This article was written by Ms. Varshini R A a 2nd year law student at Ramaiah college of law, Bangalore.
ABSTRACT
Culture. Tradition. Knowledge. is the fiber that weaves India into the great nation it is. Protection of this vital intellectual heritage is imperative to uphold the customs, practices, and principles of our ancestors. IPR laws have not only proven to be torchbearers of effective safeguards by have also transcended expectations, treasuring ancient wisdom that forms an intricate part of our identity. The law is meant to preserve and conserve ancient knowledge and reduce the possibility if not completely obviate this praxis slipping into oblivion.
One of the six major components that make up the IPR framework is GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION TAGS. This article delves into the significance of this aspect, recognizing its pivotal role in the broader context of safeguarding our cultural legacy.
Educating readers on the working of GIs and the impact it has had on the local custodians is the predominant focus of this article.
INTRODUCTION
India, a tapestry of diverse cultures and a storehouse of rich heritage stands as a lighthouse of artistry admired by scholars across the Western world for its unparalleled perfection, finesse, and intricate detailing. However, the urgency to protect and preserve this traditional knowledge has become increasingly evident. The essence of Indian craftsmanship passed down orally through generations, faces the risk of fading into oblivion, reducing many crafts to mere footnotes in historical texts.
The tide of globalization, coupled with rising standards of living, has prompted a genuine appreciation for the beauty and dedication towards the artisan’s craft. The craftsmen’s ability to transform simple elements of nature into extraordinary works of art has captivated the world, earning admiration on a global scale.
As this recognition grows, so does the need for legal safeguards to protect these crafts from appropriation by those who would claim them as their own. Intellectual property laws step in as the guardians of these intangible treasures, acknowledging them as the invaluable creations of individuals and attributing value to their unique origin.
Crafts like pottery, handloom textiles, and sculptures are not mere artistic expressions but represent traditions passed down through familial lineages for generations. The uniqueness of each craft is deeply rooted in its place of origin and the centuries-old traditions that have shaped it. Here lies the significance of the Geographical Indications Act of 1999, a legal framework designed to safeguard the regional heritage embedded in these crafts.
Navigating the delicate terrain of intellectual property for such commodities is a challenging task. Unlike tangible assets, these crafts exist beyond the realm of materialism, making them susceptible to imitation. The intangible nature of intellectual property, especially in the context of traditional art forms, necessitates a nuanced and comprehensive legal framework to ensure the continued protection and prosperity of these unique cultural expressions.
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION
India, an epitome of exotica, has consistently captivated hearts with its mesmerizing landscapes and the rich tapestry of customs and practices embraced by its people. The allure of these distinctive practices and products has transcended geographical boundaries, drawing people from far and wide into its cultural embrace.
Geographical Indications (GIs) emerge as the custodians of this uniqueness, serving as distinctive signs assigned to products that stand as differentiating factors amidst an ocean of competing goods. These GIs, whether assigned as symbols or names on products, serve as symbolic ambassadors that proudly declare the place of their origin. Rooted in a collective ethos, GIs carry a robust historical foundation, intertwined with traditional and cultural knowledge.
The collective nature of GIs fosters a sense of shared ownership among those involved in their production and marketing. Engaging in collective action becomes intrinsic to the preservation of GIs, encompassing crucial aspects such as production methods, adherence to quality standards, and control over the distribution and marketing of these distinctive goods.
The hallmark of GIs lies in the delivery of high-quality goods, a testament to a rigorous production process and the utilization of the finest materials. This commitment to excellence naturally appeals to discerning customers. Yet, in the realm of trade, a surge in demand unmet by an appropriate level of supply often paves the way for the unfortunate consequence of product duplication. This phenomenon holds especially true for these unique goods. Counterfeit attempts may mimic the appearance of the original, but they inevitably fall short of capturing its true essence.
