opaque. Official data indicates that
Azerbaijani writers have not shown any desire to get their works electronically registered.
Consequently, it is imperative to initiate a successful public relations effort aimed at writers to
persuade them not to steal ideas from other people.41
Even while piracy was prevalent prior to the invention of the Internet, its prevalence has
increased dramatically since its introduction. While Azerbaijani law does accommodate for
unique measures of accountability for piracy, it does not account for the virtual and global
characteristics of the Internet. When it comes to the Internet, the old methods of eradicating this
illegal behavior just won't cut it. The broad consensus is that international legal control is
necessary to combat IP infringement. The battle against online crime necessitates concerted
effort from nations all over the world. It is easy, cheap, or even free to buy pirated products in
countries with a poor quality of living, therefore there is less incentive to fight piracy there.
Therefore, in order to decrease piracy, software manufacturers should follow a preferred pricing
policy for low-income nations.
THE COMMERCIALISATION OF SCIENCE AND THE PROBLEMS CONCERNING

PATENTS
9
41
2023.
Another major obstacle to IP protection is the difficulty of commercializing scientific work and
obtaining patents for novel innovations. The term "commercialization" describes the steps used
to turn raw data into a marketable good or service. Presenting an idea to a market while
exchanging information and experience is a common practice in commercializing innovations,
often called the transfer of technology. Researching patents, conducting technology audits, and
analysing markets and market conditions are all necessary steps in the early phases of the
commercialization process for scientific advances. The inability to resolve these issues results in
an ineffective utilisation of both intellectual and financial resources. The process of
commercialization is not necessarily something that can be accomplished by a researcher. The
management of intellectual capital is a professional field that focuses on determining how to
utilise newly acquired information and expertise for the aim of commercialization.
A patent is the most important legal mechanism when it comes to the commercialization of
scientific information. This document serves as an enforcement instrument assigned by the
government agency in charge of overseeing inventions and their industrial applications. The
primary function of a patent, according to the more common understanding, is to grant legal
protection for an innovative product or process. Commercial uses of the patented innovation
15
(including but not limited to manufacture, application, usage, sale, and bids for sale or import)
are subject to the owner's right to prohibit such uses. This involves making it such that no one
else can make, use, sell, or import the innovation. When a patent is licensed, the owner of the
patent can sell or transfer the rights to use the patent to another entity. Software is already
protected by patents, and the number of cases involving software developers has been rising
sharply alongside the number of registered patents.
At this time, Azerbaijani scientists are unable to provide scientific findings, inventions, or results
that have been successfully implemented in the commercial, production, or service sectors of the
economy. During the time of the Soviet Union, the departments in charge of patents were active,
and inventions received assistance in the form of patents. Following that, the actions taken by
these departments have become ineffective and do not satisfy the conditions that are currently
being imposed.42
6
42
The commercialization of scientific discoveries in Azerbaijan and their marketing both
domestically and internationally could be lucrative for the country's researchers. Even when
Azerbaijani researchers are able to secure patents, these patents are not accepted in the United
States or Europe. The reason for this is because Azerbaijan's patent statute does not comply with
the standard legal practises used internationally. Therefore, it is critical that national laws be
modernized to match international norms. In 2010, Azerbaijan enacted a law called "On Patents"
that regulates the ownership relationships that develop from the development, protection, and
utilization of inventions, models, and industrial uses. Not only are those products the only ones
that can be legally patented, but it also controls any personal ties that aren't related to property.
However, software tools are protected under the patent laws of industrialized nations since they
are considered inventions. As part of its progressive economic growth policy, Azerbaijan
supports new enterprises financially and offers other types of government aid; the country also
lays a strong emphasis on developing new technology and software tools. Because of this, the
national legislation needs to be updated so that it includes software tools on the list of things that
can be patented.43
A civilised society has always been built on trade and commerce. The growth of trade and
commerce has coincided with human progress. Trade used to entail the exchanging of goods.
Initially, commerce was done on a smaller scale, but as time went on, larger-scale trading took
place, which led to problems with product identification. To address this problem, the traders
started marking their products. There may be a hint as to the products' origins on the labels
themselves. Eventually, these symbols came to stand for the product as well as its manufacturer
or distributor. Because of this, both the product and its owner started to become well- known,
which attracted repeat customers. Consequently, the merchants started to mark their products
differently, and these marks eventually made the products easier for customers to identify when
they were on the market. Eventually, the concept of modern trademarks evolved. These days, a
company's reputation and goodwill are linked to its trademarks. These days, they are an essential
resource for any company and are crucial to expanding share of the market. Proper production of
the product requires the inventor to investigate the wants and requirements of the target market.
This requires time, effort, and strategic planning. Furthermore, it takes time to establish a
8
43
6
reputation, which is why everyone works hard to maintain. On the other hand, dishonesty and
deception are basic human traits that have led people throughout history to profit at the expense
of others through theft, piracy, and other illicit acts in addition to forging well-known
trademarks. Gaining an unfair corporate advantage is a straightforward procedure that requires
legal authority to halt. Criminal laws used to be used to penalise dishonesty on the part of the
counterfeiter, but this was insufficient because goodwill was lost and could not be restored. As a
result, the need for a precise regulation on trademark infringement surfaced. Trademarked goods
travelled the world and brought goodwill with them, making it challenging for other countries to
protect their trademarks.
State incentives for the creation and use of models, ideas, and industrial applications are outlined
in the "On Patents" act. Loan conditions that are more accommodating to authors, patent holders,
and other businesses are examples of concessions that the state can impose. But this rule is
impractical to enforce in Azerbaijan. On the other hand, in developed nations, there are three
ways to bring technology and scientific innovations to market:
 the quest for budget money on a non-returnable basis at every stage of project realisation;
 the attempt to secure finance from banks;
 the pursuit of a commercialization strategy.
The innovation process can be broken down into its component parts, the first of which is the
transfer of commercialization and technology. For example, the commercialization and transfer
of different technologies is one of the main purposes of technoparks. As a whole, Azerbaijan's
national legal framework might use some work in the following areas to entice businesses to
invest in STEM initiatives:
 the distribution of roles and responsibilities regarding the commercialization of the

