Seminar on World Intellectual Property Day-
The National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi commemorated World Intellectual Property Day by organizing a seminar to celebrate the effect, impact and need for IPR as well as to discuss the positive and negative connotation affiliated with the concept of IPR. The programme was initiated with the inaugural address, which was made by Assistant Professor of NUSRL, Santosh Malwa who spoke of the history of IPR tracing it down the ages, which he illustrated with numerous examples. The concept of IPR can be traced to natural law but given traces from civilized living.
The Key- Note Speaker was the Honorable Vice- Chancellor A.K Koul , in his speech he traced the development of TRIPS and India’s struggle in being part of the convention. India had exclusively isolated herself from the entire scenario due to political conflict with the idea of TRIPS and social circumstances. However when Rajiv Gandhi took over power in the political sphere then initially the debate of joining the Paris Convention came into being, although it was severely criticized by many. IPR was contended as an instrument to protect the interests of the scientific community and promote and safeguard technological advancement. On signing the Paris convention there arose an immediate need to change all related laws especially those pertaining to trademark, corporate and so on. TRIPS as part of the WTO played an imperative role in strengthening international law of IPR. Also the TRIPS Council enhanced protection not only for the state but also the individual whose right was being infringed. Formation of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) was to enable conflict resolution of those countries,that did not pay heed to Rights and Duties incorporated by TRIPS. India was taken twelve times to the DSB between the period of 1995-2005 as several of its law and provisions were in contravention to those of TRIPS protection. As such few amendments passed to the Act between the ten year period. Presently India is one of the very few countries that stands as to TRIPS plus As it is able to protect interest of scientist, those making progress in agricultural developments also. Initially it was argued that IPR in the pharmaceutical sphere would hamper the interest of the poor however in contrast instead promoted competition in the international market and the impact was reverse that what was estimated. Thus, in conclusion it could be comprehended that being a part of TRIPS was more beneficial to India.
Followed by this the I.G.CID Mr. Anurag Gupta spoke of how IPR may lead to complete monopolization of every aspect or dimension of life. He depicted that it would result in a world where free thought would be curbed. Also he emphasized the need of people especially in India to be well acquainted with their rights in order to protect their interests in this sphere.
The Technical Session was started by a presentation given by Assistant Professor Nimesh Das Guru opposing the need for IPR by challenging the popular arguments in favor of IPR. He contended that there were no substantial moral grounds for protection proposed by IPR and in today’s world the stringent IPR regime is hampering rather than fostering the growth and development of new ideas. Initially IPR was to protect the invention of people in contrast to nowadays where it is primarily governed by the Corporates defeating the protectoral purpose of the notion itself.
Dr. Syamala followed this by providing us with a glimpse on the requisite of IPR in this day and age. The 21st century has been flooded by the Corporate houses and MNC’s as a product of globalization. Hence initially there might have been no need for IPR , however that has changed since the modern trend several companies from all over seek to explore new markets. The new entrants strive hard to find opportunities in the form of unique products in order to gain access to the market. This is where pirating and illegal exploiting of ideas come into the picture. Further the inventor exerts painstaking efforts in the entire process, which is all rendered futile if IPR ceased to exist.
Dr. Sreenivasa Murthy Assistant Professor of NUSRL concluded the second session. He spoke about the recent controversies pertaining to patents. One such issue discussed was recent compulsory licensing case, whether patenting medicines transgress the basic human rights. Also he covered the interpretation of Patent Act and its role in maintaining a balance between social and private interest, after which the Technical Session came to an end.
In the latter Technical Session students from various colleges presented their papers on various issues pertaining to IPR. To conclude this session Mr. Mokhtar Ahmed Advocate on record Supreme Court commented on how the judiciary is working towards trademark infringement.
M.S Lakra the chief guest for the valedictory session gave a succinct account of how MSME is helping the entrepreneur to protect all IPR’s for the entrepreneurial interest. He illustrated few of the schemes keeping in mind all sections in the social construct.
