Upload
leliem
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
RESEARCH PAPER
The management of geographical indications: postregistration challenges and opportunities
K. D. Raju . Shivangi Tiwari
Published online: 4 June 2015
� Indian Institute of Management Calcutta 2015
Abstract India passed the Geographical Indications
of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999 in
compliance with the Trade Related Aspects of Intel-
lectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Agreement under the
World Trade Organisation (WTO) Agreements which
concluded in 1995. Article 22 of the TRIPs Agreement
defines Geographical Indication as ‘‘the indications
which identify a good as originating in the territory of
a Member, or a region or locality in that territory,
where a given quality, reputation or other character-
istic of the good is essentially attributable to its
geographical origin’’. Many developing countries like
India has enacted legislation for greater and stronger
protection of GI in order to uplift the economic
condition of the poor people those who contribute to
many key products of export. Since the Act has been
passed 15 years back and India registered its first GI,
Darjeeling tea in 2004, the total registrations now have
reached to 227 in number. The present paper re-
examines the challenges ahead in implementation of
the Act and to suggest further amendments to the Act
for better protection to Indian indigenous knowledge
and reputation of products originating from India. It
also tries to identify what is further required to reap the
benefits of registration and problematic areas like who
can be a right applicant of a GI application, Part-B
registration of beneficiaries, marketing of GI products,
maintaining quality of the product and counterfeiting
and enforcement mechanism. It is argued that India
requires a coordinated effort of Central and State
Governments, proprietors of GI and beneficiaries to
protect and promote Indian GIs in future.
Keywords Benefit sharing � Geographicalindication � Developing nations � India � Economic
development
Introduction
India has always been a land of international trade and
export from ancient times.1 From handicrafts to
textiles, jewelry to metallurgy, there has been a long
history of export. According to some artisans India
The Author has registered seven GIs from Odisha and
implementing a project on ‘‘Post—Registration Measures on
the GIs, Sambalpuri Bandha Saree & Fabrics and Bomkai
Saree & Fabrics from Odisha’’.
K. D. Raju (&)
Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law, IIT
Kharagpur, Kharagpur, India
e-mail: [email protected]
S. Tiwari
MSc Plant Biotechnology, TERI University, New Delhi,
India
e-mail: [email protected]
1 Padma Mohan Kumar, India - The Roaring Trade Partner of
Yore, http://www.gatewayforindia.com/articles/tradeyore.htm.
123
Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306
DOI 10.1007/s40622-015-0084-2
may have been the original home of textiles printing
and the export of these printed fabrics to China can be
dated back to fourth century B.C.2 Indian textile items
from Gujarat were exported to Arab countries. Carpet
weaving and export were peculiar during the Mughal
period.3 In sixteenth century Portuguese trading port
was established in Calicut and Cochin where the
export of various varieties of spices took place.4 Since
that time there has been a strong connection between a
product and a region that had a great impact in the
international trade as the product is known to the
outside world in the name of the region or a country.
There was always a demand for a product originating
from a particular place with a special reputation. This
demand was due to the superiority of the product
belonging to a specific geographical area which was
believed to be present due to the distinctness of various
factors such as geography, soil, climate, water or
specific skills and craftsmanship. For example, Scotch
whisky belongs to Scotland is famous from 1495 is
now protected under the TRIPs regime.5 With the
increasing demands and the rise in the economy, the
merchants started branding their products with a
certain mark that delegated the place of origin of the
product. The description or the branding was done by
using symbols, logo or even the pictures of local
animals, landmarks, buildings or well-known local
personalities of the particular region. Later on, these
marks were regarded as the symbol of quality,
guarantee and faith by the customers. Thereby, stating
that the marks indicating the geographical region were
the earliest type of the trademarks used by the
merchants.6 To safeguard the commercial status and
to maintain the quality of these goods, establishment
of a system of labeling of the approved local goods
made by the original producers with a mark (e.g.
hallmarks and wool marks used for goods made up of
precious metals and cloth quality respectively)
authenticating their quality, was done by the local
legislators.
These geographical marks are defined worldwide as
‘‘Indication of Sources,7’’ ‘‘Appellations of Origin,8’’
and ‘‘Geographical Indications (GI)’’. Paris Conven-
tion9 was the first multilateral agreement which
provided for protection of ‘‘indication of source’’
and ‘‘appellations of origin.’’ It however, does not
define ‘‘Indication of Source’’ or ‘‘Appellations of
Origin’’. Article 1(2) of the Convention states that
‘‘The protection of industrial property has as its object
patents, utility models, industrial designs, trademarks,
service marks, trade names, indications of source or
appellations of origin, and the repression of unfair
competition.’’
The conclusion of the Uruguay Round of nego-
tiations became the turning point in the history of the
entire intellectual property protection regime.10 For
the first time the IP protection came under the
umbrella of the WTO regime since the establishment
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT) in 1947. Before the TRIPs Agreement, GI
was protected under Article 1(2) of the Paris Conven-
tion 1883 andMadrid Agreement for the Repression of
False or Deceptive Indications of Source on Goods of
1891 and later on in the 20th century it was protected
under the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of the
2 Stuart Robinson: A History of Printed Textiles.3 History of India: IndiaTradePromotion.com http://www.
indiatradepromotion.com/history-indian-trade.html.4 The Portuguese Empire in the East (c.1500–1600), The Flow
of History http://www.flowofhistory.com/units/west/12/FC82.5 History of Scotch Whiskey, Scotch Whiskey Association
http://www.scotch-whisky.org.uk/understanding-scotch/history-
of-scotch-whisky/.6 McCarthy C and Devitt BM (1979) Protection of geographical
denominations: domestic and international, 69 T.M.R.197.