To safeguard the sanctity of these authentic artifacts and uphold the interests of both consumers and producers, the Geographical Indications Act was introduced. This legislative measure acts as a shield against the encroachment of counterfeit products, ensuring that the genuine article retains its cultural and regional integrity. In essence, the Geographical Indications Act becomes a beacon of protection, preserving the essence of India’s unique practices and products, making them not just products but veritable ambassadors of the nation’s rich cultural heritage. Article 1(2) and 10 of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property covers geographical interactions as an element of the laws of intellectual property. It is one of the six trade-related IPRs and ensures that none other than those registered and authorized use the GI tag that concerns the product in trade. It is also covered under articles 20 to 24 of the trade-related aspects of intellectual property (TRIPS) agreement that India is a signatory to. India as a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) enacted the Geographical Indication of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, of 1999 which came into effect on 15th September 2003.
CONTRIBUTION TO INDIAN LOCAL SENARIO.
Undoubtedly, the impact of Goods with Geographical Indication (GI) tags on the economy is undeniable. An outstanding example is Darjeeling tea, the flagbearer of GI recognition in India, contributing a staggering 25 crores to the government’s revenue. However, the venerable traditions associated with these products face an imminent threat of commercialization in the face of technological advancements and innovative mechanisms.
As of now, India boasts a whopping 432 registered GIs with new additions made every year. Karnataka leads the list with a total of 33 products on the list. This is a matter of great pride for the nation, striving to protect its ancestral heritage.
It is a well-known fact that the Indian textile industry is an outstanding specimen of marvelous artistry. Even the British colonizers envied the skill and techniques used in the preparation of these fabrics and made every effort to destroy the ever-booming Indian textile industry. The reason for such extreme action was the noblemen and the well-to-do of the empire preferred Indian calico over their textiles. This led to the mass execution of the practitioners of the craft and eventually led to the extension of the art itself.
Yet, against all odds, the Indian textile industry endured the test of time, emerging as a beacon of fine craftsmanship. Today, it proudly holds the majority of GIs, symbolizing a triumphant resurgence and standing tall as a testament to the resilience of India’s artistic legacy.
DIFFICULTIES.
India is a country where technology and trade go hand in hand. The rise of metropolitan cities and the need for speedy solutions has resulted in the automation of many processes. It Is the rural spaces that continue to be the beacon of traditional knowledge and work tirelessly for the furtherance and protection of this craft or product that has now become a part of their identity. This is the exact aspect that GIs aim to protect. When a commodity or craft is given a GI mark it does not act as a safeguard for the good in question by always providing complete protection for its practitioners to further their trade and even pass it down to the next generation.
However, this is not as easy as it sounds. The daunting task of implementing provisions at grassroots levels has plagued the system for a very long time now. India is a signatory to the trips agreement, the basic document for intellectual property laws and its various aspects. On the international level, India seems to be doing significantly well as compared to other ‘developed’ countries. But when the curators of the craft or the farmers of the products are questioned, they seem to have a different opinion.
The impending issue that needs to be addressed at the earliest is legal awareness among the prospective owners of GIs. Despite the act finding its operation for over 24 years, cognitions of protection are still negligible to nill. Common artisans and manufacturers do not believe that their skilled goods or products are even worth protection. To further complicate the situation and add oil to the fire, the artisans do not have the slightest idea of how to even register for a GI let alone have ownership of one.
in case of any duplication or misuse of their GI, the owners do not know what is to be done or which authority to approach. If and when the breach is brought to the attention of the respective authorities, no action is taken by them unless in most cases a bribe is involved.
It is also true that if the owners of the GI were to sue the miscreants for a breach on their part, the cost and time of litigation would be a burden for both parties, who might not always be in a position to bear the cost.
The first case of infringement of GI registered in the Indian courts was the case of Tea Board India vs ITC
ANALYSIS OF THE CASE
The Indian tea board had filed a suit for passing off an act of unfairness for the use of the words,” Darjeeling lounge” that referred to a section of the hotel by ITC. It was stated that the use of this phrase amounted to a breach of articles under the Geographical Indication of Goods (registration and protection) Act 1999. The Calcutta high court had even issued an interim injunction before trial.
It was the opinion of the court that not all acts of passing off amount to acts of unfair competition If the GI had any ‘nexus’ with the product with the product it is exclusively associated with. Since the area of the hotel in question was a closed space that was accessible only to high-end clients, the claim was baseless.
