Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5928
This Paper seeks to review the articles published in the Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (hereinafter, JIPR) in the third decade of the twenty-first century from Volume 25 (1) (2020) to Volume 28 (5) (2023). In this decade, five new series on different themes of intellectual property rights (hereinafter, IPRs) were started by JIPR which include ‗IP & Taxation Policy‘, ‗Theoretical Underpinnings of IP Laws‘, ‗Standard Essential Patents‘, ‗IP Laws Declared by the Supreme Court‘, and ‗JIPR in IPR Research‘. In this decade, a total of 139 articles were published covering different areas of IPRs. The articles published in this decade constitute 14.52 (point five two) percent of the total articles published in JIPR till Volume 28 (5) (2023). In terms of percentage of the articles published in each decade, this decade with 14.52 (point five two) percent comes fourth after the decades 2010–2014 with 26.22 percent, 2005–2009 with 22.98 percent, and 2015–2019 with 15.04 percent. This is the sixth paper on the theme ‗JIPR in IPR Research‘ and proceeds with the same argument and method as developed and adopted in the First Paper1 and the sequel papers published under the theme.
{"title":"Contribution of Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR) in IPR Research: A View through the Articles Published in the Third Decade of Twenty-First Century (2020–2023) — VI","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5928","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5928","url":null,"abstract":"This Paper seeks to review the articles published in the Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (hereinafter, JIPR) in the third decade of the twenty-first century from Volume 25 (1) (2020) to Volume 28 (5) (2023). In this decade, five new series on different themes of intellectual property rights (hereinafter, IPRs) were started by JIPR which include ‗IP & Taxation Policy‘, ‗Theoretical Underpinnings of IP Laws‘, ‗Standard Essential Patents‘, ‗IP Laws Declared by the Supreme Court‘, and ‗JIPR in IPR Research‘. In this decade, a total of 139 articles were published covering different areas of IPRs. The articles published in this decade constitute 14.52 (point five two) percent of the total articles published in JIPR till Volume 28 (5) (2023). In terms of percentage of the articles published in each decade, this decade with 14.52 (point five two) percent comes fourth after the decades 2010–2014 with 26.22 percent, 2005–2009 with 22.98 percent, and 2015–2019 with 15.04 percent. This is the sixth paper on the theme ‗JIPR in IPR Research‘ and proceeds with the same argument and method as developed and adopted in the First Paper1 and the sequel papers published under the theme.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"37 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135566325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5900
The Parliament of India amends and makes and unmakes the law. The Supreme Court of India (hereinafter, the Supreme Court), does not merely decide a lis in personam but also declares the law on a question that it decides to answer. The law so declared by the Supreme Court becomes binding in rem by virtue of Article 141 of the Constitution of India (hereinafter, the Constitution). The Supreme Court, by virtue of Article 141 of the Constitution, declares the law and makes and unmakes the law while deciding cases through the process of judicial review and interpretation-construction. In the second and third decades of twenty-first century, the Supreme Court has, on an average, decided 1.86 (point eight six) cases in a year, or one trademark case in 196.07 (point zero seven) days, or one case in .53 (point five three) year. A review of the reported decisions on the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter, the Trade Marks Act) reveals that the Supreme Court has: (i) delivered a total of 27 decisions including a few decisions in which the Trade Marks Act finds only a reference; (ii) declared trademark law and iron out the creases of law by interpreting the text of the statutes; (iii) not declared anything on the constitutionality of the trademark statutes as no such question of constitutionality was brought before it; (iv) delivered all the decisions unanimously as no dissenting or concurring judgment is reported; (v) decided maximum number of cases by Division Bench (21 cases) constituting 77.77 (point seven seven) percent, followed by Full Bench (5 cases) constituting 18.51 (point five one) percent, and 1 by Single Bench constituting 3.7 (point seven) percent; and (vi) decided only one trademark case by a Single Bench which is reported from the third decade of this century. A total of 39 judges were on the bench deciding the 27 trademark cases. It has been observed that no sitting Chief Justice of India was on the bench in any of the trademark cases. Paper proceeds with the same argument and method as developed and adopted in the papers covering patent law, copyright law, design law and trademark law in twentieth and twenty-first centuries published under the theme„IP Laws Declared by the Supreme Court). This Paper seeks to cull out the principles of trademark law declared by the Supreme Court in the second and third decades of the twenty-first century.