findings of scientific research;
 the establishment of a regulatory framework favourable to the launch of novel, small
businesses that put the findings of scientific study into practise;
 the creation of infrastructure for the purpose of facilitating the increased
commercialization of innovations;
15
 the establishment of legislative foundations for the development of state-private sector
cooperation in the field of the commercialization of innovations.44
PERSONNEL TRAINING AND THE ISSUES OF STIMULATING INNOVATIVE
THINKING
Staff training and advanced degrees are two of the biggest challenges confronting the IP
protection sector. Here we have one of the most pressing problems in the business world. While
instructing scientists, we must keep in mind the needs of a knowledge- and information-based
society and give serious consideration to creating a professional culture that scientists can
embrace. Scientists from Azerbaijan do not yet have the knowledge to secure patents and
copyrights because there is no way to learn this at universities, particularly at the PhD level. This
proves that Azerbaijani scientists are now lacking in the required expertise. However, scientists
need to have the data necessary to safeguard their copyrights, original ideas, and other forms of
intellectual property as knowledge has become a significant revenue generator. Legal education
curricula should include instruction on copyright and intellectual property rights protection.
Professional employees must receive training on the most recent specifications for this security.45
Research and practise should be based on the successful experiences that industrialised nations
have had in this area. It is necessary to implement training programmes at all educational levels
in order to disseminate this information. Training programs, scientific seminars, and workshops
75
on intellectual property and copyrights are organized by the Academy of the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) in a number of different nations. The World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO) offers training courses that could be one way to achieve this goal. These
courses are offered in different countries. It is possible that the organisation of these courses in
Azerbaijan might make a significant contribution to the education of professional workers on the
rights associated with intellectual property.46
In general, the following problems need to be resolved in order for there to be an increase in
innovation and the growth of human capital:
1
44
45
311–15. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40707312. Accessed 18 Oct. 2023. 7
46
2023.
 The encouragement of young people to participate in scientific endeavours, as well as the
promotion of the researcher as a profession and the allure of a career in the sciences;
 An increase in the flexibility of working conditions for personnel of scientific
institutions;
 An rise in the number of students who are pursuing a degree in business administration as
a career path;
 Innovation and production centred around clusters of companies.
The development of an innovative culture and the promotion of innovators to positions of higher
15
status are both crucial issues. In order to accomplish this goal, it is essential to promote the
importance of innovations in the growth of both society and the economy, as well as to spread
information about successful innovation practises in the managerial and social spheres. It is
essential to engage public opinion leaders in the process of popularising science, innovations,
and innovation activities through advertising, and to encourage competitions between businesses,
scientific researchers, and students. It is vital to provide specialised innovation courses at
educational institutions of higher learning in order to make innovative endeavours more widely
known.
The establishment of an ecosystem that is suitable is the primary challenge facing the pursuit of
innovative and sustainable growth. The establishment of a legal framework and the adaptable
98
enhancement of that framework in line with the characteristics of its growth is one of the most
important parts of this ecosystem. In the absence of stable, ongoing protection of IP rights,
innovative, competitive progress in the global economy would remain elusive. In the document
15
titled "Azerbaijan 2020: The Vision of the Future" Development Concept, the topics of
intellectual property policy and the goal of creating programs to deal with IP concerns are
discussed. Professionals in the scientific and other fields are responsible for creating the ideas
and knowledge that lay the groundwork for innovative progress. So, in order to increase
production as a whole, it is crucial to safeguard scientists' interests within the national strategy
and related programs.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
It has nothing to do with picking pockets or robbing banks. Individuals own their own ideas,
inventions, and artistic expressions in addition to their intellectual property, which can range
from software and films to trade secrets and proprietary items and parts. People are being robbed
of their concepts, innovations, and artistic expressions by this practise.
One technical invention that greatly impacted the rise of intellectual property rights as a tool for
public policy in response to social, economic, and political factors was the printing press. It has
been recognized in numerous international government documents. The spread of digital
technology and online file-sharing networks has made a substantial contribution to the threat's
escalation. Furthermore, a sizable percentage of theft occurs abroad, where laws are typically
laxer and harder to implement.
THE ANACHRONICITY OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Put another way, information that is released from material confines presents significant
obstacles to the established system of intellectual property. The "convenient coincidence" that
served as the foundation for the Intellectual Property system, according to Madison, was that it
placed greater emphasis on tangible objects than on concepts. One of the best things about the
system was this. The ability of a creator to transform a concept into a product that could be sold
to clients earned him compensation. Concepts and final products were virtually inseparable from
one another, therefore there was no problem at all. Because ideas could be valued, acquired, and
sold like objects, they could be disseminated for the good of society as a whole.
Conversely, ethereal knowledge is starting to break free from its tangible form. Information
travels across cyberspace in a more digital and pliable way.
When this happens, it's important to understand data as information, not a physical object,
because it has many properties that go against the grain of conventional wisdom and refuse to be
commodified. To rephrase, data is not easily reduced to a marketable commodity.
In contrast to "data," which is more of a "thing," information is more of a process happening at