This judgment limited the scope of passing off under the GI Act to only those cases that were directly about the product, that may affect its value in the eyes of its users. It was further noted the use of the word ‘Darjeeling’ was not for the sole prerogative of the tea board but was used by commoners long before a GI was granted.
The case was dismissed in favor of the defendants, stating that the tea board prima facia was not entitled to any relief on the grounds stated by them.
SIGNIFICANCE
It is sufficiently discussed in this article that GIs are an important protection that needs to be availed by farmers of exquisite craft and produce. But how is this piece of legislation going to help its owners? What are the ramifications of having or not having a registered GI? How is this ‘tag’ going to help improve revenue for the individual owners that would in turn also boost the Indian economy?
To answer these questions the case of Chinese pinggu peaches serves as an appropriate specimen. These peaches are known for being brightly colored accompanied by an unmatched sweet taste. Historical records show that these peaches have been grown for centuries now on the outskirts of the city of Beijing.
By obtaining a GI for this remarkable fruit, the Chinese producers were able to create a very niche market for this product due to its unique characteristics and reputation. The demand for this product has only risen in the past years which has led to an increase in its market value as well. Sales grew from RBM 1.5 per kilo to RMB 4 per kilo leading to a rise in economic returns for the local producers.
This scenario can be comfortably duplicated by a capable country such as ours and can be used to our advantage.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the concept of Geographical Indication (GI) holds immense significance for Indian local manufacturing, providing a unique and valuable tool for protecting and promoting traditional products. The recognition and legal safeguards offered by GI status not only contribute to preserving the cultural and historical heritage of a region but also foster economic growth by empowering local manufacturers.
By associating specific products with their geographical origin, GI status enhances consumer trust and confidence in the authenticity and quality of these goods. This, in turn, can stimulate demand both domestically and internationally, creating new opportunities for local manufacturers to thrive. Furthermore, GI protection acts as a powerful means of preventing the misappropriation and imitation of traditional products, safeguarding the intellectual property rights of local communities.
In the context of India, with its rich tapestry of diverse cultures and traditional manufacturing practices, embracing and promoting the GI system can be a catalyst for sustainable development. It encourages the preservation of age-old techniques, empowers local artisans and producers, and fosters a sense of pride and identity within communities.
However, to fully realize the potential benefits of Geographical Indication, it is crucial for policymakers to streamline the GI registration process, raise awareness among local manufacturers, and establish robust enforcement mechanisms. Additionally, fostering collaboration between government agencies, industry stakeholders, and local communities can create a more conducive environment for the successful implementation of the GI system.
In essence, the integration of Geographical Indication into the Indian local manufacturing landscape represents a promising avenue for balancing economic growth with the preservation of cultural heritage. By leveraging the unique identity of regional products, India can not only protect its traditional knowledge and skills but also create a globally recognized brand for its diverse and authentic offerings in the international market.
REFERENCES
- CASE LAW:
tea board of India vs ITC limited
GA No. 3137 of 2010 CS No. 250 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION TEA BOARD, INDIA
- ARTICLES AND BLOGS REFERRED:
- NAME: Protection of traditional knowledge through Geographical Indication
The article was originally written by Yashwardhan Singh and published on WordPress.com. the link is listed herein:
- NAME: Geographical indication: A journey of Indian exclusiveness
The article was originally written by Pragya Gupta and Anunay Shrivastava and published on SCC online. The link is listed herein:
https://www.scconline.com/Members/SearchResult.aspx
- JOURNALS
- NAME: Geographical Indication as a tool for protecting traditional knowledge.
The article was originally written by Rajesh BL, Anagha S Beedu and Varshu S and published on the ACCLAIMS, volume 3, dated August 2018 . The link is listed herein:
http://www.penacclaims.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Rajesh-BL-new.pdf
- NAME: Challenges posing to Geographical Indications in India
The article was originally written by Shilpa Rathod and published on IPR journal, volume I, Issue I. the link is listed herein: