US and India to join hands on the grounds of Intellectual Property Rights

Dec 2022

After US President Donald Trump’s visit in India from February 24 to 25th February, India and the US have opted for an agreement relating to intellectual property rights or IPR. As a result of this, the cabinet sanctioned MoU with the US pertaining to IPRs, relevant to information and broadcasting as has been stated by Minister Prakash Javadekar.

Officials are of the opinion that the agreement is a knowledge-sharing one that will enhance the functioning of the IPR system between the two parties involved in the agreement. The pack has been triggered due to the fact that India has dropped to 40th position in US Chamber’s International IP Index. In addition to this, the country is still in the US’s priority list. Due to this, there are some trade barriers with US companies on account of IP laws of other countries.

Putting beside the trade barriers, it requires the smooth and active cooperation of the US and India, which can improve the flow of IPR systems. Similar MoU has also been conducted with other countries. However, considering India and the US, the agreement is important as has been stated by a senior official. However, the agreement took place after the Department of Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade decided to review IPR laws.

Another official stated that the MoU is a type of learning exercise. The time of the agreement is decided across the whole IPR program that includes the copyrights and patent issues without being specific to any of the sectors. The official further added that it does not require any law. Along with this, it will have training sessions in which concerned officials have to travel to each of the countries to study the condition of its IPR system.

The MoU has no connection with a legal commitment by the country as has been stated by experts, India needs to be careful as the US is trying to push India to withdraw Section 3 (d) of Indian Patents Act. The patent is relating to items that have little to no difference compared to its older version. It is also obstructed in case of compulsory license that involves the manufactured copies of the drugs that will help address problems of emergency. This is done as per has been stated in the trade rules.

Last year, the US was of the opinion that India does not have an effective system that can look after the unfair practices of commercial items. Also, it cannot protect any unauthorized disclosure or data or generate data as a means of better marketing strategies for the agricultural and pharma based items.

Trending Blogs

Breaking News: Toyota Loses Trademark Battle over Prius at Indian Supreme Court

The plaintiff, in this case, is Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha and they seek to prevent the defendant, a spare parts supplier by the name M/S Prius Auto Industries Limited, from the usage of the trademarks- “Toyota”, “Innova”, and “Prius”. According to the finding of the court, two of the three trademarks mentioned, namely Toyota and […]

Music Law 101: What Does Copyright Law Protect?

Music Law 101 is all about protecting different musical works along with sound recordings to its original creator. As copyright can be a confusing part, it is better to know what all it protects so that it becomes easy. It is known that each piece of recording has two types of copyrights. First, it protects […]

Protection Folklores India Intellectual Property Rights

India is a land of diversity when it comes to folk and ethnic culture with hundreds of ethnic, linguistic and religious groups with diverse origins and lifestyles that, over time, intermingled in part and remained untouched in parts over centuries. Perception about folklore differs in India, mainly associated with tribals and simple rural people, rather […]

Why Are Drug Patents Important Everything You Need to Know?

Before you ask for the importance of patent in the Pharmaceutical world, let us first learn about Patents. After a song is recorder, the song is approached by various music production companies who would like to rent the copyright of the song for marketing purpose and earn profit from it. And patent is almost similar, […]

PTAB Should Not Disapprove Claims on the Grounds of Indefiniteness in IPR

Federal Circuit has disapproved of arguments of claims that show any reason other than anticipation pertaining to party procedures. Federal Circuit has rejected the challenge shown by Samsung Electronics America, Inc. The company challenged that PTAB can disapprove claims that are considered indefinite in IPR. Samsung has been charged on the grounds of infringing U.S. […]

Lack of Music Publishing Knowledge Robbing Indian Artists of their Rights

In India there has been a lack of knowledge regarding publishing music. It can be said that a large part of publishing an art for is still unexplored. It is not about the common people but the artists and the music companies are oblivious towards it. At the initial stage due to lack of knowledge […]

US and India to join hands on the grounds of Intellectual Property Rights

Trademarking surnames

Having difficult surnames may be challenging to explain others and also when you want to register the name as trademark. As per the trademark and merchandise act of 1958, it is stated that a mark can be refused if one choose a personal name or surname. Though, there is no such clear specification in the […]

Liability Of Internet Service Providers In Digital Environment

Isp Liability In India: Internet Service Providers (ISPs) can be liable for the content on the sites they host. They can be liable even if they were merely passively hosting the site, unless they take down the objectionable material when they receive notice of it. The Copyright Act and the Information Technology Act includes the […]

Delhi HC’s Ex Parte Order in Coca-Cola Company & Anr vs Glacier Water Industries Ltd.

This is a case of a Delhi High court ex parte proceeding concerning trademark dilution. The plaintiff filed a suit seeking a permanent injunction, damages and to restrain them from passing off their products as that of the plaintiff. The plaintiff also pleaded the court to restrain the defendants from using the mark ‘KINLEY’ and […]