Indian
government has been preparing the draft national IPR policy of India
for some time. Perry4Law
Organisation (P4LO)
has suggested that the proposed IPR policy of India must be techno
legal
in nature. P4LO has also provided its suggestions regarding the
proposed Trade
Marks Rules 2015 of India whereby we have suggested
(pdf) for establishment of a strong and efficient trademark regime in
India. The crux of all these discussions is that the proposed IPR
policy of India must be technology
driven and beneficial to small and medium enterprises,
e-commerce
players and entrepreneurs.
It has now been reported
that the Cabinet has approved
the national intellectual property rights (IPR) policy with a view to
promoting creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. The aim is to
create awareness about economic, social and cultural benefits of IPRs
among all sections of society, Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley
said on Friday while briefing reporters about Thursday's Cabinet
decisions. The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP)
will be the nodal
department to co-ordinate, guide and oversee
implementation and future development of IPR’s in India.
The minister also said
that by 2017, the window for trademark registration will be brought
down to one month. This means that starting 2017, trademark
registration will take only one month. P4LO's suggestion number (11)
on the proposed trademark rules recommended this requirement. We
suggested that the proposed rule is a golden opportunity for the
Indian Government/Registrar to speed up the trademark registration
procedure that is suffering from backlog as on date.
We also recommend that the Registrar
must not "discriminate" between those applicants who have paid additional fees for
expedition and those who have applied through normal course of
action. If the Registrar discriminates between those who have paying
capacity and those who do not have such capacity, it would
unnecessarily create hindrances before the small and medium
enterprises and entrepreneurs. Indian government seems to have
accepted these suggestions of P4LO.
According to Jaitley,
there are seven objectives that guided the policy mechanism, which
include IPR public awareness, stimulation of generation of IPRs, need
for strong and effective laws and strengthening enforcement and
adjudicatory mechanisms to combat infringements. The policy also puts
a premium on enhancing access to healthcare, food security and
environmental protection. It is expected to lay the future road map
for intellectual property in India, besides putting in place an
institutional mechanism for implementation, monitoring and review.
The policy recognizes
that India has a well-established TRIPS-compliant
legislative, administrative and judicial framework to safeguard IPRs,
which meets its international
obligations while utilizing the flexibilities provided in
the international regime to address its developmental concerns. It
reiterates India's commitment to the Doha Development Agenda and the
TRIPS agreement.
