Exploring the Possibilities of Utility Models Patent Regime for Grassroots Innovations in India (original) (raw)
Related papers
Institutionalization of grassroots innovation in India
India's economy has a large informal sector, which is generally associated with low labour productivity and poverty in the country. India became the first country to recognize the innovative ability of the informal sector and support it. Grassroots innovations scouted in various parts of India are now provided a complete cycle of support and integrated into the formal sector through networking cooperation with research institutions, businesses and governmental organizations at various levels. This article traces the genesis of the system of support for grassroots innovation in India through the institutionalization of the innovative activity of the informal sector. The specifics of this process can be taken into consideration by countries wishing to unleash the innovative potential of the informal sector.
Intellectual Property Rights in India: Significance of Patents
This paper highlights an overview of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in India and their trends. Importantly, patents have played a key role in changing national and global innovation landscape.The IPR trends during 2003-13, the approved rate of designs (87.38%) and trademarks registrations (65.54%) were significantly higher than the granted patents (22.06%) in India. Though, the patents (63.26%) have generated huge revenues than the designs, trademarks and GIs over last decade.Total number of patent grantsoverthe last 10 years was 69,745 out of which 21.71% were granted to Indians and 78.29% wereto foreign applicants. Maharashtra, Delhi and Southern states are leading in filing patents. Streams like chemical and mechanical engineering have produced highest number of patents whereas bio-technology and foods field were at the low preference. This paper also deals with the patent grants in Asian countries.On an average, the percentage of patent grants in Japan, Korea and Taiwan was 43.08, 43.95 and 45.88 respectively. China has shown massive interest in patent filing in recent years and the overall percentage of patent grants over last dozen years was 32.99%. When compared with Asian countries, India was least innovative nation among them in terms of patent filing with a granting percentage of 23.07. It indicates, India is conscious about its IPR polices with higher rejection of filed patents. It has also shown considerable increase in its research and innovation capabilities. Over the last 10 years, India managed to produce 2.84 lac research publications. In the 2012, India ranked 9th in scientific publications at a global share of 3.5%. Inthe global innovation index over the last 5 years,on an average,Indian input sub-index ranking was 74.6% and output sub index ranking was 45.8%.Besides, India was often ranked at No. 01 in the region of Central and Southern Asia for the last 5 years. India has been consistently ranked in the top ten when it compared to lower-middle-income (LMI) economies worldwide. However, IPR culture in India is anything but satisfactory. It demands effective strategies for encouraging and building IPR activities and explore scientific and industrial research and innovationin India. Keywords: Intellectual Property Rights; Patents; Indian Patent Office; Copyright; Global Innovation Index
Intellectual Property and Economic Development in India
Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 2010
In present times, it is inconceivable that intellectual property rights were once the target of serious criticism in several countries around the world. What is ironic is that countries that are today considered as the strongest advocates for intellectual property protection, particularly patents, were once fighting tooth and nail against all forms of private proprietorship in intangible property. This change of heart was perhaps engendered due to an understanding of the long-term benefits of this protection regime which sequestered information and the benefits arising therefrom, and gave monopolistic rights over exploitation of the same. Despite the diatribe that intellectual property protection has received historically, there is a contemporary consensus that intellectual property protection is required for the sustained progress of a society. Some may argue that intellectual property, more specifically its protection, contributes to the advancement of society by encouraging innovation and their exploitation and also promoting circulation of innovations and other creations. One of the most important arguments in support of intellectual property rights is that every human has a natural right over his own creation and it is justified if a creator is granted an exclusive right to enjoy or exploit his own creation. Taking this line of thought forward, even governments are under a moral obligation to provide a creator a reward for his/her invention or novel achievement. The litmus test of a government, however, then lies in its ability to balance the trade-off between rewarding innovators and providing affordable technology. Often this trade-off engenders the most intellectual property controversies.
A country’s patent system plays a significant role in the progress it makes in relation to technological innovations. Yet, from a developing country’s perspective it is necessary to ensure that the grant of patent rights promotes local interests, and in particular the transfer of technology to foster domestic industries and promote local innovations. However, where the grant of a patent results in the patented product being solely imported into the territory of a country in which patent rights subsist, there is little benefit for the patent granting country. It is for this reason that the incorporation of a local working requirement–compelling the local manufacture of a patented product–for the grant and maintenance of patent rights could be beneficial to a patent granting country. Yet adopting such an approach to formulate domestic patent legislation is not without controversy. Although Article 5A(2) of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property 1883 (Paris Convention) provides that a compulsory license may be issued where there is a failure to work a patent, the Paris Convention permitting the term ‘working’ to be defined as requiring local manufacture of a patented product, Article 27:1 of the Trade Related aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS) provides that patent rights must be made available without discrimination as to the place where a patented product is produced. This chapter explores the tension between Article 27:1 of TRIPS and Article 5A(2) of the Paris Convention and suggests how TRIPS flexibilities may be used in favour of imposing a local working requirement under domestic patent law, while also considering the approaches adopted in relation to local working requirements in two South Asian jurisdictions–namely, India and Sri Lanka.
Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2012
Recent patent-law changes in India's pharmaceutical industry provide opportunities to study changes of institutional and regulatory environments on innovation and social welfare in low-income markets. From 1972 to 2004 under its process-patent regime, India's pharmaceutical industry grew to become the world's fourth largest. Indian companies were becoming globally competitive in generics and clinical testing, and moving into product R&D. Researchers have debated the effects of India's new product-patent laws' effects on these trends. The authors cover the domestic characteristics and global competitiveness of India's pharmaceutical industry. They contrast data (from 2001 to 2004) on patents in India's process-patent regime with preliminary data (from 2005 to 2008) on patents in the country's new product-patent regime. They argue that Indian pharmaceutical companies have changed their decision-making in response to changed patent laws by moving from process to product research. However, the preliminary results indicate that these changes may have hurt domestic innovation. They conclude with strategic implications for the Indian pharmaceutical industry and highlight the need for research and public policy to establish optimal social returns from product-patent regimes.
Intellectual property rights and innovation in developing countries
This paper studies intellectual property rights (IPRs) and innovation in developing countries. A model is developed to illustrate the trade-off between imitating foreign technologies and encouraging domestic innovation in a developing country's choice of IPRs. It is shown that innovations in a developing country increase in its IPRs, and a country's IPRs can depend on its level of development non-monotonically, first decreasing and then increasing. Empirical analysis, with a panel of data for 64 developing countries, confirms both the positive impact of IPRs on innovations in developing countries and the presence of a U-shaped relationship between IPRs and economic development. D