The National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi commemorated World Intellectual Property Day by organizing a seminar to celebrate the effect, impact and need for IPR as well as to discuss the positive and negative connotation affiliated with the concept of IPR. The programme was initiated with the inaugural address, which was made by Assistant Professor of NUSRL, Santosh Malwa who spoke of the history of IPR tracing it down the ages, which he illustrated with numerous examples. The concept of IPR can be traced to natural law but given traces from civilized living.
The Key- Note Speaker was the Honorable Vice- Chancellor A.K Koul , in his speech he traced the development of TRIPS and India’s struggle in being part of the convention. India had exclusively isolated herself from the entire scenario due to political conflict with the idea of TRIPS and social circumstances. However when Rajiv Gandhi took over power in the political sphere then initially the debate of joining the Paris Convention came into being, although it was severely criticized by many. IPR was contended as an instrument to protect the interests of the scientific community and promote and safeguard technological advancement. On signing the Paris convention there arose an immediate need to change all related laws especially those pertaining to trademark, corporate and so on. TRIPS as part of the WTO played an imperative role in strengthening international law of IPR. Also the TRIPS Council enhanced protection not only for the state but also the individual whose right was being infringed. Formation of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) was to enable conflict resolution of those countries,that did not pay heed to Rights and Duties incorporated by TRIPS. India was taken twelve times to the DSB between the period of 1995-2005 as several of its law and provisions were in contravention to those of TRIPS protection. As such few amendments passed to the Act between the ten year period. Presently India is one of the very few countries that stands as to TRIPS plus As it is able to protect interest of scientist, those making progress in agricultural developments also. Initially it was argued that IPR in the pharmaceutical sphere would hamper the interest of the poor however in contrast instead promoted competition in the international market and the impact was reverse that what was estimated. Thus, in conclusion it could be comprehended that being a part of TRIPS was more beneficial to India.
Followed by this the I.G.CID Mr. Anurag Gupta spoke of how IPR may lead to complete monopolization of every aspect or dimension of life. He depicted that it would result in a world where free thought would be curbed. Also he emphasized the need of people especially in India to be well acquainted with their rights in order to protect their interests in this sphere.
The Technical Session was started by a presentation given by Assistant Professor Nimesh Das Guru opposing the need for IPR by challenging the popular arguments in favor of IPR. He contended that there were no substantial moral grounds for protection proposed by IPR and in today’s world the stringent IPR regime is hampering rather than fostering the growth and development of new ideas. Initially IPR was to protect the invention of people in contrast to nowadays where it is primarily governed by the Corporates defeating the protectoral purpose of the notion itself.
Dr. Syamala followed this by providing us with a glimpse on the requisite of IPR in this day and age. The 21st century has been flooded by the Corporate houses and MNC’s as a product of globalization. Hence initially there might have been no need for IPR , however that has changed since the modern trend several companies from all over seek to explore new markets. The new entrants strive hard to find opportunities in the form of unique products in order to gain access to the market. This is where pirating and illegal exploiting of ideas come into the picture. Further the inventor exerts painstaking efforts in the entire process, which is all rendered futile if IPR ceased to exist.
Dr. Sreenivasa Murthy Assistant Professor of NUSRL concluded the second session. He spoke about the recent controversies pertaining to patents. One such issue discussed was recent compulsory licensing case, whether patenting medicines transgress the basic human rights. Also he covered the interpretation of Patent Act and its role in maintaining a balance between social and private interest, after which the Technical Session came to an end.
In the latter Technical Session students from various colleges presented their papers on various issues pertaining to IPR. To conclude this session Mr. Mokhtar Ahmed Advocate on record Supreme Court commented on how the judiciary is working towards trademark infringement.
M.S Lakra the chief guest for the valedictory session gave a succinct account of how MSME is helping the entrepreneur to protect all IPR’s for the entrepreneurial interest. He illustrated few of the schemes keeping in mind all sections in the social construct.