the crossroads of consciousness; it is something you have rather than something you possess; it
occurs "to" you. The ownership of data in its raw, unfiltered form becomes more murky as a
result.
If our property can be immediately and freely replicated to any location on the planet, without
our knowledge or consent, and without ever leaving our control, how can we protect it? In what
precise way will we receive payment for the mental labor we perform? If we are not paid for our
work, how would we guarantee that such material is produced and distributed going forward?
Given this, the researcher has categorized the thesis's findings into the following primary
categories:
Among the points covered in the conclusion were (i) the aforementioned three types of EForm
IP, (ii) the importance of IP recognition in the digital realm, and (iii) the difficulty right holders
have had due to the vagueness of IP law in India as it pertains to IP protection in EForm.’
The phrase "intellectual property" refers to a group of rights that can be violated in many
different ways, such by stealing software, breaking copyrights, infringing on trademarks and
service marks, and so forth. The Internet has developed into the most practical way to conduct
commercial transactions since it is the fastest information and communication technology
available. Online infringements of intellectual property rights are becoming more common as our
society progresses. The legislation regulating the safeguarding of intellectual property rights in
cyberspace is in its early stages of development, but India has already solidified its position as a
leading contender in the international IT outsourcing industry.
The researcher started by stressing that property already existed before the state's machinery;
rather, property's legal status defines its existence in a form that can be recognized as property.
Some have interpreted this as a way to stress that the state or government machinery was not the
original owner of the Property. Legally speaking, knowledge and information are not considered
property just because you possess them. The law is the sole authority that has specified the rights
that "owners" are entitled to. With the ability to "regulate the acts of others in respect to the
objects of property," American property owners have the greatest legal privilege. Thus, the
ability to lawfully charge for any specific use of such (intellectual) property is what enables other
economic players to maintain control.
Several activists and "netizen" ideologues have taken the concept of "cyberspace," which
describes how the Internet works, very seriously. They have even gone to the extent of claiming
that cyberspace is a separate realm from our "traditional" world and should, therefore, be free
from any restrictions imposed by governments or international accords. They have gone to great
lengths to make this claim, to rephrase. Everything that happens in our "traditional" world—the
computers that upload and download protected materials, the communication infrastructure
needed for online communication, the people who run the systems, the people who profit heavily
from using these and other works of art (sometimes illegally), and the people who stand to lose a
lot—all reside in one country or another. Our "traditional" world is the only one there is.
The researcher also concluded that people can practice their talent and artistry for a profession
and grow their skills thanks to intellectual property rights. This is a crucial component of the part
intellectual property plays in a society's socio-legal evolution. The state's recognition of labor
worth through the awarding of certain intellectual property rights. It is right for someone to be
able to limit the freedom of others after they have achieved such authority. On the other hand,
under an intellectual property-based legal system, some works can be "propertized," meaning
that they can be backed up by a claim that is "good against the world," and they can be made
legally enforceable by using the state's power to take legal action against anybody who would
violate them. To recognize and honor actions that benefit the state and society, a number of
different strategies can be employed. Why must a solid legal claim or right be required for a just
reward or acknowledgment?
68
The World Trade Organization (WTO) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
made substantial contributions to the emergence of Intellectual Property Rights in post-Civil War
international forums through the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) accord.
Ethical concerns often associated with this international accord include, but are not limited to,
the exploitation of resources in regions outside of the West and the pursuit of economic gain.
These agreements undoubtedly emphasize their contractual nature, and they have provided a
discussion of some standard suggestions for future problem-solving. The establishment of
common administrative procedures stemming from a standardized system for protecting patent
rights is one example of how the adoption of uniform laws has contributed to the development of
sovereign rights.
One could conclude that the imposition of intellectual property rights on products with
significant societal value, like necessary medicines, creates a variety of moral dilemmas after
reviewing prior Supreme Court rulings and research published in academic journals. This would
imply that the closing statements may occasionally express a personal opinion, but that endorsing
and defending a specific solution to the concerns raised throughout the presentation is not their
primary goal. In this context, we aim to draw attention to, clarify, and place in perspective a
number of significant international convention discussions about the changing character of IP
rights and technical advances so that those involved in decision-making can become more
informed.47
Despite the difficulties, India's legal system has been brought into compliance with TRIPs, which
has helped to position the country as a leading hub for IP investment in the 21st century. The
building of a new TRIPS compliant system, the evolution of Indian intellectual property laws
35
through various amendments, and the shift from a limited term process patent regime to a
product patent regime are all potential sources of far-reaching repercussions. We can track the
outcomes of this change's deployment over time.
COPYRIGHTS IN E FORM AND RELATED RIGHTS
Internet users have access to what appears like an endless market, which is great news for those
who hold intellectual property. However, although the Internet does provide greater
opportunities for some to infringe against others' rights, it also makes it harder to identify and
remove such infractions. In recent years, the legal world has encountered a dilemma: how to
encourage the growth of IP online while simultaneously limiting its unauthorized use?
Nevertheless, with so many instances of infringement happening every day on the Internet,
intellectual property owners have to make tough choices about how to spend their resources to
detect and stop infringement. If they overly forcefully defend their rights, intellectual property
owners risk alienating their customers and sparking a possible PR backlash. Furthermore, a
number of the most widespread online violations comprised well-organized webpages that
focused on different facets of popular culture.
In conclusion, the evolution of intellectual property law has been substantially influenced by
shifts in consumer preferences and new technologies. The new system is built around the idea of
intellectual property rights and how they impact the economy. The language of argumentation
may sometimes invoke ideas of fairness and injustice, but policy conversations regarding
intellectual property protection now take place within the framework of modern economic
analysis, which is characterized by its focus on efficiency issues. Rewarding investors is more
47 9
2023.
important than promoting individual creativity and knowledge sharing with the general
population.
India passed the Information Technology Act (IT Act) in 2000 to address the concerns that
"cyberspace" raises regarding the transactional aspects of electronic business, bringing it into
compliance with the UNCITRAL Model Law. The Information Technology Act does not
provide a clear framework for handling specific online copyright violations. Section 43 of the
Information Technology Act, 2000 makes clear that certain parts of copyrights are addressed, as
seen by the clauses pertaining to the penalties for causing damage to a computer or system. One
clause that can be seen as attempting to address copyrights is one such clause.
With a few tweaks here and there, it has been found that some of the new domains are suitable
for the existing intellectual property laws and institutions. For instance, in the case of computer
software, copyright laws today recognize it as a literary work and grant it the same protections as
other literary works due to a number of precedents established by national laws. It is now
explicitly required of all parties to the TRIPS Agreement to adopt that approach. While this has
shown that copyright may be tailored to new situations, not everyone seems to be satisfied with
the result. This is because software is inherently functional and therefore notoriously difficult to
incorporate into creative works. Many people still have strong opinions on this matter.
New technological advancements have presented obstacles to intellectual property law that are
novel and progressively more complex, even though these laws handled a large portion of the
expanding issues. The convergence of many applications built on the common infrastructure
given by digital technology is one of the most significant advancements stemming from these
kinds of discoveries.
Despite the government of India's best efforts, intermediaries and users have pointed out several
problems with the current version of the law, despite the government's efforts to provide a
comprehensive framework for regulating intermediaries in India. Among these concerns are the
following:
(i) The Intermediary Law's ambiguity A number of things are unclear in the due diligence
framework outlined by the Intermediary Law, including (a) the types of content that are
prohibited and (b) the kind of action that an intermediary must take in the event that such content
is made available online. As a result, there are now situations when intermediaries may practice
private or self-censorship in an effort to absolve themselves of responsibility, which appears to
limit the right to free speech.
(ii) The rise in takedown notices and their effects In 2012, the number of takedown requests from
Indian government agencies increased by ninety percent, according to Google's transparency
report. 2012 was the year of this peak.
A prominent Indian review site, "mouthshut.com," has taken legal action by submitting a petition
to India's highest court, challenging the validity of the Intermediary Law on the grounds that it
violates the right to free expression as enshrined in the Indian Constitution. The increase of
removal demands and the lack of clarity surrounding the law have helped propel
"mouthshut.com" to the position of leading customer review site in India. Although we do not
yet know the outcome of this case, we do know that the Information Technology Act applies to
all of India's territory and to any violation of the IT Act that involves a computer located outside
72
of India, even if the offender is not an Indian citizen. The provisions of the IT Act apply to any
criminal or violation committed within India by any person. Any third party using Indian
computer resources or systems shall be subject to the IT Act's accountability requirements and
the Intermediary Law's requirements, regardless of where they are based in the globe. This might
work for any country in the world. If an intermediary is based outside of India but is yet subject
to copyright or tort law, the Indian courts may nevertheless pursue legal action against them.
This raises a lot of concerns, such as whether or not Indian courts can handle such matters and, if
so, whether or not the foreign intermediary would be legally bound by an Indian court's
judgment. Because databases are covered by both the Information Technology (Amendment) Act
of 2008 and the Copyright' Act, the protection that Indian law provides for them is inadequate.
To protect databases, it is advised that a distinct law be enacted that functions similarly to an EU
directive. According to research out of India's Centre for Internet and Society, letting private
intermediaries decide what content gets made available online might have a "chilling effect" on
people's ability to freely express themselves online. According to this study's findings, many
intermediaries deleted relevant content after receiving take-down warnings, even though it did
not fall into any of the categories explicitly forbidden by the Intermediary Law, in an effort to
avoid possible legal issues.
5
Keep in mind that a copyright license can be obtained by a computer program in accordance with
the provisions of the Copyright Act of 1957. You can't make copies, distribute them, publish
them, or use them in any way without the owner's consent, which is known as copyright. If it is
demonstrated that traditional theories of copyright infringement apply when it is misused or done
so illegally, they can be safely and legally applied. Furthermore, this can be prevented by using
the terms of the 1957 Copyright Act and strengthening those regulations with the strict
restrictions of the 2000 Information Technology Act. These two legislative measures were
designed to prevent the theft of intellectual property.
Certain actions are specifically shielded from the idea of copyright infringement by a number of
provisions in the Copyright Act of 1957. Hence, undertaking any action required to acquire the
information required to guarantee the compatibility of a computer program developed separately
with another program developed by a legitimate owner of a computer program is not considered
an infringement of copyright as long as the information is not readily available in any other
setting. Furthermore, no copyright will be violated when observing, analyzing, or testing how the
computer program operates to ascertain the concepts and tenets that guide any of its components
5
while carrying out the tasks required to fulfill the purposes for which the computer program was
provided. Finding the principles and ideas that underpin any part of the program is the goal of
this strategy. Making modifications or duplicates of the software from legally acquired personal
copies for non-commercial personal use does not violate copyright laws, as the Act makes very
clear.
The defense of an author's rights against an assignee or licensee is another area of copyright
infringement that calls for further regulation. It is necessary to reinforce this defense. It is
imperative to create a model contract that ensures author rights are protected in the ever
changing world of electronic publishing, the Internet, and other platforms. This is essential.
Just as copyright as a percentage of national economies approaches record highs, these issues are
presently afflicting the copyright sector. The copyright sector in the United States alone is
estimated by the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) to be worth US$91.2 billion
(movies, music, and television).2. America's robust copyright laws and efficient enforcement
practices have contributed significantly to the copyright industries' current 5.24% GDP share,
which is increasing at a rate more than twice as fast as the overall economy.
5
Modifications made to Section 52 of the Copyright Act of 1957 in 2012 provide some safeguards
for the preservation of a work or performance during "transient or incidental" storage. As long as
the right holder hasn't expressly forbade it, this type of storage can be utilized for technical
electronic transmission or public communication or to build electronic networks. It is not
necessary for the person in charge of storage to be
To successfully and acceptably respond to new technological advancements, it is crucial to