{"title":"Trademark Law Declared by the Supreme Court of India in Twenty-First Century (2010–2023)–– II","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5900","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5900","url":null,"abstract":"The Parliament of India amends and makes and unmakes the law. The Supreme Court of India (hereinafter, the Supreme Court), does not merely decide a lis in personam but also declares the law on a question that it decides to answer. The law so declared by the Supreme Court becomes binding in rem by virtue of Article 141 of the Constitution of India (hereinafter, the Constitution). The Supreme Court, by virtue of Article 141 of the Constitution, declares the law and makes and unmakes the law while deciding cases through the process of judicial review and interpretation-construction. In the second and third decades of twenty-first century, the Supreme Court has, on an average, decided 1.86 (point eight six) cases in a year, or one trademark case in 196.07 (point zero seven) days, or one case in .53 (point five three) year. A review of the reported decisions on the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (hereinafter, the Trade Marks Act) reveals that the Supreme Court has: (i) delivered a total of 27 decisions including a few decisions in which the Trade Marks Act finds only a reference; (ii) declared trademark law and iron out the creases of law by interpreting the text of the statutes; (iii) not declared anything on the constitutionality of the trademark statutes as no such question of constitutionality was brought before it; (iv) delivered all the decisions unanimously as no dissenting or concurring judgment is reported; (v) decided maximum number of cases by Division Bench (21 cases) constituting 77.77 (point seven seven) percent, followed by Full Bench (5 cases) constituting 18.51 (point five one) percent, and 1 by Single Bench constituting 3.7 (point seven) percent; and (vi) decided only one trademark case by a Single Bench which is reported from the third decade of this century. A total of 39 judges were on the bench deciding the 27 trademark cases. It has been observed that no sitting Chief Justice of India was on the bench in any of the trademark cases. Paper proceeds with the same argument and method as developed and adopted in the papers covering patent law, copyright law, design law and trademark law in twentieth and twenty-first centuries published under the theme„IP Laws Declared by the Supreme Court). This Paper seeks to cull out the principles of trademark law declared by the Supreme Court in the second and third decades of the twenty-first century.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"44 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135566522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.56042/jipr.v28i6.1518
The Law of Copyright is capable of facilitating creativity as well as hindering it. Art has progressed over the years and the past few decades witnessed the expression of art in several forms. The market for contemporary art is thriving and this raises a very important question: Should the ambit of copyright law be extended or modified to protect newer forms of art work? As the art movement across the world is undergoing some dynamic changes, it becomes necessary to study the art protection laws across jurisdictions to hatch a regulatory framework, especially for contemporary artworks like appropriation art which are two fields of expression that are trickier than others. This article aims to provide a comprehensive deep-dive into the sufficiency of law and the changes that need to be made to both secure economic and moral rights of the creator and incentivize new art, but also to not thwart away the existing regime to accommodate trivial ideas, drifted from expression.
{"title":"The Interplay between Contemporary Art and Copyright Law","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.1518","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.1518","url":null,"abstract":"The Law of Copyright is capable of facilitating creativity as well as hindering it. Art has progressed over the years and the past few decades witnessed the expression of art in several forms. The market for contemporary art is thriving and this raises a very important question: Should the ambit of copyright law be extended or modified to protect newer forms of art work? As the art movement across the world is undergoing some dynamic changes, it becomes necessary to study the art protection laws across jurisdictions to hatch a regulatory framework, especially for contemporary artworks like appropriation art which are two fields of expression that are trickier than others. This article aims to provide a comprehensive deep-dive into the sufficiency of law and the changes that need to be made to both secure economic and moral rights of the creator and incentivize new art, but also to not thwart away the existing regime to accommodate trivial ideas, drifted from expression.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"38 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135566323","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.56042/jipr.v28i6.1917
This article considers the protection of authorship in scientific papers. We analysed the role of authorship in the light ofthe current legal and ethical framework. We have discovered that standard rules of copyright law refer to the relationshipbetween the 'author' and the result of their creative activity. 'Authors' are not originators of a discovery, idea, procedure,theory, method or other immaterial contribution to research unless they have fixed the intellectual work in any tangiblemedium of expression. At times, it is challenging to identify scientific products, which are an essential contribution toresearch projects, which means that copyright law might not protect them. These two contexts, modern science andcopyright law, allow us to conclude that ethical codes for researchers properly define the right to be an author of a scientificpaper. The study aims to clarify that (1) international human rights guarantee the protection of the author's moral rights ofthe original contribution to the research project, (2) this obligation is not implemented correctly by national legislators, (3)national legislators' task is to create an adequate legal protection system for original contributions to research scienceaccording to the example of the solutions adopted by the German legislator.
{"title":"Ethics and IPR - Much Needed Legal Solutions for Tomorrow","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.1917","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.1917","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the protection of authorship in scientific papers. We analysed the role of authorship in the light ofthe current legal and ethical framework. We have discovered that standard rules of copyright law refer to the relationshipbetween the 'author' and the result of their creative activity. 'Authors' are not originators of a discovery, idea, procedure,theory, method or other immaterial contribution to research unless they have fixed the intellectual work in any tangiblemedium of expression. At times, it is challenging to identify scientific products, which are an essential contribution toresearch projects, which means that copyright law might not protect them. These two contexts, modern science andcopyright law, allow us to conclude that ethical codes for researchers properly define the right to be an author of a scientificpaper. The study aims to clarify that (1) international human rights guarantee the protection of the author's moral rights ofthe original contribution to the research project, (2) this obligation is not implemented correctly by national legislators, (3)national legislators' task is to create an adequate legal protection system for original contributions to research scienceaccording to the example of the solutions adopted by the German legislator.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"37 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135566324","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article attempts to provide an overview of the pre-grant opposition against a patent application no 1219/DEL/2004dated 30-06-2004 filed by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). The Pre-Grant Opposition was filed byM/s Hindustan Lever Limited by way of Representation u/s 25 (1) of Indian Patents Act, 1970. This resulted in theapplication being denied to CSIR, by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Design, Indian Patent Office (IPO), New Delhi.Subsequently, CSIR went on to file an appeal against the Order of Assistant Controller of Patents & Design at IntellectualProperty Appellate Board (IPAB), Chennai which ultimately resulted in the impingement of the decision of the AssistantController of Patents and Designs, IPO, New Delhi by the IPAB on 20-06-2013 and a direction to grant the Patent to CSIRwas passed by IPAB, Chennai, and accordingly the Patent was granted to CSIR on 27-08-2015. This study provides anoverview of the case, including comprehensive information on the Indian patent filing process, examination procedures, pregrantopposition, and strategies to address opposition. Furthermore, it presents a comparative analysis of similar cases,highlighting key legal interpretations, and offers suggestions for enhancing institutional IP due diligence processes andstrengthening IP safeguards.
本文试图概述对科学与工业研究委员会(CSIR)提交的专利申请1219/DEL/2004(日期为2004年6月30日)的授权前异议。授权前异议由m /s Hindustan Lever Limited以1970年《印度专利法》第25(1)条的方式提出。这导致CSIR的申请被专利助理总监拒绝。印度专利局(IPO)，新德里。随后，CSIR继续对专利助理总监的命令提起上诉。金奈知识产权上诉委员会(IPAB)的设计最终导致IPAB于2013年6月20日对新德里IPO专利和设计助理控制器的决定产生影响，并由金奈IPAB通过了向CSIR授予专利的指示，因此该专利于2015年8月27日授予CSIR。本研究概述了该案例，包括有关印度专利申请程序、审查程序、孕期异议和应对异议策略的全面信息。此外，本文还对类似案例进行了比较分析，强调了关键的法律解释，并为加强机构知识产权尽职调查程序和加强知识产权保障提供了建议。
{"title":"Pre-Grant Opposition: CSIR v Ms Hindustan Lever Limited","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.827","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.827","url":null,"abstract":"The article attempts to provide an overview of the pre-grant opposition against a patent application no 1219/DEL/2004dated 30-06-2004 filed by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). The Pre-Grant Opposition was filed byM/s Hindustan Lever Limited by way of Representation u/s 25 (1) of Indian Patents Act, 1970. This resulted in theapplication being denied to CSIR, by the Assistant Controller of Patents & Design, Indian Patent Office (IPO), New Delhi.Subsequently, CSIR went on to file an appeal against the Order of Assistant Controller of Patents & Design at IntellectualProperty Appellate Board (IPAB), Chennai which ultimately resulted in the impingement of the decision of the AssistantController of Patents and Designs, IPO, New Delhi by the IPAB on 20-06-2013 and a direction to grant the Patent to CSIRwas passed by IPAB, Chennai, and accordingly the Patent was granted to CSIR on 27-08-2015. This study provides anoverview of the case, including comprehensive information on the Indian patent filing process, examination procedures, pregrantopposition, and strategies to address opposition. Furthermore, it presents a comparative analysis of similar cases,highlighting key legal interpretations, and offers suggestions for enhancing institutional IP due diligence processes andstrengthening IP safeguards.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135566328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Intellectual property issues are covered by international contracts and need private enforcement, or steps taken in court byprivate parties. These legal actions are governed by the legislation of the nation where the lawsuit is filed and are based on theterritoriality concept. A thriving private international law may contribute to the system in ways that go well beyond resolvingindividual conflicts because it acknowledges the expressive and formative power of judicial decision-making. National courts hadplayed limited part in the development of global intellectual property law under the conventional framework controlling mattersrelating to intellectual property. The lack of willingness on the part of courts to consider claims involving external intellectualproperty rights resulted in a pattern of domestic litigation of foreign conflicts, typically based on a right similar to that given by themunicipal law system in effect at the time. When it came to intellectual property rights, litigation only involved the domestic rightsdiscussed in municipal law. It did, however, get national courts thinking about situations with global implications, which led to theincorporation of private international law into IP protections. In an effort to better understand the Indian perspective on foreignintellectual property concerns, this study examines the laws that govern IPR violation, validity, ownership, and the difficulties ofimplementing abroad court judgments.
{"title":"Decussating Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and Private International Law in India","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.762","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.762","url":null,"abstract":"Intellectual property issues are covered by international contracts and need private enforcement, or steps taken in court byprivate parties. These legal actions are governed by the legislation of the nation where the lawsuit is filed and are based on theterritoriality concept. A thriving private international law may contribute to the system in ways that go well beyond resolvingindividual conflicts because it acknowledges the expressive and formative power of judicial decision-making. National courts hadplayed limited part in the development of global intellectual property law under the conventional framework controlling mattersrelating to intellectual property. The lack of willingness on the part of courts to consider claims involving external intellectualproperty rights resulted in a pattern of domestic litigation of foreign conflicts, typically based on a right similar to that given by themunicipal law system in effect at the time. When it came to intellectual property rights, litigation only involved the domestic rightsdiscussed in municipal law. It did, however, get national courts thinking about situations with global implications, which led to theincorporation of private international law into IP protections. In an effort to better understand the Indian perspective on foreignintellectual property concerns, this study examines the laws that govern IPR violation, validity, ownership, and the difficulties ofimplementing abroad court judgments.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135566523","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5776
Within the conventional economic framework, the defence of traditional knowledge as a form of Intellectual Propertyoften lacks a robust foundation. While human rights theories offer a more compelling justification, the economic rationalefor protecting traditional knowledge remains elusive at the international stage. This ambiguity has even prompted someacademics to challenge the relevance and practicality of safeguarding traditional knowledge through the framework ofintellectual property rights. This paper seeks to present an economic argument in favour of traditional knowledge protection,drawing from the principles of ‘Identity Economics’. Interestingly, identity economics provides a rationale for both thewidely accepted positive protection and the more debated negative protection of traditional knowledge. Furthermore, thepaper delves into justifying additional policy measures to enhance the protection of traditional knowledge.
{"title":"Economic Justification of Traditional knowledge with Insights from Identity Economics","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5776","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.5776","url":null,"abstract":"Within the conventional economic framework, the defence of traditional knowledge as a form of Intellectual Propertyoften lacks a robust foundation. While human rights theories offer a more compelling justification, the economic rationalefor protecting traditional knowledge remains elusive at the international stage. This ambiguity has even prompted someacademics to challenge the relevance and practicality of safeguarding traditional knowledge through the framework ofintellectual property rights. This paper seeks to present an economic argument in favour of traditional knowledge protection,drawing from the principles of ‘Identity Economics’. Interestingly, identity economics provides a rationale for both thewidely accepted positive protection and the more debated negative protection of traditional knowledge. Furthermore, thepaper delves into justifying additional policy measures to enhance the protection of traditional knowledge.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135566326","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.56042/jipr.v28i6.4043
The present study addresses a knowledge gap by examining global and domestic patent trends in the agriculture sector, with a focus on leading agriculture patenting countries like India, China, and North America. The analysis, spanning from 1990 to 2022 and covering 37 leading agricultural countries, reveals a significant increase in global patent filings across diverse categories, even in the post-pandemic era. Southeast Asia, led by China, emerges as the primary region for agricultural patents globally, followed by North America. China exhibits substantial growth and becomes the leading country in patent filings, while the USA experiences a decline in 2022. India's representation in agricultural patents consistently declines, and sector-specific analysis underscores the importance of chemical compounds and fertilizers, animal husbandry, machinery and implements, horticulture, and new plants in patent filings. The slow progress in agricultural patenting in India highlights the need for a greater focus on technological advancements, research and development investment, protection of agricultural innovations, reduced reliance on imported technology and innovations, and enhanced collaboration. To address these challenges, it is crucial to prioritize agricultural research and development, incentivize innovation through intellectual property protection, and increase investment in research and development, and foster collaboration between the public and private sectors.
{"title":"Trends and Patterns of Patent in Agriculture and Allied Sector","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i6.4043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i6.4043","url":null,"abstract":"The present study addresses a knowledge gap by examining global and domestic patent trends in the agriculture sector, with a focus on leading agriculture patenting countries like India, China, and North America. The analysis, spanning from 1990 to 2022 and covering 37 leading agricultural countries, reveals a significant increase in global patent filings across diverse categories, even in the post-pandemic era. Southeast Asia, led by China, emerges as the primary region for agricultural patents globally, followed by North America. China exhibits substantial growth and becomes the leading country in patent filings, while the USA experiences a decline in 2022. India's representation in agricultural patents consistently declines, and sector-specific analysis underscores the importance of chemical compounds and fertilizers, animal husbandry, machinery and implements, horticulture, and new plants in patent filings. The slow progress in agricultural patenting in India highlights the need for a greater focus on technological advancements, research and development investment, protection of agricultural innovations, reduced reliance on imported technology and innovations, and enhanced collaboration. To address these challenges, it is crucial to prioritize agricultural research and development, incentivize innovation through intellectual property protection, and increase investment in research and development, and foster collaboration between the public and private sectors.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135566530","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Contribution of Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (JIPR) in IPR Research: A View through the Articles Published in the Last Decade of Twentieth-Century (1996–1999) — I","authors":"","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i1.538","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i1.538","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70706735","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.56042/jipr.v28i3.1616
Anindya Roy Chowdhury, Purushotham Hanumanthu
The National Education Policy 2020 is a fantastic move by the Indian government to transform the educational system. The aim to make higher education more multidisciplinary and comprehensive like making curriculum more adaptable, developing e-courses in regional languages, and introducing skill-development course are appreciated. However, the policy does not specifically mention intellectual property, innovation, and entrepreneurship—key elements of transferring higher education institution into a research and innovation focussed institution, which is the need of the hour. The current study looked at the role of intellectual property, research, innovation, and entrepreneurship and made some recommendations on how to integrate them into academic curricula so that NEP's goals can be met fully and faster.
{"title":"Analysing India’s National Education Policy from the Angle of Research, IP, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship","authors":"Anindya Roy Chowdhury, Purushotham Hanumanthu","doi":"10.56042/jipr.v28i3.1616","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v28i3.1616","url":null,"abstract":"The National Education Policy 2020 is a fantastic move by the Indian government to transform the educational system. The aim to make higher education more multidisciplinary and comprehensive like making curriculum more adaptable, developing e-courses in regional languages, and introducing skill-development course are appreciated. However, the policy does not specifically mention intellectual property, innovation, and entrepreneurship—key elements of transferring higher education institution into a research and innovation focussed institution, which is the need of the hour. The current study looked at the role of intellectual property, research, innovation, and entrepreneurship and made some recommendations on how to integrate them into academic curricula so that NEP's goals can be met fully and faster.","PeriodicalId":39166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Property Rights","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70707337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：