INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION FOR TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN INDIA

This article is written by Iqra Rasheed of Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, an intern under Legal Vidhiya

ABSTRACT

Intellectual property rights and laws have evolved in modern times to keep pace with technological advancements worldwide. However, many countries, particularly India, possess a vast reservoir of knowledge that originated from native communities and indigenous peoples  passed down through generations, shaping the very identity of these communities. Despite the advancements in technology, industry, and innovation, most contemporary intellectual property rights and laws worldwide do not extend protection to traditional knowledge.^[1] The preservation of traditional knowledge is crucial considering that indigenous peoples have played a significant role in conserving and maintaining it. This article explores various methods for securing traditional knowledge through constructive and protective defenses that have been implemented with main focus on India. ^[2]

Keywords

Traditional Knowledge, Intellectual Property Rights, Protection, Initiatives.

INTRODUCTION

Traditional knowledge (TK), refers to a reservoir of wisdom, philosophies, observations, art, literature, or expertise that is cultivated by indigenous peoples or a specific community. This reservoir is passed down through successive generations within the community, often becoming a fundamental aspect of its cultural identity. These invaluable knowledge repositories are frequently utilized and sometimes exploited, particularly within the realms of science and medicine. Consequently, indigenous communities are now advocating for the recognition of traditional knowledge as a form of intellectual property.^[3]

Traditional knowledge forms a vital component of the cultural identity of the majority of indigenous communities. The knowledge systems inherent in traditional knowledge are crucial for attaining sustainable development objectives. Additionally, it is imperative to safeguard the social and physical environments in which traditional knowledge thrives. Thus, it becomes essential to establish methods and strategies for safeguarding and nurturing traditional knowledge, thereby promoting sustainable development that aligns with the interests of those who hold this knowledge.^[4]

For a long time, traditional knowledge remained unprotected. However, traditional knowledge can now be safeguarded under Intellectual Property Rights, though this presents its own challenges. This article delves into the concept of traditional knowledge protection, the initiatives for protecting this knowledge base in Indian legal sphere.^[5]

UNDERSTANDING TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE

The term ‘Traditional Knowledge’ (TK) means and includes the knowledge of skills and practices that form a part of the cultural or spiritual identity of a community or an indigenous group, and is sustained by being passed on from generation to generation within that community.^[6]

It includes their cultural awareness, inventions, and customs which is passed through generations. Generally transmitted orally, traditional knowledge is evolved through decades of experience and is suited to the local culture and environment of the community.^[7]

As of now, there is no internationally accepted definition of traditional knowledge. It covers various aspects of human development like scientific, agricultural, ecological, technical, medicinal knowledge as well as biodiversity-related knowledge.^[8]

To qualify as a traditional knowledge, the new practice must meet two demands:-

1. must have been passed from generation to generation as a custom.
2. must not only be native to a particular group but also be limited to that community owing to its principles.

It may be in the form of stories, folklore, songs, cultural values and beliefs, customs, community ethics, regional language, or various agricultural techniques. It has passed through generations by being taught, drawn, sculpted, sung, danced, and performed for thousands of years. Most of it is in the form of an oral tradition. Traditional knowledge predominantly includes human practices in different spheres like agriculture, horticulture, fishing, forestry, environment and biodiversity conservation and management, etc. ^[9]

THE NEED TO PROTECT TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE

Since Traditional knowledge (TK) is integral to the identity of an indigenous group, its unauthorized diffusion or exploitation for commercial and industrial benefits by third parties is prejudicial to the interests of its rightful custodians. It reflects social environment and traditions of local communities and its preservation is quite essential.

Lately, traditional knowledge of local communities of various developing countries is being used and patented by other nations without consent and information. This has raised a need for protection, preservation and propagation of TK especially by the developing countries.  Their deep knowledge of their biodiversity, the richness of their culture and their innovative skills and methodology used in agriculture, medicine, healthcare, environment, trade and development is a valuable asset and needs to be preserved. The debate regarding sustainable use and protection of TK is now at the forefront of the international agenda.^[10]

CHALLENGES OF PROTECTING TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE

The existing system for IPR protection was conceived and developed in response to the perceived needs of technologically advancing societies post industrialization. They meant to provide a temporary monopoly to the inventor by rewarding their innovation and its creative outputs.  The Intellectual property protection endeavours to prevent misappropriation of such intellectual innovations and to enable the developer/ owner of the intellectual property to benefit exclusively from it for a fixed term. ^[11]

Such protection is recognized mainly in five forms, namely, Copyrights, Patents, Industrial Designs, Trademarks and Trade Secrets. Traditional Knowledge, fails to find any individual place in the ambit of intellectual property which has always focused on the needs of technologically advanced societies. Recently, nations have started to feel the need to protect traditional knowledge. But there is no formal international instrument/ mechanism to realize this need yet.^[12]

There are multiple challenges that are faced in the process of preservation of traditional knowledge. Some of them are listed below:-

1. Since traditional knowledge is passed on from generation to generation orally, it becomes difficult to trace its origin in the absence of any written record. Lack of documentation makes its identification difficult and ownership cannot be established in cases where TK is exploited without permission.^[13]
2. Intellectual property protection is generally granted for a specified period of time, say 10 or 20 years or so. Traditional knowledge, being an ever-evolving system, cannot be protected for any specified time frame.^[14]
3. Due to lack of awareness about traditional knowledge among IP professionals, most of the IP professionals and policymakers fail to realize the cultural significance and value of traditional knowledge and may not recognize the need to protect them. Hence the lack of specific international legislations to protect traditional knowledge.^[15]
4. Also balancing the interests of different stakeholders is a big challenge. While protecting traditional knowledge and cultural expressions is a way to preserve cultural heritage and promote economic development, it also conflicts with the interests of organizations and corporations who try to benefit from such knowledge and expressions.

POSITION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are terms not often associated with each other. While IPR refers to the legal rights over creations of the mind, Traditional Knowledge is something that we all possess and often overlook its significance— knowledge passed down orally and to be passed on to future generations.^[16]

The significance of safeguarding traditional knowledge has only recently gained attention, yet there remains no global mechanism dedicated to its protection. This is largely due to the fact that preserving traditional knowledge presents distinct practical and logistical challenges as have already been discussed earlier. Traditional knowledge stands apart from other types of intellectual property due to its organic nature. Therefore, a tailored system of protection, specifically crafted for traditional knowledge, is imperative.

In light of this, several countries have devised a sui generis (unique) model for safeguarding their traditional knowledge. For instance, India established the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) in 2001, which serves as the country’s repository of traditional medicine information.^[17]

Other legislative and administrative initiatives taken by India towards protecting its Traditional Knowledge from unauthorized misappropriation have been discussed later in this article.

METHODS OF PROTECTING TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN IPR^[18]

There are two perspectives to consider regarding the protection of intellectual property:

• Defensive Protection: This approach aims to prevent individuals or entities outside a community from obtaining intellectual property rights over traditional knowledge. For instance, India has developed a searchable database of traditional medicine. This database serves as evidence of prior art for patent examiners when reviewing patent applications. The creation of this database was prompted by a well-known case where the US Patent and Trademark Office granted (but later revoked) a patent for the use of turmeric in treating wounds. This property was already widely known among traditional Indian communities and documented in ancient Sanskrit texts. Defensive strategies may also extend to safeguarding sacred cultural elements, such as symbols or words, from being registered as trademarks by third parties.
• Positive Protection: In contrast, positive protection involves granting and exercising rights that empower communities to promote their traditional knowledge, regulate its usage, and benefit from its commercial exploitation. This can be achieved through the current intellectual property framework, and several countries have enacted specific legislation to this end. However, it’s important to note that protection afforded under national laws may not hold true in other jurisdictions. This discrepancy is why many advocate for an international legal instrument.

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) addresses traditional knowledge in three main areas:

1. Traditional knowledge in its strict sense, encompassing technical know-how, practices, skills, and innovations related to biodiversity, agriculture, or health.
2. Traditional cultural expressions or expressions of folklore, which includes cultural manifestations such as music, art, designs, symbols, and performances.
3. Genetic resources, referring to genetic material of actual or potential value found in plants, animals, and microorganisms.

WIPO’s efforts reflect the need to protect and promote traditional knowledge and cultural expressions on both a national and international scale.

PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE INITIATIVES OF INDIA^[19]

LEGISLATIVE

• The Biological Diversity Act, 2002

The Biological Diversity Act of 2002 was put into effect to fulfill India’s commitments under the Convention on Biodiversity, requiring member States to grant access to genetic resources to other members with Prior Informed Consent (PIC) and mutually agreed terms. The Act focuses on the protection of biodiversity, defining ‘biological diversity’ as the variety of living organisms from all sources and their respective ecosystems. Under this Act, equitable benefit sharing is mandated between applicants seeking approval for the use of biological diversity or related knowledge, local bodies, and benefit claimants, with the Authority determining the form of benefit sharing. The benefits may include joint ownership of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), technology transfer, establishment of production and research units, collaboration between Indian scientists, local communities, and benefit claimants, venture capital support, or monetary/non-monetary benefits.

• The Patents Act, 1970

This Act was enacted to consolidate the law relating to patents in India on the recommendation of Justice N. Rajagopala Ayyangar Committee. The Act explicitly excludes Traditional Knowledge from the class of patentable inventions. It places it in the public domain as an invention not patentable and hence protects it from being commercialized.

• The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmer’s Rights Act, 2001

The Patent Act of 1970 in India excludes life forms, agricultural, and horticultural methods from patentability. Initially, India’s farming system allowed free exchange of seeds among farmers. However, the entry of multinational companies prompted the need to protect India’s diverse plant and seed varieties. This Act was enacted as a response, recognizing and rewarding breeders’ and farmers’ contributions to new crop varieties. The Act aims to establish an effective regime for plant variety protection and encourage new varieties’ development.

Under this legislation, certain varieties are excluded from registration if their commercial exploitation could harm public order, morality, health, or the environment. The Act defines various types of new varieties, such as essentially derived varieties, extant varieties, and farmer’s varieties.  It also grants rights such as benefit sharing, breeder’s rights, farmer’s rights, and community-based rights. The Act mandates criteria for registration, and remedies for infringement include injunctions and damages. The Act establishes the ‘Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmer’s Rights Authority’ and the ‘National Register of Plant Varieties’ for structured protection of plant varieties and associated rights.

• The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999

Geographical Indication (GI) signifies a product’s distinct and unique geographical origin, showcasing qualities exclusive to that specific area. The GI tag is awarded to communities, groups, or associations linked to a particular geographical location. The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement defines Geographical Indication as indications which identify a good as originating in the territory of a Member [of the World Trade Organization], 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.

India regulates Geographical Indications through the Geographical Indications Act, 1999 (GI Act), enacted to fulfill obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. The GI Act, 1999 aims to protect Geographical Indications (goods) in India and establish a registration mechanism.

Geographical Indications are registered for ten years & are renewable. Unauthorized use of a Geographical Indication is considered infringement, leading to legal action. It offers broad protection to agricultural, natural, manufactured, or other goods with distinctiveness from a particular region. Example, the registration of Boka Chaul (GI Application no. 558), a rice variety native to Assam, based on its unique quality of cooking itself at room temperature, production areas, historical records, and more.

ADMINISTRATIVE

• The Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) ^[20]

The Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) is an important initiative by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) along with various ministries in India. It was established in 2001 with the aim of preventing the misappropriation of India’s rich traditional knowledge in international patent offices. The TKDL is implemented by the CSIR and has been successful in documenting approximately 0.29 million traditional medical formulations that are in the public domain in India.

One of the key features of the TKDL is its linguistic diversity, with formulations available in languages such as German, French, Spanish, and more. This allows patent examiners to easily check whether an invention is based on traditional knowledge from India when examining patent applications.

India has signed TKDL access agreements with sixteen international patent offices, with ongoing negotiations for collaborations with other patent offices. Prior to the establishment of the TKDL, it was estimated that around 2,000 patents based on Indian medicinal systems were being granted annually worldwide, erroneously. This was due to the fact that Indian knowledge was not documented in languages understood by patent offices’ examiners, making it essential to create a database like the TKDL. Patent offices that have signed access agreements with the TKDL have access to its contents, and these agreements include non-disclosure obligations.

The TKDL is recognized as a global intellectual property (IP) watch system, enabling Third Party Observations (TPOs). This means that if an application for patenting an invention based on Indian traditional knowledge is rejected by any of the patent offices that have signed access agreements with India, third parties can make observations regarding such rejections. This helps Indian authorities become aware of any attempts of misappropriation promptly, allowing corrective action to be taken.

IMPORTANT CASES

Turmeric Case[21]

The inventors asserted that they had devised a method to aid in the healing of wounds in patients, involving the administration of a beneficial quantity of turmeric either orally or applied topically.

CSIR approached the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to challenge the patent application for turmeric, acting as an interested party with the authority to initiate re-examination proceedings based on prior art to demonstrate the lack of novelty in the patented invention. Despite the widespread knowledge of the various forms and uses of turmeric in Indian households for generations, it was challenging to locate published information specifically regarding the use of turmeric powder through both oral ingestion and topical application for wound healing.

The USPTO ultimately revoked the patent for turmeric on the grounds of prior art. The evidence presented by CSIR clearly demonstrated a lack of novelty, non-obviousness, and inventive step—requirements essential for the granting of any patent. Moreover, the USPTO’s ruling that turmeric powder and paste were interchangeable indicated the satisfaction of the “Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art” test (PHOSITA). This test assesses whether the invention in question would have been obvious to an individual with ordinary skills in the relevant field. This standard aims to prevent the patentability of trivial inventions while preserving the patentability of substantive ones.

Neem[22]

The therapeutic properties of the Neem tree have been documented in ancient Indian Ayurvedic texts dating back to 5000 BC, and it continues to be used today as both a biopesticide and medicine. In India, the tree is revered for its germicidal properties, its role in pesticide applications, and its use in dental care. From its roots to its crown, the Neem tree holds a legendary status.

Initially, W.R. Grace and the US Department of Agriculture submitted a patent request to the European Patent Office (EPO) for a neem oil-based fungicide designed for “controlling fungi on plants”. This patent was granted in 1995.

During the same year, three organizations—the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) based in Germany, the Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Ecology in Delhi, and the Green Party in the European Parliament in Brussels—filed a legal opposition against the patent’s issuance at the EPO. Their primary argument was that the fungicidal properties of hydrophobic extracts from neem seeds had long been known and utilized in India for centuries. It was used both in Ayurvedic medicine to treat skin conditions and in traditional Indian agriculture to prevent fungal infections that could harm crops. This evidence of prior public use in traditional Indian knowledge refuted the patentee’s claim of novelty.

A second argument made against the patent was that it violated “morality” because the purported inventors sought to monopolize a technique that was part of Indian traditional knowledge. This Neem patent case became the first instance where US and European patents were accused of infringing upon traditional knowledge through biopiracy. In 2005, the European Patent Office (EPO) ultimately revoked the contested patent.Top of Form

Basmati Patent[23]

The US Patent Office granted a patent to ‘RiceTec’ for a variety of Basmati rice, which is an aromatic rice cultivated in India and Pakistan for centuries. Rice serves as the staple food for many populations across Asia, particularly in countries like India and Pakistan. Farmers in this region have meticulously developed, preserved, and nurtured over a hundred thousand distinct rice varieties to cater to various tastes and requirements.

In its 1997 patent application, RiceTec acknowledged that “good quality Basmati rice traditionally comes from northern India and Pakistan… Indeed, in some countries, the term can be applied solely to Basmati rice grown in India and Pakistan.” However, the company then asserted that it had created certain “novel” Basmati lines and grains “that enable the production of high-quality, higher-yielding Basmati rice worldwide.”

The Indian Government chose to challenge only 3 out of the 20 claims made in RiceTec Inc.’s original patent application. These challenges were specifically directed at the characteristics of Basmati, such as starch index, aroma, and grain dimensions. It should be noted that the WTO Agreement does not mandate countries to offer patent protection for plant varieties. Instead, it requires countries to establish legislation ensuring some form of protection for plant varieties (not necessarily through patents).

However, due to the US’s strong stance on patent protection for plant varieties, the patent application was accepted. Three strains developed by RiceTec were granted patent protection, allowing them to label their strain as “Superior Basmati Rice.” In the Basmati rice case, RiceTec modified the strain through crossbreeding with a Western grain variety and successfully claimed it as their invention. This case serves as an illustration of the challenges highlighted in the TRIPS agreement concerning the patenting of biotechnological processes.

CONCLUSION^[24]

Many third-world countries, including India, have a history of colonial exploitation, where their traditional knowledge was often taken without recognition or compensation. The undocumented nature of traditional knowledge makes it vulnerable to misappropriation and exploitation. Protection measures are crucial to safeguard this knowledge from being exploited without consent or benefit to the communities that hold it. But even when partially documented, traditional knowledge often does not conform to the rigorous standards required for modern-day patents. This makes it challenging for communities to defend their knowledge in legal disputes.

There is a growing recognition of the importance of community knowledge and innovation. Protecting traditional knowledge encourages communities to continue their practices and innovations, ensuring their cultural heritage and sustainable development. For e.g., Countries like India have a rich history of using traditional medicines derived from plant sources. Protecting traditional knowledge associated with these medicines is crucial for maintaining healthcare practices that have been beneficial for generations.

In essence, the protection of traditional knowledge is essential for preserving cultural heritage, promoting sustainable development, ensuring fair benefit-sharing, and safeguarding against exploitation and misappropriation in the context of globalization and modern legal frameworks. The development of international legal frameworks, emphasizes the importance of respecting and protecting traditional knowledge. These frameworks provide guidelines for fair and equitable benefit-sharing from the use of traditional knowledge.

REFERENCES

1. Akanksha Saini, Documenting Traditional Knowledge (2022) https://eacpm.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Documenting-Traditional-Knowledge-2.pdf
2. Arushi Guha, Patenting of Traditional Knowledge in Light of the Turmeric Case, IIPRD(3, April, 2024, 5:06 PM), https://www.iiprd.com/patenting-of-traditional-knowledge-in-light-of-the-turmeric-case/
3. Bipul Kumar, Protection Of Traditional Knowledge And Cultural Heritage Under IPR: An Indian Outlook, IIPRD (March 9, 2024 6:28 P.M.) https://www.iiprd.com/protection-of-traditional-knowledge-and-cultural-heritage-under-ipr-an-indian-outlook/
4. Dr. Ghazala Javed, Protection of Traditional Knowledge-Initiatives of India https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_iptk_ge_2_16/wipo_iptk_ge_2_16_presentation_12javed.pdf
5. Intepat Team, Traditional Knowledge And Intellectual Property Rights, INTEPAT (March 11, 2024 2:30 P.M.), https://www.intepat.com/blog/traditional-knowledge-and-intellectual-property-rights/
6. IPTSE, https://iptse.com/what-is-traditional-knowledge-and-can-ipr-protect-it/ (last visited Mar.11,2024)
7. Ishita Chatterjee, Intellectual Property Rights and Traditional Knowledge – Indian Perspective, Manupatra, https://www.manupatra.com/roundup/363/articles/ipr%20and%20traditional%20knowledge.pdf
8. Juhi Chowdhary, Intellectual Property and Traditional knowledge, LEGAL SERVICE INDIA (March 8,2024 9:20 P.M.), https://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l98-Intellectual-Property-and-Traditional-knowledge.html
9. Riya, Protection Of Traditional Knowledge Under Intellectual Property Rights Regime, Vol. 1 (01) E-JAIRIPA 149 (2020),  https://cnlu.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/10-Riya.pdf
10. Rukma Lavania, TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN INDIA: A LEGISLATIVE ANALYSIS, ILI Law Review 96 (2020) https://ili.ac.in/pdf/rlava.pdf
11. Saipriya Balasubramanian, India: Traditional Knowledge And Patent Issues: An Overview Of Turmeric, Basmati, Neem Cases, MONDAQ (3, April, 2024, 5:03 PM ),  https://www.mondaq.com/india/patent/586384/traditional-knowledge-and-patent-issues-an-overview-of-turmeric-basmati-neem-cases
12. Shivani Singh, Understanding traditional knowledge with the help of neem, turmeric and basmati case, SANRACHNA, ( 3 April, 2024, 5:08 PM), https://www.sanrachna.foundation/understanding-traditional-knowledge-with-the-help-of-neem-turmeric-and-basmati-case/#:~:text=The%20incidents%20involving%20turmeric%20and,on%20a%20course%20of%20action.
13. Swati Malladi, Effectiveness Of Indian IP Laws In Protecting Traditional Knowledge And Cultural Expressions, LEGAL SERVICE INDIA (March 9, 2024 8:40 P.M.), https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-10899-effectiveness-of-indian-ip-laws-in-protecting-traditional-knowledge-and-cultural-expressions.html
14. Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property, https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_tk_1.pdf
15. WIPO, https://www.wipo.int/tk/en/tk/ (last visited March 8, 2024)
16. WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANISATION, https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2011/03/article_0002.html (last visited March 11,2024 )

---

[1]IPTSE, https://iptse.com/what-is-traditional-knowledge-and-can-ipr-protect-it/ (last visited Mar.11,2024).

[2]Riya, Protection Of Traditional Knowledge Under Intellectual Property Rights Regime, Vol. 1 (01) E-JAIRIPA 149 (2020),  https://cnlu.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/10-Riya.pdf

[3] IPTSE, supra note 2

[4] Juhi Chowdhary, Intellectual Property and Traditional knowledge, LEGAL SERVICE INDIA (March 8,2024 9:20 P.M.), https://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l98-Intellectual-Property-and-Traditional-knowledge.html

[5] IPTSE, supra note 3

[6]WIPO, https://www.wipo.int/tk/en/tk/ (last visited March 8, 2024)

[7]Bipul Kumar, Protection Of Traditional Knowledge And Cultural Heritage Under IPR: An Indian Outlook, IIPRD (March 9, 2024 6:28 P.M.) https://www.iiprd.com/protection-of-traditional-knowledge-and-cultural-heritage-under-ipr-an-indian-outlook/

[8] WIPO, supra note 2

[9] Bipul Kumar, supra note 2

[10]WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANISATION, https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2011/03/article_0002.html (last visited March 11,2024)

[11]Akanksha Saini, Documenting Traditional Knowledge (2022) https://eacpm.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Documenting-Traditional-Knowledge-2.pdf

[12] Intepat Team, Traditional Knowledge And Intellectual Property Rights, INTEPAT (March 11, 2024 2:30 P.M.), https://www.intepat.com/blog/traditional-knowledge-and-intellectual-property-rights/

[13] Swati Malladi, Effectiveness Of Indian IP Laws In Protecting Traditional Knowledge And Cultural Expressions

LEGAL SERVICE INDIA (March 9, 2024 8:40 P.M.), https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-10899-effectiveness-of-indian-ip-laws-in-protecting-traditional-knowledge-and-cultural-expressions.html

[14] Akanksha Saini, supra note 2

[15] Swati Malladi, supra note 2

[16] WIPO, supra note 3

[17] Intepat Team, supra note 2

[18]Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property, https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_tk_1.pdf

[19]Dr. Ghazala Javed, Protection of Traditional Knowledge-Initiatives of India https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_iptk_ge_2_16/wipo_iptk_ge_2_16_presentation_12javed.pdf

[20]Rukma Lavania, TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN INDIA: A LEGISLATIVE ANALYSIS, ILI Law Review 96 (2020) https://ili.ac.in/pdf/rlava.pdf

[21] Arushi Guha, Patenting of Traditional Knowledge in Light of the Turmeric Case, IIPRD(3, April, 2024, 5:06 PM), https://www.iiprd.com/patenting-of-traditional-knowledge-in-light-of-the-turmeric-case/

[22] Shivani Singh, Understanding traditional knowledge with the help of neem, turmeric and basmati case, SANRACHNA, ( 3 April, 2024, 5:08 PM), https://www.sanrachna.foundation/understanding-traditional-knowledge-with-the-help-of-neem-turmeric-and-basmati-case/#:~:text=The%20incidents%20involving%20turmeric%20and,on%20a%20course%20of%20action.

[23]  Saipriya Balasubramanian, India: Traditional Knowledge And Patent Issues: An Overview Of Turmeric, Basmati, Neem Cases, MONDAQ (3, April, 2024, 5:03 PM ),  https://www.mondaq.com/india/patent/586384/traditional-knowledge-and-patent-issues-an-overview-of-turmeric-basmati-neem-cases

[24]Ishita Chatterjee, Intellectual Property Rights and Traditional Knowledge – Indian Perspective, Manupatra, https://www.manupatra.com/roundup/363/articles/ipr%20and%20traditional%20knowledge.pdf

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.