7 Agreement for the Repression of False or Deceptive Indica-
tions of Source on Goods, 1891 (The Madrid Agreement
provides for false and deceptive Indication of Sources). See
http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/madrid/en/legal_texts/pdf/
madrid_agreement.pdf, last visited on 14.12.2014.8 The Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of
Origin and there International Registration (1958) defines
Appellation of Origin in Article 2(1) to mean ‘‘the geographical
name of a country, region, or locality, which serves to designate
a product originating therein, the quality and the characteristics
of which are exclusively or essentially due to the geographical
environment, including human and natural figures’’. See at
http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/text.jsp?file_id=285838, last
visited on 14.12.2014.9 Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property was
one of the first multilateral treaties protecting the intellectual
property. Article1 deals with the establishment of the union and
scope of industrial property. Full text available at http://www.
wipo.int/treaties/en/text.jsp?file_id=287556, last visited on
10.12.2014.10 Uruguay Round of trade negotiations started in 1986 and
ended in 1994 which lead to the establishment of the World
Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement.
294 Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306
123
Appellation of Origin and their International Regis-
tration of 1958.
GI protection under the TRIPs agreement
Geographical indication protection is one of the
categories of intellectual property item included under
Article 22 of the TRIPs Agreement. It defines
Geographical Indication as ‘‘the indications which
identify a good as originating in the territory of a
Member, or a region or locality in that territory, where
a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the
good is essentially attributable to its geographical
origin’’.11 Article 22(3) states that members must
‘‘refuse or invalidate the registration of a trademark
which contains or consists of a geographical indication
with respect to goods not originating in the territory
indicated if use of the GI of such a nature leads to
mislead the public with the true place of its origin’’. It
means that there must be a link between the product
and the original place of production. Not only the
agricultural products but any product that can be
attributed to human factors found in the product’s
place or origin, such as specific manufacturing skill
that can be registered as in the case of Mysore Saree.
Handicrafts are best qualified to be registered as GIs as
in India this sector is well developed and with highest
number of registrations and many more are to be
exploited. The standards of Article 22 are qualified
under Article 23 which provides for additional
protection for GI related to wines and spirits.
GI protection in India
Many developing countries like India have enacted
legislation Geographical Indications of Goods (Regis-
tration & Protection) Act, 1999 for greater and
stronger protection of GI with an objective of uplifting
the economic condition of the poor people those who
contribute in many key products of export. The prime
economic function of GI protection is to maintain the
goodwill and reputation of the product in the market
and thus expanding the access to the market for better
revenues. Different countries have their discrete
objectives for getting GI protection. Where the
European Union (EU) on one hand used GI as a tool
in order to consolidate the reputation, market niche
and market exports keeping in mind both the quality
and the quantity of the agricultural products,12 coun-
tries like Costa Rica13 have built up a certain
mechanism for benefit sharing after the GI Registra-
tion. This has not only led to an increase in the income
of coffee growers but has also led to the infrastructure
development of the places which are registered.
The first GI registered from India is ‘‘Darjeeling
Tea’’ in the year 2004, which is world famous for its
aroma and known as the black tea from India. The Tea
Board of India has also applied for the registration of
the words ‘Darjeeling’ and ‘Darjeeling logo’ under the
Act. This tea is produced by approximate 80 tea
gardens in the valley of Darjeeling in the State of West
Bengal. In order to provide legal protection in India the
Tea Board of India registered the ‘Darjeeling logo’ and
also the word ‘Darjeeling’ as certification trade marks
(CTMs) under the (Indian) Trade and Merchandise
Marks Act, 1958 (now the Trade Marks Act, 1999).14
GIs and trademark are distinct signs to identify a
particular product. But considering their objective they
are different in protection of a product. Trademark
informs a consumer about its source of goods or
services and from which company it specifically
originates. GI specifically indicates and identify a
good originating from a particular place. Trademark
can be licensed but GI cannot be licensed to anybody.
Appellation Origins (AO) are also special GIs protect-
ed under the Lisbon Agreement. A name of the product
connected with a place in AO. In both AO and GI there
should be a qualitative link between the product and
place of origin. Sometimes CertificationMark can also
become GIs like in the case of Colombian Coffee. The
11 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Prop-
erty Rights, April 15, 1994. Marrakesh Agreement Establishing
the World Trade Organization, Annex 1C, art. 22–23, Legal
instruments—results of the Uruguay Round, 33 I.L.M. 1197
(1994) [hereinafter TRIPS Agreement], available at http://www.
wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips.pdf, last visited on
10.03.2014.
12 Information obtained from United Nations Economic and
Social Commission from Asia and the Pacific (UN ESCAP). See
http://www.unescap.org/pdd/publications/apdj_16_2/4_jain.pdf,
visited on 10.03.2014.13 Cafe de Costa Rica http://www.cafedecostarica.com/home.
html.14 S.C. Srivastava Protecting the Geographical Indication for
Darjeeling Tea https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/
casestudies_e/case16_e.htm.
Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306 295
123
Indian registration and trend is to be discussed in order
to understand the participation of different states and
its approaches in protecting its indications.
GI registrations in India
With the emergence of the Geographical Indication of
Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, India
propelled forward to safeguard the commercial status and
to maintain the quality of these goods, by establishing a
system of labeling the approved local goods made by the
original producers. State governments are taking initia-
tives to safeguard the interest of its people by getting their
GI registered, be it for the exquisite work done by the
people, a traditional practice over the generation or any
form of a traditional knowledge also. A total of 227 GIs
have been registered so far in India since 2004 and around
139 Indian applications and 126 foreign applications are
filed with the GI Registry in Chennai. The following
table15 provides for the initiatives taken by the respective
state governments in India (Table 1).
It can be clearly seen that the states from the
southern part of the country are more active with
regard to the registration of their GIs. Where Kar-
nataka has the maximum GI registered of number 41
followed by Andhra with 26, Tamilnadu with 24 and
Kerala with 21 GI registrations. States like Odisha (16)
and Uttar Pradesh (15) are also taking more initiatives
about their GI registration. States are taking efforts to
create more awareness among the people on the
benefits of GI protection. Unfortunately, states in the
Northern part of the country are less active about GI
registration, there are hardly any GI registrations from
the North Eastern States and hence, are lacking
adequate protection to traditional goods and products
originating from these parts of the country.
The lack of awareness amongst the people and
initiatives from the state govt. is jeopardizing some of
the traditional and highly economical products, For
e.g. ‘‘Chilika Curd’’ is one such dairy product prepared
with a traditional technique in cup shaped bamboo
basket using milk of Chilika buffalo by the ethnic
community of Chilika, Odisha.16 It is known and
Table 1 State-wise distribution of GI registration in India
S. no. Names of the states No. of GI registrations
1 Andhra1Telangana 23
2 Assam 03
3 Bihar 05
4 Chhattisgarh 03
5 Goa 01
6 Gujarat 09
7 Haryana 01
8 Himachal Pradesh 06
9 Jammu and Kashmir 03
10 Karnataka 41
11 Kerala 21
12 Madhya Pradesh 06
13 Maharashtra 10
14 Nagaland 01
15 Odisha 16
16 Punjab 01
17 Rajasthan 10
18 Tamil Nadu 24
19 Uttar Pradesh 15
20 West Bengal 09
Data Source GI Registry as of 1st January 2015
Bold indicates the top 5 states with highest GI registrations in
India
Karnataka 20%
AP 12%
Assam 1%
Bihar 2%
Chha�sgarh 1%
Goa 0%
Gujarat 4%
Haryana 0%
HP 3% J&K
1%
Kerala 10%
MP 3%
Maharashtra 5%
Nagaland 0%
Odisha 7%
Punjab 0%
Rahasthan 5%
Tamilnadu 11%
UP 7%
WB 4%
Fig. 1 Statewise contribution of granted GIs. Source GI
registry data up to 1st January 2015
15 Data obtained from Geographical Indications Registry,
Intellectual Property India Website. See http://ipindia.nic.in/
girindia/, visited on 14.03.2014.
16 Nanda DK, Singh R (2013) Chikila curd—a potential dairy
product for geographical indication registration. Indian JTradit
Knowl 12(4):707–713.
296 Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306
123
tested to have an exceptionally extended shelf life as
compared to the other curds. Experiments have shown
the presence of a diverse range of microbes which
helps in increasing the shelf life of this curd. Curd is
considered to be to the oldest Indian fermented dairy
product17 which is also used in the treatment of
diarrhea. The economics of India depends on Agri-
culture and its products and thus Chilika curd would
make a potential GI. Many such products in various
parts of the country are hidden and not explored well.
Proper awareness is the need of the hour in order to
explore this tremendous variety of products as poten-
tial GIs (Fig. 1).
India is a country rich in culture and heritage and
hence, with the increased demands in the handicraft
and textiles industry, it is important for the govern-
ment to preserve the skills, the exquisite work and the
revenue earning capacities of these artisans and skilled
people pertaining to a particular geographical area and
conferring to them a monopoly to manufacture the
same. India has its products registered in 5 categories
namely Agricultural, Handicraft, Manufactured, Food
stuff and Textiles. Following chart18 provides for the
percentage division of each category for the GIs that
have been registered (Fig. 2).
Despite India being an agrarian country, handicrafts
lead when it comes to GI registration with a maximum
of 66 % followed by agricultural GIs of 22 %. The
registration makes handicrafts and textiles industries
as one of the promising revenue generating industries
in the coming future after agriculture but when it
comes to extracting the economic benefits out of GI,
one need to acknowledge the fact that GI registration
or protection for that matter doesn’t sell itself. For a
product to sell and achieve a certain status in the
market proper branding and quality assessment has to
be done so that the consumer is able to find a product-
place link.19
Part-A registration procedure
An association of persons or producers as a group or
any authority should represent the interest of the
producers as a whole to file the GI application and they
must file an affidavit as to how they claim to be
represent the interest.20 The application must mention
the special characteristics of the product and its
production procedures or cultivation methods. A
statement of case is to be prepared and filed with the
application. The region map to be certified by the
authorities. The uniqueness of the product will decide
the qualification of registration. The application will
be examined by the GI Registry in Chennai andmay be
asked for more clarification and details and fulfil the
deficiencies. The consultative group with experts will
consider the statement of case and a proper represen-
tation from the applicant. The decision will be
communicated to the applicant and further appeal
can be filed to the IPAB by the applicant. The
application will be published and opposition to
registration will be accepted. It is the duty of the
applicant to file counterstatement and defend his case.
Once the application has been accepted by the
Registrar, registration will be done and the certificates
will be issued.
Handicra� 66%
Agricultural 22%
Manufactured 8%
Food stuff 1%
Tex�le 3%
Fig. 2 Sector-wise distribution of GI registration in India. Data
Source GI registry as of 1st January 2015
17 Sarkar S (2008) Innovations in Indian fermented milk
products—a review. Food Biotechnol 22(1):78–97.18 Data obtained from Geographical Indications Registry,
Intellectual Property India Website. See http://ipindia.nic.in/
girindia/, visited on 14.03.2014.19 Kasturi Das, Socio Economic Implications of Protecting
Geographical Indication in India http://wtocentre.iift.ac.in/
Papers/GI_Paper_CWS_August%2009_Revised.pdf, visited on
14.03.2014.
20 http://ipindia.nic.in/girindia/RegistrationProcess.htm, visit-
ed on 14.04.2015.
Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306 297
123
Who can be an applicant in Part-A and Part-B
registration
Section 11 of the GI Act provides that ‘‘any asso-
ciation of persons or producers representing the
interest of the producers of the goods’’ can be an
applicant for registration of a GI in Part-A. As a
community right or a group right, GI application is to
be submitted by the interested persons of producers
forming an association. The association can be in the
form of co-operative societies, societies registered
under Societies Registration Act of 1860 or asso-
ciation formed under any other lawful authority. But in
an analysis of the applications reveals that 41 % of the
applications are filed by State Government Depart-
ments and State agencies. 15 % applications are filed
by Central Government agencies further constitute a
total of 56 %. Co-operative societies and associations
filed only 39 % of the granted GIs so far. In some of
the cases Universities are the applicants, such as
Kerala Agricultural University filed an application for
‘‘Central Travancore Jaggery’’ and Anand Agricultur-
al University, Gujrat, filed for ‘‘Bhalia Wheat’’ from
Gujarat. These Universities and State agencies are
neither the producers nor association of producers.
The increasing number of such applications undermi-
nes the very spirit of the GI Act. In such cases the
original producers are going to be registered in the
Part-B and they can only become beneficiaries and
cannot own their own indication (Fig. 3).
Whereas, the main objective of this registration
should be to provide ownership to those who are the
prime producer of the product. Therefore, in every
application, the governmental agencies should play a
role of a mediator and facilitator in filing the
applications rather becoming the proprietors of GIs
themselves which doesn’t help benefit the real
producers. Moreover, in some cases, the GI propri-
etors have nothing to do with the geographical area
and the producers. For example the Leather Research
Institute in Chennai filed application for the famous GI
‘‘Kolhapuri Chappals’’ from Maharashtra, thousands
of kilometers away from the actual producers. Another
application for ‘‘Leather Toys of Indore’’ was filed by
the Development Commissioner (Ministry of Handi-
crafts), New Delhi. If the GI Registry promotes this
kind of application, finally, there won’t be any
connection between the Proprietor under Part-A
registration and beneficiaries under Part-B
registrations giving proprietor an edge over the
beneficiaries in terms of any monetary benefit arising
out of the product.
Part-B registration is provided in Section 7(3) of the
Act. It is noticed that in few GIs very less number of
beneficiaries are registered under Part-B. As per
information from the GI office a total number of
2073 Part-B applications have been filed so far against
few GIs registered. This number is a fractional one on
the background of lakhs of beneficiaries are available
on the product. If we consider a single item,
Sambalpur bandha saree and fabrics, there are more
than one lakh weavers are spread on the four districts
of Odisha. But recently the Odisha Government has
taken an initiation to register only 30 beneficiaries
under Part-B registration of this item. It is interesting
to note that not even a single Part-B application has
been filed against Darjeeling tea even though the
proprietor, the Tea Board has included 80 plantations
from the area for the authorized production of the
famous Darjeeling tea. Generally people are not
interested in registering themselves as beneficiaries
because no actual benefit is going to the weaver or
producer of these goods. Neither in the Act nor in any
policy for benefit sharing mechanism for the better-
ment of the producer community. Without actual
monetary or non-monetary benefits, people may not be
interested to register themselves as beneficiaries under
Part-B registration. The possible other reasons may be
summarized as follows:
C.Gov.Agencies 15%
State-Agencies
41%
Co-Op.&Socie�es
39%
Universi�es 2% Foreign
3%
Applicants-Registered GIs
Fig. 3 Category of applicants. Data Source GI registry as of 1st
January 2015
298 Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306
123
• There is no incentive for the beneficiaries to
register under Part-B.
• The procedures for registration are unknown to
beneficiaries.
• The proprietors have less interest in including
more and more on its fold.
• Lack of awareness is a common reason.
• Financial constraints for completing the procedure
is also an impediment.
• Lack of expertise in most of the States in India is
another barrier.
Possibly State Governments can take up the initial lead
in Part-B registrations with proper awareness pro-
grammes and administrative set up for benefit sharing
which may attract the beneficiaries.
Branding and marketing of GI products
GI products are facing origin linked quality issues as
their counterfeits are competing in the market reduc-
ing the reach of the original product to the public. Each
and every GI product have a specific market and if this
geographical-origin linked quality product can be
translated into market potential and sales, this will
immensely benefit the producers. Proper marketing
can reduce product failures and reduce the risk of
business and can generate sufficient income for each
group in the marketing ladder. Many of the products
have logo as well included in the applications
including the first GI registered in India, i.e. Darjeel-
ing tea. But in most of the GI products there is less
emphasis on branding and marketing of products
Other countries are actively promoting their prod-
ucts in the international market. But India has taken
little effort to market its famous products like
Darjeeling tea or Mysore silk within or outside the
country. Around 80 tea gardens have been recognized
by the Tea Board of India within the territory of
Darjeeling Tea. But none of the tea gardens are
registered under Part-B. Most importantly, Tea Board,
the proprietor of the GI has not taken any measures to
use its logo registered. In a preliminary market survey
revealed that many brands of Darjeeling tea is
available in the market, but none of them are using
the registered logo and there is no mechanism to check
whether all these brands are selling tea originating
from the geographical area thus fooling the public of
the product. Marketing a GI product requires more
efforts and it should contain the economic, social and
tourism aspects. Considering the cultural importance
associated with the products. Following steps can be
taken to improve the market strategy:
1. Create an organization at every State level to
manage GI system. Governance of the organiza-
tion should include all stakeholders including
governmental agencies that can help the producers
in advising in documentation, Part-A registration,
Part-B registration, marketing and benefit sharing
as a single agency of all GI products.
