Relevance: GS-2: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

Relevance: GS-3: Indian Economy, mobilization of resources, changes in industrial policy and their effects on industrial growth.

Key phrases: US Chambers of Commerce International Intellectual Property, India’s IP policy regime, Process to Product Patents, Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act, Therapeutic Efficiency, Compulsory licensing, Food security and IPR, patent cell, Make in India, Atmanirbhar Bharat.

Why in News?

• The Parliamentary panel on commerce has suggested, among others, a legislative framework in conformity with the changing dynamics of innovation.

Context:

• It is not often that an Indian report gets appreciation overseas. The 161st Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Commerce was much discussed within legal circles and appreciated by the US Chambers of Commerce in its 10th edition of the International Intellectual Property (IP) Index.
• The US publication appreciated the recommendations as a ‘welcome development’ and ‘a first major attempt at assessing the state of India’s IP policy regime’. It also highlighted the proposed Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) reforms in the report as being significant in substantially improving India’s national IP environment.
• While critically analysing the committee’s report, the US publication lauded the recommendations on the changes to be made in the existing IP regime of India.
• According to Economic Survey 2021-22, India’s domestic filing of patents rose 30 per cent in the last five years whereas the number of patents granted during the same period almost tripled. A total of 58,502 patents were filed in 2020-21, while 28,391 were granted in the same period.
• One of the reasons for the relatively low patents in India is low expenditure on research and development, which was just 0.7 per cent of GDP in 2020. This number is a small fraction of the patents filed and granted in China and the US and the committee has made specific recommendations to bolster the efforts of the government in this respect.
• India possesses a large pool of creative individuals with efficient and innovative ideas. This necessitates establishing a robust IPR regime with targeted strategies and government policies that will strongly support the holistic development and sustainability of the intellectual rights of individuals.

Challenges to Intellectual Property Rights in India

• From Process to Product Patents- One of the binding point in TRIPS agreement is that all member countries are required to shift their patent regime from “Process Patent” to “Product Patent.” The fundamental difference between a Process Patent regime and a Product Patent regime lies in the fact that the former protects for processes only while the latter products. It becomes a contentious issue when it comes to getting IP rights on pharmaceuticals and food products.
• Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act– Another challenge that it is facing is the condemnation of section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act. This section prevents multinational companies evergreening their patents simply by making minor changes. Implementation of 3(d) was exercised in challenging the patent of Novartis Glevac drug. The Court rules that multinational companies can’t evergreen their patents simply by making minor changes in earlier patents and they need to show considerable “Therapeutic Efficiency” to get patent protection in already existing patents.
• Compulsory licensing- With the provision of compulsory licensing, the Govt of India can compel the owner company or other companies to mass produce some drugs in emergency irrespective of who got the patent. Multinationals are accusing India of being opportunistic in their stand and are asking to abrogate this provision. However, Indian Govt is not willing to cancel this provision to safeguard the interests of mass.
• Provision of Drug Price Control Order- With this provision companies can’t charge an unfair price for drugs that they are producing. The price has to be justified regarding investments, and if someone plays foul, then the Govt has the right to intervene.
• Food security and IPR- India is a land of farmers wherein most of the people are engaged in doing farming for their livelihood. In such a country Govt offers many subsidies to farmers. India’s domestic support schemes are generally in the form of “minimum support price” for major agricultural commodities and “input” subsidies provided to farmers in the types of electricity, fertilizers, seeds, etc. However, for complete implementation of TRIPS agreements, these subsidies will have to be reduced or eliminated. Thus, the Indian Government is struggling to create a balance between food security and providing IP rights in India.
• IPRs, Community property rights, & Indigenous knowledge- Traditional knowledge gives ready-made leads for pharmaceutical companies and then simply come up with the new formulation to show the efficacy of the general traditional understanding. The Indian Govt is bound to protect the rich source of traditional knowledge by not allowing multinationals to get patents on traditional culture. As a defensive mechanism, the Govt has created TKDL (Traditional Knowledge Digital Library) to challenge patenting traditional Indian understanding. Multinationals and developed countries are also opposing this move.

Committee Recommendation on IPR Policy

• With a view to enhancing the current IPR ecosystem, the committee made an attempt to analyse the ways and means of capitalising on the strengths and removing the weaknesses of the present IPR regime.
• The report emphasises the need to ensure an appropriate legislative framework on IPR in conformity with the changing dynamics of innovation, measures to expedite the processing of patent and trademark applications, active coordination between enforcement agencies and appointment of skilled manpower and additional staff for deftly handling IPR issues.
• It further recommends the enactment of laws on issues such as anti-counterfeiting, trade secrets, financing of IP assets, AI inventions and educational copyrights. Through the successful implementation of its recommendations, the committee aspires to bridge the gap between innovation, economic activity and IPR. This will generate employment opportunities and encourage the inflow of foreign exchange.
• The committee, in its report, has further recognised the significance of industry-academia partnership to boost research and innovation, primarily in the pharmaceutical sector.
• While acknowledging India’s might and prowess in the pharmaceutical sector, the committee has suggested encouraging research and development towards niche segments and new drugs discovery in order to sustain its growth in the global pharmaceutical market.
• To foster IP cooperation between nations, the report recommends collaborative efforts with other countries and international organisations through MoUs, which will result in the exchange of crucial information on the best practices and expertise in IPR.
• It further suggests undertaking consolidated efforts on the part of government, industry, civil societies as well as educational and research institutions functioning at the level of schools, colleges and universities in evolving a robust IPR regime.
• These recommendations have been formed after extensive consultation with Advocate Generals of various States, leading law firms of India and also with the bureaucracy. With the report now tabled in both the Houses of Parliament, the ball lies in the government’s court.

Intellectual Property Rights (India): Milestones to Achieve

• Though India technically has shifted from a process patent regime to a product patent regime, it is still struggling to balance the interest of companies as well as the masses. The country has technically incorporated the rules of TRIPS but also trying to level the playing field by adding clauses and provisions like compulsory licensing. Some of the milestones still to achieve, are:
  • Successful implementation of the TRIPs agreement: The important ones being legal, administrative and institutional reforms, appropriate research investment, and first-rate science and technology capability. Provided the IPR protection is adequate and effective (worldwide), the TRIPs accord can promote innovation, transfer of technology, foreign direct investment, use of genetic resources and environmental protection.
  • Creation of patent cell in the ICAR: Having a clear-cut intellectual property policy and promoting patent literacy among its scientists must be the next logical step.
  • Foster and reward entrepreneurship: To maximize opportunities patent offices must evolve a regulatory environment conducive to technological innovation.
  • Indian must establish a lobby: At the international level, in the WTO, India must lobby for creating a linkage between the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and TRIPs, stating that it is the CBD which must have primacy over the TRIPs and not the other way round.

Way Forward:

• Strengthening of the IPR regime has also gained significance in providing thrust on policies such as ‘Make in India’ and ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’ (self-reliant India). With continuous efforts in this direction, India has significantly improved its ranking on the International IP Index and currently stands 43rd among 55 countries. However, much more needs to be done, which requires a combination of effective government schemes and policies, fiscal incentives, financial assistance and technological infrastructure.

Source: The Hindu BL

Mains Question:

Q. What were the challenges faced by the IPR Policy regime in India? Discuss the measures to strengthen the IPR system in India? Examine.