update the legal system as soon as possible while ensuring that the process is continuing. By
doing so, we can be sure that copyright and related rights will continue to uphold the following
principles, which are relevant even in the face of rapid technological change: giving creators
reasonable control over how their works are used and the chance to profit from them;
encouraging creators to create and share new creative works; and ensuring that public and private
interests are fairly balanced when it comes to the use of these works.
Therefore, in the modern era, it is imperative to resolve the problems brought about by the
mutual intersection of information technology advancements and intellectual property rules. It's
also vital to remember that the government's investigation into the preservation of digital rights
30
has progressed with the passing of the Copyright Amendment Act of 2012.
The Draught National IPR policy, designed by the Government of India's IPR Think Tank, is
another policy that is believed to be static. In its few mentions of online piracy, the Policy mostly
avoids the topic, opting instead to call for the strengthening of enforcement organizations and the
implementation of enforcement measures.
But this unduly defensive mindset is not only incorrect, but antiquated as well. For quite some
time now, there has been a contention that the conventional approach to material distribution and
the copyright system that protects it are outdated and need major overhauls to make them
internet-friendly. Since anti-piracy laws and measures have failed time and time again around the
world, more and more people are taking this stance. The Indian government's anti-piracy efforts
59
have also failed, as evidenced by the country's placement on the 2014 International Piracy Watch
List of the International Creativity and Theft-Prevention Council. Each year, the caucus gathers
to make this list. The widespread use of the internet has had a significant impact on content
development. Both creating and accessing material has become more easier in the wake of the
Internet and other technological developments. As a result, the market's requirements have
changed. As usual, the legislation is out of step with the times, but this time an entire industry is
supporting it.48
ENCRYPTATION OF TRADEMARKS
In the event that a machine's domain name is initially associated with an IP address that pertains
to the region in which the machine is physically situated—for example, if the domain name ends
25
in ".in"—then the machine can relocate in physical space without relocating in the logical
domain space of the Internet. The reason behind this is that the location of a computer has no
25
bearing on the domain name. The owner of the domain name may also request that it be
associated with a totally different computer system in a foreign nation. Users are completely
25
unaware of the physical location of the server that hosts the material they read, buy, or engage
with. The logic for this is that unlike servers with the ".com" extension, which can be placed
anywhere in the world, servers with the ".in" suffix are not limited to being in India.
It is necessary to establish new institutions for the formulation of laws in order to prevent the
management of the domain name space by a legal body that is not established geographically.
This is because anyone intending to commit intellectual property fraud or piracy can use other
users' or even service providers' web addresses to carry out their illicit operations and profit from
them. Therefore, the question that has to be answered is whether the lack of cyberspace
regulation legislation and technological advancements that led to the emergence of cyberspace
are elements that contributed to this situation. It has been suggested that treating cyberspace with
the gravity it merits could help clarify the contentious debate over how intellectual property law
should be implemented in the digital age.
A comprehensive review of the current mechanisms for resolving domain name disputes leads
one to believe that there are still many unanswered questions. I am sorry.UDRP Guidelines and
the.When it comes to administrative arbitration in India, the two primary documents that govern
the process are IN DRP.
The UDRP and its rules were a game-changer in the field of online dispute resolution (also
referred to as "ODR") and in the settlement of disputes involving domain names in general,
6
48
which is a subset of electronic commerce. The rules and procedures of the UDRP are designed to
facilitate the easy and affordable resolution of domain name disputes. The issue of resolving
country code top level domain names (also referred to as "ccTLDs") is being tackled by multiple
countries using various protocols and methods. In the vast majority of cases, parties involved in a
domain name dispute will go through the UDRP Rules or another similar process for ccTLDs. If
the panel orders the domain name to be transferred or canceled, the registrar will carry out the
transfer or cancellation in accordance with the UDRP, unless one of the parties decides to
challenge the decision in federal court. In terms of dispute resolution, this method is specifically
authorized by law in most ccTLDs. The winning team in particular has made good use of the
prior agreement during play.
Because of this, there must be a system in place to check if the decisions are reasonable. The
sovereignty of federal or regional courts to hear cases, interpret IP rights, and enforce them
would be completely unaffected by the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy on its
own. The losing party in arbitration may initiate legal action immediately upon the arbitrator's
decision due to the mutual jurisdiction clause's stipulation that either party may initiate court
proceedings at any time. Adding insult to injury, the court typically gives little weight to the
panel's decisions. An American case that proves this is Sallen v. Corinthians Licenciamentos
LTDA. The importance of a UDRP's decision was not attempted to be clarified by the Court.
47
Starting the UDRP process is the first step in contesting a domain name. The Uniform Dispute
Resolution Policy (UDRP), issued by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN), is in charge of these processes. The decision of the UDRP panel to transfer the domain
name to the trademark owner will be enforced unless the domain registrant takes swift legal
action against the trademark owner. This opportunity for external court review is the only
internal appeal process that the UDRP affords. The registrants of domain names have used their
right to seek judicial review, as guaranteed by the constitution.
Additionally, it is not illegal to register a domain name in bad faith in India, as neither particular
laws nor rules ban such actions. However, it appears that no particular statute serves this
objective, according to the Supreme Court's ruling in the Satyam v. Sify Net case. Instead, the
court decided to "nip the evil in the bud" by making sure that harmful registration attempts are
either rejected or forbidden at the first try.
ADVICE OFFERINGS
Rather than increasing protection as suggested by the National IPR Draught Policy and
5
concentrating on the fruitless endeavor of trying to control the hydra that is online piracy, it
would be more prudent to actively seek to accommodate the internet here and provide innovators
with some more leeway so that they can assist the industry in adapting to new technologies.
Compared to the proposed method of bolstering security, this would be the better option. The
growth of India's tech sector would benefit from this since it will encourage new businesses to
try out creative and unconventional business methods. In place of the current structure, which is
both outdated and unsustainable, a more robust model would be created to tolerate and even
support the changes that technology advancements frequently bring to the content production
industry. A research conducted in 2014 by the Business Software Alliance estimated that 61% of
software in India was pirated. Evident from this outcome is the widespread cultural sentiment
that is opposed to stringent standards for the protection of software..
SUGGESTIONS
With Regards to the Protection of Electronic Copyright in India

32
A study conducted by the Centre for Internet and Society in India found that if private
32
intermediaries were given the power to decide whether or not certain content should be made
available on the internet, it could lead to a "chilling effect" on people's freedom of expression
online. Several intermediaries simply deleted the relevant content when they received take-down
notices, this study found, even though the content in question did not violate any of the
categories explicitly forbidden by the Intermediary Law, likely to avoid any possible liability.
The security of databases is not covered by any legislation in India. The House of
Representatives did not adopt the Personal Data Protection Bill until after it was introduced in
2006. The Data Privacy Directive, passed by the EU in 1996, appears to provide as a general
framework that the Bill adheres to. The Bill aims to regulate the collection, processing, and
disclosure of personal data; it is built on this concept. A thorough model is followed. Remember
that the Bill's definition of "personal data" in Clause 2 limits its applicability to that specific type
of information. The purpose of database protection is to safeguard the uniqueness and financial
investment in the compilation, verification, and presentation of databases, which is completely
distinct from the role of data protection. While the goal of data protection is to safeguard
personally identifiable information, the function of database protection is completely different.
The Copyright Act of 1957 protects works of art in the fields of literature, theater, music,
painting, and cinematography from unauthorised access and use. Also included in the definition
of "literary work" is the information contained in databases. Copyright infringement can be
addressed through both civil and criminal remedies; for example, one can sue someone for
disseminating a database copy or a computer database copy. To deal with worries about illegal
activities occurring on the internet, the Information Technology Act of 2000 was amended. The
two major regulations it passed to achieve this goal will shake up the data protection legal
landscape. But this is still not enough to warrant the provisions5 pertaining to data security and
information confidentiality. Consequently, it is critical to increase the penalties for careless or
intentional disclosure of sensitive personal information or breaches of data protection.
Given the context described above, it is reasonable to draw the conclusion that the status quo
regarding the protection of databases in India is not all that satisfying. The reach of the
Databases Act of 2006 does not extend to cover all of the different kinds of databases. As a
result, it has been urged that India should design its own legislation in order to clarify the
situation about the ambiguity therewith.
99
Given the worldwide reach of the Internet, the millions of websites that comprise the World
Wide Web, the ease with which one can obtain and copy the intellectual property of others, and
the well-known anonymity of this new medium, it may be the most challenging task for
intellectual property to communicate with the intended source of goods and ensure customers
that they are purchasing genuine goods from a trustworthy source.. It's an intriguing occurrence
that while the Internet has helped people become more anonymous, it has also increased the
significance of using brand names to create one's identity online. Electronic commerce does not
require or allow for in-person interaction or the opportunity to personally inspect the goods
because it is done via the Internet. Because of this, identity—which can be established by using
trademarks and domain names as company identifiers—has taken on increased importance as a
way to set different actors apart who conduct business online. In light of the difficulties
associated with many forms of intellectual property, it is critical that legal advancements keep
pace with technical advancements in order to protect the just and equitable.
When it comes to online activity, India is consistently ranked among the top 10 countries
worldwide. India has emerged as the world's centre for software creation despite having a low
Internet penetration %. As a result, India has become a popular location for those interested in
this field. Because of the rise in people using the internet, issues concerning the protection of
intellectual property rights during digital transmission have become more severe. It is a
circumstance that contains a paradox. If India were to grant more legal protection for
technological protection measures, with limited exceptions for fair use, this would result in the
public domain being depleted and would be harmful to the public interest premise of copyright.
If the Internet does not offer legal protection for technological measures, it may lead to confusion
when it comes to copyright enforcement.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PATENT APPLICATIONS IN ELECTRONIC FORM
Because of the exclusive character of intellectual property rights, no one else can legally use
them. Whoever owns intellectual property also owns the monopoly on that property. The
monopolistic right may go so far as to prevent anybody else from making use of the owner's
ideas. Serious financial penalties may be imposed for any infraction of such. But there is a
meeting place for IP and antitrust regulations at what are called "Standard Essential Patents," or
76
SEPs. Antitrust laws and intellectual property rights intersect at this juncture, when the public
interest is invoked. Nevertheless, the two authors' views coincide on this matter, which limits the
scope of absolute rights pertaining to intellectual property. While engaging in counter legislation,
competition laws typically avoid dealing with issues relating to intellectual property rights.
Standards essential patents (SEPs) are licencing staples in the standards development process,
and they must be done on reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) conditions. An important
goal of RAND is to prevent the abuse of market dominance by the owner of a Standard Essential
Patent, which can occur when a voluntary technical standard gains extensive acceptance and
incorporates patented technology. Furthermore, RAND guarantees that technological standards
that use copyrighted technologies are advantageous.
The owner is subject to restrictions on the use of this invention based on RAND (reasonable and
nondiscriminatory) considerations, making it less absolute than other patent rights. Owning a
standard-setting patent (SEP) means you have an obligation to grant licenses to utilize that
technology. But even a little price has to be acceptable and supported by good reason; else,
competition law would intervene and stop him from having a monopoly. In the Microsoft v.
Motorola6 case, the court defined SEP. Here is what happened:
"A given patent is "essential" to a standard if use of the standard requires infringement of the
patent, even if acceptable alternatives of that patent could have been written into the standard."
"A given patent is "essential" to a standard."
Therefore, licencing under FRAND circumstances is the fundamental necessity for SEPs in order
for them to be constructive. Fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory are the three components
that make up the abbreviation FRAND. Additionally, it is referred to as RAND, which stands for
reasonable and non-discriminatory. SEPs have the potential to result in expensive conflicts if
FRAND is not in place. The owner of the patent must provide permission for a licence to be
taken out, the terms of the licence must not be illegal or anticompetitive, and the price of the
licence must not be excessively high. These are the core tenets of the FRAND licencing model.
However, the Indian Patents Act of 1970, in its several altered forms up to the present day, is not
well equipped to cope with such challenges. As a consequence of this, Indian businesses such as
Micromax and Intex are forced to pay enormous monetary fines on the grounds that their
products infringe upon SEPs.
Rather than the twenty-year period that is currently granted under the current patent system,
there has been an argument that the duration of protection for business method patents can be
reduced to achieve more practical results. Some people have said things that back up this idea:
(i) The development cycles in the software sector are significantly shorter than those in other
industries;
(ii) The vast majority of patents pertaining to business methods, the internet, and software have a
brief lifespan and are produced by efforts to modify or enhance previously granted patents; and
(iii) Rather than being developed in a laboratory, business technique, internet, and software
patents are developed in an arena where there is intense competition.
Nevertheless, there is still a challenge associated with differentiating inventions relating to
business methods, the internet, or software from other inventions.
Some have proposed instituting a mechanism of early pre-grant opposition for software and
business method patents when it comes to electronic patents. In this scenario, a rival would argue
their case before the examiner by presenting relevant prior art, but with many caveats and
restrictions. The goal of this system would be to reduce the number of patents that are overly
broad and unwarranted. In light of the fact that certain rivals might exploit the system in order to
engage in strategic blocking, it is recommended that the window of opportunity for submitting a
pre-grant opposition application be maintained as small as possible. The third party should be
charged after submitting two pieces of prior art; however, the price should be reimbursed if the
prior art is found to be relevant to a claim made during the examination.
Both proponents and detractors of business method patents have valid points of view. The first
holds that business procedures alone do not merit patent protection. Second, to avoid invalidating
valid claims due to a lack of prior art databases, the non-obviousness test should be applied
cautiously to Business Method Patents.
Business method patents should be added to the list of patentable categories by the Indian patent
authority. This will lead to better business ethics and attract more international investment to
India, in my opinion. In addition, it gives businesses the chance to safeguard their ideas and
prevent competitors from stealing them when they spend heavily in the company's growth
through innovative business strategies. Reason being, it aids businesses in safeguarding their IP
rights.
If patents for business procedures are granted and can be enforced in court, the sector's structure
would be drastically changed. In the US, businesses that are either owned or controlled by
individuals of Indian ancestry are increasingly filing patent applications for online tools, web-
enabled business techniques, and web-based business methods. They are well aware of how easy
it is to make copies and duplicates in India, where they are originally from. For all their worth,
patent protection for these items must incorporate India as a designated nation, and the
application must be pursued in India.49
SUGGESTIONS REGARDING TRADEMARKS IN E -FORM

Arguments advanced in the E form that are specific to the Indian situation regarding trademarks
stress the need for stringent new legislation. Drafting new laws in India that deal with domain
names is an urgent matter of government policy. Because there is no hard and fast rule, cyber
squatters can easily find legal loopholes that would get them off the hook in any court case. This
helps further the cause of cyber squatters. In addition, relying on antiquated trademark law would
result in a significant amount of time being lost in the appellate courts. Since time is of the
biggest importance in the virtual world, this would be extremely detrimental, ultimately leading
to the invalidation of the right that was being asserted. Independent Adjudicatory organisation–
The United States National Arbitration Forum and the Czech Arbitration Court could serve as
models, and a parallel organisation in India should be established along the same lines as the
Independent Adjudicatory Body.
It has also been suggested that INDRP be updated. The difficulty with it being a policy is that
adhering to it is not required in any way, which is why the regime is so relaxed. Making it more
lawlike and in line with the UDRP is the top priority right now. The Arbitration and Conciliation
Act of 1996 states that all arbitration rulings issued by the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation
Centre must be recognized as legally enforceable in India. Decisions rendered by ICAAN and
WIPO will have this effect, helping the already burdened Indian court system. Instead of
mindlessly assigning domain names, registrars should actively attempt to address and restrict
cybersquatting at the registration stage by examining the claim and making background checks.
This is of utmost importance considering the concerning upward trend in cybersquatting rates in
India and other nations. The current situation involves a great number of different types of
commercial organisations.50
The current approach that the judiciary has taken will very certainly have significant
repercussions for both the commercial society and the general population as a whole. Having
1
49
311–15.
11
50
said that, this strategy is not relevant to all possible circumstances. There are some circumstances
in which the English rigour is required in order to safeguard the nation's economic interests. The
scale of the Indian market is enormous, and our culture encourages a culture of plagiarism that
runs deep. Both of these factors make it difficult to effectively execute these parameters. But this
idea's application has rethought trademark laws in our country, and considering how the business
world is always changing, only time will tell how effective these criteria were.
By analyzing the challenges of IP protection in the digital realm, we can get a better idea of the
state of affairs in India with respect to the need to standardize our methods. Thanks to the e-
form, this is now feasible. In order to safeguard its software, business processes, databases, and
domain names, among other forms of intellectual property, the expanding nation of India must
embrace a progressive approach. In view of the global nature of electronic trade, governments
should endeavor to coordinate (not harmonise) new laws with other nations on a bilateral and
multilateral basis.
When it comes to e-commerce, several different international organizations have different

52
stances. Both the World Trade Organization and the World Intellectual Property Organization
have begun to investigate different facets of the connection between IP and electronic trade. The
World Trade Organization sees this partnership as part of a broader initiative that encompasses
intellectual property, commodity and service trade, and other related areas. Focusing on certain
IP-related matters, WIPO has conducted evaluations of copyrights in the WCO and WPPT,
worked on the Internet domain names project, conducted studies on IP elements of e-commerce,
and online arbitration processes. Several of these locations have seen success with this method.
To make sure that the outcome of the interaction between law and technology doesn't cause
additional problems, it's important to consider both the potential costs and constraints of
expanding intellectual property protection to the digital and electronic realm, as well as the
benefits that India stands to gain:51
6
51
(i) The creation of new forms of intellectual property rights that are not widely recognised or
recognised in underdeveloped nations. Patents on novel business operations, sui generis
protection of databases, and Internet domain names are some examples of this type of
protection.52
(ii) Could make it easier for businesses to engage in anticompetitive behaviour by allowing
patents to be used as a means of stifling further innovation. These kinds of activities could
restrict access to new technology since they raise a number of jurisdictional difficulties that have
not been resolved as of yet.
(iii) Strengthens the protection afforded to investments, but does nothing to foster originality or
innovation. Instead of producing new intellectual property rights, it generates new legal
monopolies.
(iv) It could make it much more difficult to put in place national policies that encourage the
growth of e-commerce activities and services, thereby reducing the space available for doing so.
(v) Makes it easier to export goods and services that have some form of intellectual property
value attached to them, such as software, technologies, the usage of trademarks, and so on.
(vi) Provides an increase in the level of legal security for investors, creators, and inventors.
(vii) Easing restrictions on the export of intellectual property contents that necessitate the use of
specialised workers during the manufacturing process.
2
(viii) Providing assistance to small and medium-sized businesses in the production and export of
goods and services that contain intellectual property that adds value. In the field of copyrights
and other connected rights, there exist chances for the taking.53
(ix) To improve the collective management of copyrights and other rights that are linked.
(x) Lowers the costs of manufacturing and delivery for goods and services that contain
intellectual property.
8
52
Lu, Louis Y. Y. “PROTECTING 6
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.” Research Technology Management,
vol.
1
50, no. 2, 2007, pp. 51–56. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24135076. Accessed 2 Oct. 2023.
53
(xi) Easier access to patent databases and other types of technological information.
(xii) Authorises the retail selling of items pertaining to culture and folklore. This benefit needs to
be supplemented by intellectual property protection in order for traditional knowledge and
folklore to be utilised to its full potential.
(xiii) In certain circumstances, makes it easier to licence intellectual property rights.
(xiv) Provides proprietors of trademarks and domain names with the opportunity for legal
protection.
(xv) When it comes to patents, procedures for conducting business online should be eligible for
protection under the law in India.54
(xvi) In order to prevent domain jacking and, as a result, safeguard intellectual property in
trademarks, the National Internet Exchange of India ought to take a rigorous approach when
assigning domain names and numbers.
(xvii) If developing nations like India are granted compulsory licencing for life-saving generic
medications, the international community should support this move rather than criticise it. This is
because compulsory licencing is a legally permissible parameter that is being exercised by the
government for the welfare of its citizens.
In conclusion, the author would like to make the modest suggestion that even in the most dire of
situations, humanity should take precedence over everything else. As a result, the approach taken
to solve the issues that have been outlined here should be more humanely oriented, and I would
also like to stress the importance of prioritising the happiness of the greatest number of people
over protecting patents on life-saving medications. Innovation should be fostered, but not at the
expense of the human race.55
9
54
1
2023.
55
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Spiers, Duncan. “INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.” Property Law Essentials,

Edinburgh University Press, 2008, pp. 23–56. JSTOR,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1g09zfv.7. Accessed 29 Oct. 2023.
Shiva, Vandana. “Agricultural Biodiversity, Intellectual Property Rights and Farmers’ Rights.”
Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 31, no. 25, 1996, pp. 1621–31. JSTOR,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4404305. Accessed 29 Oct. 2023.
Antia, N. H. “Intellectual Property Rights.” Economic and Political Weekly, vol. 27, no. 27,
1992, pp. 1374–76. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4398582. Accessed 29 Oct. 2023.
Väisänen, Tuire Anniina. “Competition Law and Intellectual Property Rights.” Enforcement of
FRAND Commitments under Article 102 TFEU: The Nature of FRAND Defence in Patent
Litigation, 1st ed., Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 2011, pp. 27–32. JSTOR,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv941w6t.6. Accessed 19 Oct. 2023.
Verma, S. K. “BIODIVERSITY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.” Journal of the

Indian Law Institute, vol. 39, no. 2/4, 1997, pp. 203–15. JSTOR,
Stith, Clark D. “International Intellectual Property Rights.” The International Lawyer, vol. 31,
no. 2, 1997, pp. 311–15. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40707312. Accessed 18 Oct. 2023.
Lu, Louis Y. Y. “PROTECTING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.” Research

Technology Management, vol. 50, no. 2, 2007, pp. 51–56. JSTOR,
Hettinger, Edwin C. “Justifying Intellectual Property.” Philosophy & Public Affairs, vol. 18, no.
1, 1989, pp. 31–52. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2265190.
9% Overall Similarity
Top sources found in the following databases:
6% Internet database 2% Publications database
Crossref database Crossref Posted Content database
8% Submitted Works database
TOP SOURCES
The sources with the highest number of matches within the submission. Overlapping sources will not be
displayed.
Westcliff University on 2023-10-08

1 <1%
Submitted works
researchgate.net
2 <1%
Internet
wipo.int
3 <1%
Internet
Bishkek International School on 2023-08-18

4 <1%
Submitted works
Amity University on 2020-06-24

5 <1%
Submitted works
Chanakya National Law University on 2023-10-26

6 <1%
Submitted works
St. Johns River Community College on 2020-03-03

7 <1%
Submitted works
University of Sydney on 2012-09-09

8 <1%
Submitted works
Sources overview
University of Malaya on 2021-02-04

9 <1%
Submitted works
Asia Pacific University College of Technology and Innovation (UCTI) on...

10 <1%
Submitted works
Collin County Community College on 2023-07-07

11 <1%
Submitted works
jamesthanickan.tripod.com
12 <1%
Internet
University of Bradford on 2023-11-07

13 <1%
Submitted works
Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law on 2017-10-28

14 <1%
Submitted works
jpis.az
15 <1%
Internet
coursehero.com
16 <1%
Internet
slideshare.net
17 <1%
Internet
Pathfinder Enterprises on 2023-04-30

18 <1%
Submitted works
IMS Unison University on 2021-03-26

19 <1%
Submitted works
press-files.anu.edu.au
20 <1%
Internet
Sources overview
Lindenwood University on 2023-03-10

21 <1%
Submitted works
University of Northampton on 2022-12-28

22 <1%
Submitted works
doksi.net
23 <1%
Internet
idrc.ca
24 <1%
Internet
National Law School of India University, Bangalore on 2010-09-08

25 <1%
Submitted works
combatlaw.org
26 <1%
Internet
Manipal University on 2019-06-10

27 <1%
Submitted works
img1.wsimg.com
28 <1%
Internet
rachanafoundation.org
29 <1%
Internet
Walsh University on 2022-05-22

30 <1%
Submitted works
Oxford Brookes University on 2023-05-04

31 <1%
Submitted works
National Law School of India University, Bangalore on 2020-02-01

32 <1%
Submitted works
Sources overview
glocom.ac.jp
33 <1%
Internet
Riga Graduate School of Law on 2021-11-28

34 <1%
Submitted works
planningcommission.nic.in
35 <1%
Internet
static.pmg.org.za
36 <1%
Internet
Bournemouth University on 2021-04-21

37 <1%
Submitted works
openknowledge.worldbank.org
38 <1%
Internet
intech.unu.edu
39 <1%
Internet
Greenhouse Higher Secondary School on 2023-07-07

40 <1%
Submitted works
University of East Anglia on 2022-09-14

41 <1%
Submitted works
pdfcoffee.com
42 <1%
Internet
mondaq.com
43 <1%
Internet
icrier.org
44 <1%
Internet
Sources overview
University of Wales, Bangor on 2019-03-04

45 <1%
Submitted works
Symbiosis International University on 2014-05-12

46 <1%
Submitted works
adndrc.hkiac.org
47 <1%
Internet
wto.org
48 <1%
Internet
Florida International University on 2021-03-21

49 <1%
Submitted works
Murray, Andrew. "Information Technology Law", Information Technolog...

50 <1%
Publication
University of Portsmouth on 2023-12-08

51 <1%
Submitted works
cimarchivists.org
52 <1%
Internet
dspace.cus.ac.in
53 <1%
Internet
epdf.pub
54 <1%
Internet
vdocuments.mx
55 <1%
Internet
science.gov
56 <1%
Internet
Sources overview
ust.edu.ph
57 <1%
Internet
Queen Mary and Westfield College on 2010-08-13

58 <1%
Submitted works
The WB National University of Juridical Sciences on 2015-04-11

59 <1%
Submitted works
University of Glamorgan on 2022-05-03

60 <1%
Submitted works
core.ac.uk
61 <1%
Internet
economicpolicygroup.com
62 <1%
Internet
findlaw.com
63 <1%
Internet
Gujarat National Law University on 2023-05-17

64 <1%
Submitted works
IMS Unison University on 2021-06-14

65 <1%
Submitted works
Nottingham Trent University on 2021-09-02

66 <1%
Submitted works
Uttaranchal University, Dehradun on 2023-06-12

67 <1%
Submitted works
imap.legalserviceindia.com
68 <1%
Internet
Sources overview
scielo.org.za
69 <1%
Internet
"Innovation, Economic Development, and Intellectual Property in India ...

70 <1%
Crossref
Newton College of Business and Technology on 2017-09-29

71 <1%
Submitted works
assets.vmou.ac.in
72 <1%
Internet
trademarksmanagement.com
73 <1%
Internet
consulegis.com
74 <1%
Internet
inprojournal.org
75 <1%
Internet
psychosocial.com
76 <1%
Internet
"WTO - Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights", Brill, 2009

77 <1%
Crossref
University of Stirling on 2012-11-16

78 <1%
Submitted works
University of Wales Institute, Cardiff on 2022-11-25

79 <1%
Submitted works
University of Wolverhampton on 2021-07-04

80 <1%
Submitted works
Sources overview
eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk
81 <1%
Internet
irigs.iiu.edu.pk:64447
82 <1%
Internet
novinite.com
83 <1%
Internet
"Intellectual Property in Asia", Springer Science and Business Media LL...

84 <1%
Crossref
Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh on 2022-06-23

85 <1%
Submitted works
American University of Afghanistan on 2022-11-23

86 <1%
Submitted works
Brown, Abbe, Kheria, Smita, Cornwell, Jane. "Contemporary Intellectual...

87 <1%
Publication
Hanefeld, Johanna. "EBOOK: Globalization and Health", EBOOK: Globali...

88 <1%
Publication
Hochschule Bremen on 2021-08-01

89 <1%
Submitted works
Leeds Beckett University on 2023-09-25

90 <1%
Submitted works
Lovely Professional University on 2014-05-22

91 <1%
Submitted works
National Law University, Orissa on 2013-04-16

92 <1%
Submitted works
Sources overview
National Law University, Orissa on 2013-04-19

93 <1%
Submitted works
Pacific University on 2018-07-16

94 <1%
Submitted works
Savitribai Phule Pune University on 2015-12-16

95 <1%
Submitted works
Sharda University on 2018-04-24

96 <1%
Submitted works
University of Greenwich on 2023-09-04

97 <1%
Submitted works
University of Strathclyde on 2012-10-01

98 <1%
Submitted works
William F. Birdsall. "Human capabilities and information and communi...

99 <1%
Crossref
dokumen.pub
100 <1%
Internet
ebin.pub
101 <1%
Internet
enhelion.com
102 <1%
Internet
er.nau.edu.ua
103 <1%
Internet
erepository.uonbi.ac.ke
104 <1%
Internet
Sources overview
etheses.dur.ac.uk
105 <1%
Internet
ftp.legalserviceindia.com
106 <1%
Internet
ijrcs.org
107 <1%
Internet
link.springer.com
108 <1%
Internet
nishithdesai.com
109 <1%
Internet
oapi.wipo.net
110 <1%
Internet
rinaction.com
111 <1%
Internet
tcc.mac.doc.gov
112 <1%
Internet
Sources overview

Babina Apat - Roll No - 4112021005 - PMLC - 4TH Sem LL.M Dissertation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Babina Apat - Roll No - 4112021005 - PMLC - 4TH Sem LL.M Dissertation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Babina Apat - Roll No - 4112021005 - PMLC - 4TH Sem LL.M Dissertation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Similarity Report ID: oid:26404:48247249

BABINA APAT_ROLL NO_4112021005_P

WORD COUNT CHARACTER COUNT

39771 Words 223127 Characters

PAGE COUNT FILE SIZE

118 Pages 179.2KB

SUBMISSION DATE REPORT DATE

Excluded from Similarity Report

ROLL NO. – 4112021005

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

DR. BIMAL PRASAD MISHRA (LECTURER)

DEPARTMENT OF MASTER IN LAW MADHUSUDAN LAW

This is to certify that the work contained in the dissertation

I considered that the dissertation has reached the standards and

Finally, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to all of the participants

I am grateful to everyone who has supported me throughout this process.

1 ABC Accessible Books Consortium

5 AMU Aligarh Muslim University

60 IOC International Olympic Committee

CONCEPT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ................................................................. 14

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS IN INDIA ............................................................. 15

ROLE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

ROLE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN ECONOMY ............................................. 19

TYPES OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ........................................................................ 20

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM..................................................................................... 20

INDIAN SCENARIO .............................................................................................................. 22

OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ....................................................................... 26

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ....................................................................................... 26

RESEARCH QUESTIONS .................................................................................................... 27

REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................................................................................ 27

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: CONCEPT AND DEVELOPMENTS ............. 28

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND RIGHTS .... 29

GENESIS OF PATENT LAW ........................................................................................... 29

THE GLOBAL SCOPE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF COPYRIGHTS LAW ......... 32

EVOLUTION OF LAW OF TRADEMARKS ................................................................. 33

GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW .............................. 34

INVENTION AND DISCOVERY ......................................................................................... 34

THE BERNE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF LITERARY AND

MADRID AGREEMENT AND PROTOCOL RELATING TO THE MADRID

THE MADRID AGREEMENT OF 1891 .............................................................................. 40

NICE AGREEMENT (1957) ON THE UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS

THE ROME CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF PERFORMERS,

WIPO CONVENTION (1967)................................................................................................ 42

THE EVOLUTION OF WIPO........................................................................................... 42

THE WIPO COPYRIGHT TREATY (WCT), 1996 ............................................................ 43

THE WIPO PERFORMANCES AND PHONOGRAMS TREATY (1996) ...................... 45

THE SINGAPORE TREATY ON TRADEMARKS, 2006 ................................................. 47

DIMENSIONS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION IN THE

AN OVERVIEW OF INDIAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS REGIME ..... 51

THE DEVELOPING INDIAN PATENT SYSTEM ............................................................ 52

FEATURES OF INDIA'S Strong PATENT SYSTEM ........................................................ 53

INTRODUCTION TO INDIA'S COPYRIGHTS LAW...................................................... 53

CHANGES TO INDIAN COPYRIGHT LAW AS OF 2012 PER THE COPYRIGHT

INTRODUCTION TO INDIA'S TRADEMARK LAW ...................................................... 55

THE DESIGNS ACT, 2000 .................................................................................................... 55

PROTECTING PLANT VARIETIES AND FARMERS' RIGHTS IN A GLOBAL

INDIA'S PROCEDURES FOR ENFORCING RIGHTS TO INTELLECTUAL

MECHANISM OF THE LAW............................................................................................... 67