2. The Organization must have a single point of
collective consultation on rule making, process-
ing, decision making, product commercialization,
marketing and dispute resolution.
3. The core of all GI systems is its reputation. Hence,
the representatives of all members of the value
chain should be part of the organization. Collec-
tive initiatives can increase the benefits and
decrease the cost in marketing GI products.
4. The organization can formulate strategies for
production systems and marketing strategies after
consultations. Thus the organization can manage
and control production systems and quality control
on the product by technical assistance and inno-
vation in the processing and quality of the product.
5. Reduce the cost of individual producers like small
scale industries. This can be done by the District
Industrial Centers by initiating the marketing
strategies.
6. On the marketing side, increase the bargaining
power of local producers in the supply chain and
the value chain should be expanded with col-
laboration of Universities, marketing agencies
and exporters.
7. Formation of a consortium of all state level
organizations and GI proprietors at the federal
level will protect all GIs in India and abroad.
India has to come up with policy guidelines for the
proper implementation of the Act, failing which, India
may lose an opportunity in the world market to
showcase the Indian GIs. It is need of the hour to
propose rules and policies for orienting the GI system
towards economic, social and sustainability of eachGI.
The Indian products which are economically
important are many but some of them are mentioned
Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306 299
123
here. Darjeeling Tea is the first GI registered in India
with a huge potential at international market and the
Tea Board of India, who is the proprietor of the GI
filed many cases against countries like Japan for
registration of the Darjeeling logo mark, namely,
Darjeeling women ‘serving tea/coffee/coca/soft
drinks/fruit juice’ in the Japanese Patent Office
(JPO) on 29 November 1996.21 Similar cases were
filed against France, Russia and US. India also
opposed the registration of Darjeeling in other coun-
tries like Germany, Israel, Norway and Sri Lanka as
well. Other category of product include textiles &
handicrafts as a single item like:
Pochampally Ikat (Andhra Pradesh)(GI Regn No. 4)
Gadwal Sarees (Andhra Pradesh) (GI Regn No.
137)
Uppada Jamdhani Sarees (Andhra Pradesh) (GI
Regn No.122)
Banaras Brocades & Sarees (UP)(GI Regn No. 99)
Lucknow Chikan Craft (UP)(GI Regn No. 119)
Paithani Saree & Fabrics (Maharashtra)(GI Regn
No. 150 &153)
Khandua Sarees & Fabrics (Odisha)(GI Regn No.
136)
Pipli Applique Work (Odisha)(GI Regn No.
86&108)
Balaramapuram Sarees & Fine Cotton Fabrics
(Kerala)(GI Regn No. 152)
Kasaragod Sarees (Kerala)(GI Regn No. 170)
Kuthampully Sarees (Kerala)(GI Regn No. 179)
Chendamangalam Dhoties & Set Mundu (Ker-
ala)(GI Regn No. 225)
Sambalpuri Bandha Saree & Fabrics (Odisha) (GI
Regn No.208)
There are hundreds of other GI products having a
market potential and the above named ones are only
some of them.
Quality issues
Quality and uniqueness of the GI products makes them
unique and the reputation is mainly depend upon the
quality of the product. It is easy to market a quality
product according to the requirement of the con-
sumers. Output of the quality product depends on the
practices of manufacturing among all providers. A
common quality policy will help the farmers and other
producers to maintain a quality product from the same
region. The quality policy should link the product and
geographical origin, production and process methods.
The distinction between two products from the same
category also depends upon the specific quality linked
to a particular geographical region. The quality or
uniqueness of the product must be essentially or
exclusively originating from a particular geographical
area which includes natural and human factors such as
climate, craftsmanship of the producer, soil quality or
local skill of the people. The production and process
should take place within the demarcated area of the
region. For e.g., The Darjeeling tea must be produced
and processed in the demarcated area of map and the
same variety of tea produced in other part of the world
cannot be named after the registered name. It means
that the reputation of the product must depend upon
the geographical origin as these geographical condi-
tions cannot be replicated under any circumstances
and in any lab. The geographical conditions of a
particular place marks as a authentication for the
quality of the product as there is no counterfeit to these
conditions
Section 11(2)(a) of the Act provides that a state-
ment to the effect of quality of the product to be stated
in the application. Rule 32(1)(6) provides that the
manufacture of the goods must have specific quality
and reputation. Rule 32(1)(6) (c) stipulates that a
mechanism to be made to ensure standards, quality,
integrity and consistency or other characteristics
should be maintained by the producers. Usually an
inspection mechanism of all stakeholders is made in
each application. But how they are going to ensure the
quality of each product is not clear from the Act. If
thousands of producers are involved in a product then
quality maintenance of each product is a herculean
task. The traditional element is an additional character
for the purpose of GI registration. If the name does not
refer to the geographical area and unique character, it
cannot be registered as a GI. It means that quality of
the product have a serious bearing on the geographical
name and the product to be registered. The following
measures can be taken by different governments for
maintaining the quality and reputation of GI products:
21 S.C. Srivastava Protecting the Geographical Indication for
Darjeeling Tea https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/
casestudies_e/case16_e.htm.
300 Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306
123
1. A code of practice should be developed for each
GI product and an independent quality monitoring
body to be formed by the Central Government.
2. This independent agency will be responsible for
auditing and adherence to code of practice appli-
cable to each GI item.
3. To take action to improve the performance and
value of the products.
4. No product should be exported without quality
checking and certification according to the GI
application process.
