Summary
This post provides an analytical overview of the Indian government's steps towards creating a new national IPR policy. It highlights the formation of an IPR think tank by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion to advise on intellectual property reforms. The post discusses concerns regarding the composition of the think tank and the sidelining of recommendations by a previously appointed academic committee. The analysis situates these developments within India's global IP standing and recent policy initiatives such as "Make in India." The post raises questions about the transparency and inclusiveness of the policy-making process in the context of stakeholder interests.
India’s IPR Think Tank and the Draft National IPR Policy
The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) constituted an Intellectual Property Rights Think Tank to draft a National Intellectual Property Rights Policy and to advise the government on IPR matters. The think tank was tasked with identifying areas requiring further study, furnishing recommendations to the Commerce Ministry, and advising on best practices to be followed in trademark offices, patent offices and other government bodies handling IPR matters. The initiative was presented as a response to longstanding international criticism of India’s IP enforcement framework as insufficiently rigorous.
Composition and Controversies
The composition of the think tank attracted scrutiny. Several members were reported to have connections with major pharmaceutical manufacturers, and at least one member headed an IPR law firm that had represented pharmaceutical companies in litigation. The think tank was chaired by Justice Prabha Sridevan, former Chairperson of the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), who had delivered notable judgements on compulsory licensing.
The formation of the new body also raised questions about the fate of an earlier exercise. The DIPP had constituted a three-member committee on 24 July to draft a national IPR policy. That committee comprised Prabuddha Ganguly, IPR Chair Professor of Tezpur University; Shamnad Basheer, IPR expert; and Yogesh Pai, Assistant Professor at National Law University, Delhi. The committee submitted a draft policy on 21 October. At the time of the think tank’s formation, the DIPP had not communicated any response to that committee’s recommendations, raising concerns about transparency and the extent to which existing work would inform the new process.
Policy Context
The developments unfolded against a backdrop of trade pressure. India had been placed on the United States Trade Representative’s “Priority Watch List” in successive reports, reflecting concerns about patent enforcement, data protection and market access for rights holders. The government had also launched the “Make in India” initiative, which placed the adequacy of intellectual property protection for both domestic and foreign investors in sharper focus. Whether the think tank would produce a transparent policy that balanced the interests of all stakeholders — including public health advocates, technology users, and industry — remained to be seen.
Disclaimer
This article is for general information and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult a qualified attorney before acting on any matter discussed here.