India Makes Traditional Knowledge Database Available to Examiners
03 October 2012
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced that the Government of India has granted the agency’s patent examiners access to a new digital database containing a compilation of traditional Indian knowledge. Access to the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) is important for both India and the United States to prevent misappropriation of traditional knowledge.
“The USPTO has long been concerned about attempts to patent traditional knowledge, not only because it may result in an incorrectly granted patent, but also because it removes knowledge from the public domain,” said Sharon Barner, Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the USPTO.
This database will be an important addition to the growing array of search tools on traditional knowledge from around the world that is already available to USPTO examiners, a USPTO press release said. USPTO examiners use these tools to help prevent the patenting, and thereby misappropriation, of existing traditional knowledge.
“We have urged countries to create, and make available to examiners around the world, digital libraries of their traditional knowledge to prevent erroneous patent grants,” Barner said. “India’s TKDL is just such a library, and we are pleased that our examiners now have access to it.”
The new database, developed jointly by India’s Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR) and the Department of Ayurveda, Yoga & Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy (AYUSH), includes more than 200,000 traditional medicine formulations on Ayurveda, Unani and Siddha comprising 30 million pages. The TKDL contains text-searchable English-language translations of these sources, permitting USPTO examiners to search thousands of years of India’s accumulated traditional knowledge. The TKDL also contains translations into French, German, Japanese and Spanish, from these sources, originally written in Hindi, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian and Urdu.
At the same time, India’s Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) and the USPTO have announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding on comprehensive bilateral cooperation on intellectual property rights protection and enforcement. Under the terms of the MOU, the USPTO and DIPP will cooperate on a range of IPR issues, focusing on capacity building, human resource development, and raising public awareness of the importance of IPR.
“India has taken great strides towards the modernization of its Intellectual Property Organization over the last decade, including the legislative framework, physical infrastructure, human resource development, awareness creation and even enforcement,” said DIPP secretary Ajay Shankar. “Our vision is to transform our IP system into a world class organization by adopting transparent, automated and userfriendly procedures. The MOU that we are signing today would help strengthen our capacity to achieve this objective.”
Under the MOU, the USPTO and the DIPP also signed an accompanying Action Plan to carry out specific activities under the MOU, including exposure to patent examination practices, exchanges of information on patent databases and patent manuals, IPR awareness programs, exchange of information on traditional knowledge and genetic resources, exchanges of best practices, and other matters.
Banarsi Saris Earn GI
A million weavers rejoiced in late 2009 when India’s Registrar of Geographical Indications issued a geographical indication ruling that only saris produced in Varanasi, Azamgarh, Chandauli, Jaunpur, Mirzapur and Sant Ravi Dass Nagar (Bhadohi) will be considered Banarsi saris, according to RK Dewan & Co’s January online intellectual property newsletter.
The certificate covers silk brocades like Amru, textile goods not covered elsewhere such as bed and table covers, silk saris and dress materials such as Jamdani, Jangla, Jamawar Tanchoi, Tissue, cut work, butidar and silk embroidery saris.
Court Scolds Microsoft for Forum Selection
A Delhi High Court judge admonished Microsoft for suing four alleged users of pirated software in Delhi despite the fact that none of the four have an office in Delhi – and that Microsoft has offices in cities where the defendants are located. The admonishment was reported in Rouse’s India IP Express newsletter.
The suits were filed on the basis of the Copyright Act (Section 62 (2)) that allows the Plaintiff, Microsoft, to bring the action at the place of their business, Rouse reported.
The Judge, while criticising this practice of forum shopping, observed that multinational companies (using monetary power) are deliberately choosing the court of their liking far away from the Defendant’s place of business, making it difficult for the Defendant to contest the suit.
Rouse reported that the court found that all four suits filed by Microsoft were based on investigations conducted by agencies hired by the Plaintiff. The court was of the view that these actions were based on mere suspicion that infringement of copyright might be committed by the Defendants and therefore directed Microsoft to deposit costs of approximately US$2,000 as security in each case so that the Defendant can be compensated if it is found that Microsoft had instituted a false suit. Microsoft has since appealed against the order to the division bench and the order directing the deposit of costs has been set aside.