Enforcement mechanism
The demand for quality products always benefits the
consumers all over the world.22 The GI protection
encourages fair competition between the producers
and help consumers, giving them information on the
specific characteristics of the products. Imitation and
duplication are serious problems to the original GIs in
the market. Section 39 and 40 of the GI Act provides
that in the case of infringement/false indication of a
GI, involving punishment of imprisonment for a term
which shall not be less than 6 months and may extend
to 3 years and with fine which shall not be less than 50
thousand which may extend up to 2 lakh rupees.
Unfortunately, apart from few cases like Pocham-
palli Ikat and Darjeeling tea, no other case has been
filed by Indian GI proprietors in the domestic market
so far. Pochampally Ikat is a registered GI in India by
‘‘Pochampally Handloom Weavers’ Coop. Society
Ltd’’, an autonomous society registered under the
Societies Registration Act 1860 and ‘‘Pochampally
Handloom Tie & Dye Silk Sarees Manufactures
Association’’ an association established under the
law, are the two bodies that are responsible for
production and marketing of Pochampally Ikat. In this
case the respondent produced and marketed a product
in the name of ‘‘GI HYCO POCHAMPALLI’’ to
derive mala-fide benefit accruing from the GI Pocham-
pally Ikat. The suit was settled outside the court and
withdrawn the name from the market.23
The Tea Board of India filed a case against ITC
Ltd., a hotel chain in India against using the name
‘‘Darjeeling’’ to a lounge in a Hotel, Sonar in
Kolkata.24 Tea Board filed the case under the Trade
Mark Act and GI Act. Tea Board is the registered
proprietor of the GI ‘‘Darjeeling Tea’’ and ‘‘Darjeeling
logo.’’ ITC argued that Darjeeling is protected under
the GI Act only to goods and not applicable to
services. The Calcutta High Court held that the name
‘‘Darjeeling’’ is not the exclusive right of the Tea
Board and concluded in favor of ITC hotel, Sonar. It is
interesting to note that all over the world, around 4
crore kg of Darjeeling Tea is sold. But all the
Darjeeling tea plantations together produce only 98
Lakh kg authentic Darjeeling tea per annum.25 It is
also an open truth that lot of Chinese ‘‘Banarasi Saree’’
is flooding in the market which undermines the famous
Indian Saree in the market for one-tenth of original
Indian price.26 Lack of coordinated effort to find out
the source of these counterfeited products and lack of a
GI enforcement mechanism enables the counterfeiters
to exploit the market.
Section 67 of the Act provides for civil remedies
include injunction as well as damages. The court can
also order for destruction of such infringing labels and
erasure. In the case of Scotch Whisky Association v.
Golden Bottling Limited,27 Delhi High Court granted a
permanent injunction in favor of the petitioner and
awarded damages of Rs. 500,000/- under Sec. 67 of the
GI Act and to pay a litigation cost of Rs. 310,000/-
.against the Indian infringer of a GI. In this case the
Indian company was selling its whisky in the name of
‘‘Red Scot’’. The court recognized that violation of
intellectual property rights are not in accordance with
the TRIPs agreement and domestic laws.
22 Protection of Geographical Indication, Designation of Origin
and Certificates of Specail Character for Agricultural and
Foodstuffs. http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/gi/broch_en.
pdf, visited on 18.01.2015.
23 Kumar Gautam & Nupur Bahl, Geographical Indication
Pochampally Ikat http://www.aiacaonline.org/pdf/policy-
briefs-geographical-indication-pochampally-ikat.pdf.24 Sumathi Chandrasekharan, Darjeeling Tea still Lounges in
Kolkata, says HC http://spicyip.com/2011/04/breaking-news-
darjeeling-still-lounges.html.25 Dr. P. Sree Sudha, Protection of Geographical Indications
(GIs) from Indian Perspective http://lawmantra.co.in/
protection-of-geographical-indications-gis-from-infringments-
an-indian-perspective/#_ftnref25.26 Indrajit Hazra, Is you Saree a Chinese Banaresi, Hindustan
Times http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/is-your-
saree-a-chinese-benarasi/article1-215657.aspx.27 129 (2006) DLT 423, 2006 (32) PTC 656 Del.
Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306 301
123
With the government support producers can en-
force, promote or defend28 their GI product in the
following manner:
• Financial support from the NGOs/state govern-
ment for the post registration branding of the GI
products of a particular area.
• Vigilant market inspections in order to keep a track
of any sort of infringement occurring.
• Usage of advance technology like Radio Frequen-
cy Identification to track down the product through
the supply chain of the product globally.
• Constant communication between the representa-
tives of the supply chain from each level in order to
bring about any improvement in order to uplift the
sale of the GI product.
• Regular quality assessment to ensure the tradition-
al aspects of manufacturing.
• Involvement of media, newspapers and internet for
the publicity of the GI product for better branding
of the product.
• Producer level mechanism for identification of
counterfeited products will help the enforcement
agencies to take action against violators.
• The GI Rules 2002 to be amended to include more
executive action against infringers with penal
provisions.
Benefit sharing
Benefit sharing refers to sharing of benefits or
revenues arising out of the promotion and develop-
ment out of an indigenous product arising from
textiles, handicraft, manufacturing, agriculture or
any other industry.
The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registra-
tion & Protection) Act, 1999 aims at providing the
registration and protection of geographical indications
related to goods in India. Section 2(e) of the act
defines ‘‘geographical indication,’’ in relation to
goods, as an ‘‘indication which identifies such goods
as agricultural goods, natural goods or manufactured
goods as originating, or manufactured in the territory
of a country, or a region or locality in that territory,
where a given quality, reputation or other character-
istic of such goods is essentially attributable to its
geographical origin, and in case of manufactured
goods where one of the activities of either the
production or of processing or preparation of the
goods concerned takes place in such territory, region
or locality, as the case may be.’’
At present there is no Benefit Sharing mechanism in
the GI Act due to which the beneficiaries are deprived
of the benefit arising post registration as it doesn’t
reach the grass root level. The need of the hour is an
emphasis on building up a strong benefit sharing
model so that the benefit reaches the producers or
beneficiaries. GI will serve as a tool for the social and
economic development only when there is an overall
improvement in the living structure of these producers
be it there life style, quality education or a better
infrastructure for work. Availability of the counterfeits
for most of the products due to an advance in the
technology becomes a problem for the producers,
since most of the people pursuing the profession over
generations are not educated enough due to their
involvement in the profession at a young age in order
to support their families.29
Jeevani: a model for benefit sharing
The benefit sharing mechanism followed in the
famous case of the drug ‘‘Jeevani’’ for has proved to
be one of the highly promising benefit sharing models
for a developing country like India. Jeevani is a drug
that is made out of a plant now known as Arogyap-
pacha. This plant and its fruit have been used as an
immunity booster by a tribe in Kerala known as Kani
tribe. Over several years it has been used as a means of
their traditional knowledge.
The entire story of Kani access and benefit sharing
model initiated in the year, 1987 where a team from
All India Coordinated Research Project on Ethan
biology reached there and observed this extra ordinary
property of this plant, fruit of which was consumed by
the Kanis who accompanied as guides while they were
on a tour to the forest. On investigating and with the
help of the tribal people they were able to extract and28 Kumar Gautam & Nupur Bahl, Geographical Indications of
India, Socio-Economic and Development Issues http://www.
aiacaonline.org/pdf/policy-briefs-geographical-indications-india-
socio-economic-development-issues.pdf, visited on 14.03.2014.
29 Mashelkar RA (2001) Intellectual property rights and the
Third World. Curr Sci 81(8):955.
302 Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306
123
prepare a drug which they named Jeevani. Later Arya
Vaidya Pharmacy Coimbatore (AVP) which is the
largest Ayurveda manufacturing company was given
the license to market and sell this drug. This drug went
on to be classified under health promoting group of
drugs.
Kani tribe being the prime beneficiaries availed the
benefit by commercialization of this drug. The first
agreement was signed between the Tropical Botanic
Garden and Research Institute (TBGRI) and AVP in
1996 which was valid for a period of 7 years with a
license fee of Rs. 1,000,000 and a royalty which was to
be paid at a rate of 2 % for 10 years. This agreement
was later improvised focusing on increment in the
benefit for the tribe. The new agreement was signed
between Kani, TBGRI and AVP in the year 2006
which is yet to be implemented. It accompanied a
license fee of Rs. 2,000,000 with a royalty of 4 % to be
paid for 10 years.30
The Kani tribe till date is being benefitted by this
whole mechanism of benefit sharing as the money of
royalty goes to a trust named as The Kerala Kani
Community (Samudaya) Welfare (Kshema) Trust
which was registered on 12 November 1997. This
way their traditional knowledge has helped them built
up a better standard of living and better quality life.
Prospective model for benefit sharing of GIs
The study suggests certain prospective measures that
can be taken in order to make sure the benefit reaches
to the grassroots level. These measures can be taken
for a developing nation like India to ensure that the
reputation and the quality of the GI registered product
remains intact and the benefit reaches to the benefi-
ciaries further uplifting their socio-economic status.
Followingmeasures can be taken into consideration
for implementing a strong benefit sharing model in
India.
1. Constitution of GI Management Committee:
• A Central GI Management Committee should
be constituted by the Central Government to
co-ordinate with State Management Commit-
tees and to constitute an expert technical
committee.
• The central GI Management Committee
should consist of heads of the State Commit-
tees, representatives DIPP, representatives of
GI Registry and representatives of beneficiary
Societies.
• Every state must have a GI Management
Committee to keep a track of the all the GIs
from that particular state
• Members of the state GI Management Com-
mittee may include representatives of the
cooperative societies or the associations work-
ing on various GIs of that region, representa-
tives from state government, and economic
experts.
• Technical experts should be included in the
Management Committee in order to conduct
an inspection of various corporations in an
orderly manner so as to insure the quality of
the products is not compromised.
• Cooperative societies should work at a block
or district level to manage the small and
medium clusters of the growers or the
weavers.
• The committee should be actively involved in
spreading the awareness regarding the emerg-
ing technologies related to the particular GI
amongst the common people so that they can
be equipped with the latest technologies.
• The committee should understand the demand
of the market and should be able to come up
with innovative marketing strategies (for E.g.
use of certified marks with indication of origin
in the case of Darjeeling tea) in order to
expand the access to the market, so that better
revenues can be obtained.
• This way the State Management Committee
can not only keep a check over the quality of
the products but also increase the market reach
of these products ultimately leading to the
increased profits.
2. Local Geographical Indication Fund
• Every GIManagement committee should have
a local GI fund.
• These local funds can be supported by private
organization by contribution.
30 See at http://piipa.org/files/PIIPA_World%20Bank%20Semi
nar%20Proceedings%20on%20The%20Role%20of%20IP%
20in%20Poverty%20Alleviation-Reduction.pdf, visited on
10.03.2014.
Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306 303
123
• These funds can be used to secure the income
of the workers (i.e. growers, producers, market
representatives etc.) irrespective of the market
fluctuations. This can be done by pre and post
funding the entire process of goods
production.
• These funds can be used in order to incorpo-
rate the upcoming technologies in the produc-
tion of the goods for an improved qualitative
and quantitative production.
3. Formation of Societies
• Societies should be registered under the Soci-
eties Registration Act,31 1860 in order to
manage horizontal clusters of GIs.
• Members of the societies should include
representatives from the horizontal and verti-
cal clusters and marketing expert who has the
required knowledge of the market and help
obtain and increase the target market.
• This would help in the efficient and smooth
functioning of the clusters as there would be
constant improvement in the production
methods.
• There should be a proper supply chain32 for
every product that arises out of a particular
Geographical area, with representatives at
each level of the vertical clusters i.e. from
growers/producers to the industrial
representatives.
• Weavers or producers should send their prod-
ucts to these societies and in return these
societies should provide them with the raw
material at lower prices.
• Further these societies should assess the
demands of the market and supply the prod-
ucts accordingly.
• The beneficiaries registered under the Part-B
registration under the GI Act to be included as
the workers of this society.
• All the products to be routed through the
society so that the quality, quantity authenti-
cation of the product can be made.
• Royalties collected can be used for the welfare
of the members.
• These societies must adapt to the infrastruc-
ture compatible with the environment for
sustainable development of the GI in future
(Fig. 4).
4. Monitory and Non-monitory Benefits to the
beneficiaries:
• Since a tribal community or any local com-
munities’ economy is dependent on their
traditional and indigenous knowledge, ex-
ploitation of it should be well paid off. For
this, a fair amount of license fee should be
charged depending on the economic potential
of the product obtained from the indigenous
communities.33
• Along, with the license fee, a fixed royalty
should be paid to the holders of of the
registered GIs; this royalty should not be
reduced even if the market doesn’t perform
well.
• A certain share should be paid to the benefi-
ciaries that arise out of the commercial sale of
the product.
• Every community holding or is involved in
any traditional practice (like weaving of
Sambalpuri saree) or is involved with the
production of an area specific product should
have a society or trust, through which proper
channelization of the monitory benefits can
take place.
• Non- monitory benefits34 should be given
which may include development in the infras-
tructure or social development in terms of
providing for better education and job oppor-
tunities to the local community.
• State likelihood programs should be built
which link the societies/communities with
various health and medical facilities.
• Food and livelihood security benefit securing
the basic living standards of the communities
should be provided.
31 Societies registration Act, 1860 http://www.mca.gov.in/
Ministry/actsbills/pdf/Societies_Registration_Act_1860.pdf.32 Cafe de Costa Rica http://www.cafedecostarica.com/home.
html.
33 As seen in the case of Kani Tribe, See http://www.cbd.int/
financial/bensharing/india-kanis.pdf, visited on 10.03.2014.34 Case Study Mali, The Contribution of Religious Entities to
Health in Sub Saharan Africa http://www.arhap.uct.ac.za/
downloads/ARHAPGates_ch7.pdf.
304 Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306
123
Conclusion
India is a country rich in its culture and heritage. It is
known for its exquisite handicraft and textile work.
Textiles and handicrafts industry has a major role in
strengthening India’s economy. Currently the number
of GIs registration is increasing but that alone is not
enough for the protection of the registered GI product.
The need of the hour is to focus on implementing and
strengthening existing framework on post GI measures
in order to increase the brand value of these products
and generate greater revenue that ultimately helps in
uplifting the socio economic status of the
beneficiaries.
Effective implementation of the GI tools includes
adherence to the quality standards by manufactures,
branding, promotion and vigilant market watch for any
infringements of the registered GI products.35 This
would include the involvement of Government, NGOs
and stakeholders of the registered GI products. The
proposed prospective model takes into account the
representation from each level in the supply chain. It
ensures funding to the beneficiaries irrespective of
market fluctuation and involves Public–Private Part-
nership (PPP) for its effective functioning. It would
ensure that GI registration is not restricted in papers
and serves to be beneficial to the grassroots level
beneficiaries. The implementation of post-registration
measures on each GI is necessary for proper benefit
sharing among the communities involved and their
socio economic development. Also its close linkage
with tradition suggests that it would help in conserving
and protecting the rights of the holders of indigenous
knowledge and skill in particular areas. Thus protect-
ing GI means that through the process we are
preserving ‘‘traditional cultural expressions’’ of artis-
tic heritage transferred by generations in the region.
The GI registration should generate premium brand
price and help in rural development of India. GIs can
be connected with tourism and add value to particular
regions like Darjeeling Tea, Nilgiri Hills are also
famous for tea plantations. State Governments should
thus take special interest in branding regions. Local
craftsmanship is affected by the intrusion of power
looms and competitiveness of the product in the
market. States should take stringent action under the
GI act against such imitations and should recover huge
damages which can be used for the development of the
Rep. of DIPP
Rep. of GI Registry
Rep.of Beneficiary
Societies
Heads of State Management Committees
Technical Experts
Central GI Management Committee
State GI Management Committee
Economist
Cooperative Societies
Rep. of Proprietors
Govt. Appointed Chair
Vertical Clusters
Horizontal Clusters
Local GI Fund
Royalty Govt. funding Beneficiary Industry
Fig. 4 The management
model
35 Kulkarni V, Konde V (2011) Pre- and post geographical
indications registration measures for handicrafts in India.
J Intellect Prop Rights 16:463–469.
Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306 305
123
community involved in the GI protection. Brand
equity development will give a positive effect in the
market and production of particular GI. The ‘‘free
riders’’ of the product will affect the quality and
reputation of the product. GI protection is a strong tool
in the hands of the rural community and proper benefit
sharing mechanism should be developed in India for
the development of rural people which constitute the
majority in India and legal protection should be given
to such models which sustain the GIs in India for the
coming centuries.
Acknowledgments The authors are thankful to the
Geographical Registry, Chennai for the data available in the
public domain and Mr. Prashant, Examiner for his support.
306 Decision (September 2015) 42(3):293–306
123