They said that the proposed amendment in the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 should consider implementing statutory liabilities for inspection bodies and establishing a structured quality control process.
The Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has sought views and comments of stakeholders on the proposed amendments.
Nilanshu Shekhar, founding partner at law firm KAnalysis, recommended mandating regular inspections, creating a dedicated statutory oversight body, and instituting random quality checks for the products.
A GI is primarily an agricultural, natural or manufactured product (handicrafts and industrial goods) originating from a definite geographical territory.
Once a product gets a GI tag, any person or company cannot sell a similar item under that name. This tag is valid for a period of 10 years following which it can be renewed. The famous goods which carry this tag include Basmati rice, Darjeeling Tea, Chanderi Fabric, Mysore Silk, Kullu Shawl, Kangra Tea, Thanjavur Paintings, Allahabad Surkha, Farrukhabad Prints, Lucknow Zardozi and Kashmir Walnut Wood Carving. Shekhar added that given the increasing significance of e-commerce and digital protection, it is essential that the amended Act includes provisions facilitating and regulating the online sale of GI products.
Kavita Bhatnagar, CEO of Kanegrade Flavours & Ingredients, said that while there is a need to raise awareness about the importance of getting more and more GI tags from India, the government should ensure a focus on mandatory quality standards for GI-tagged products, especially food items.
“Otherwise, it may have an opposite effect. Food products under the Indian GI tag must meet stringent safety and authenticity benchmarks in collaboration with regulatory bodies like FSSAI,” Bhatnagar added.
Ravi Bhardwaj, Founder of EduLegaL, said that the current legal framework does not adequately protect unregistered users of GIs, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation and unfair competition from larger, registered enterprises.
“To resolve these issues, a comprehensive, data-driven approach is necessary,” he said.
Jogeshwar Mishra, Partner Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co., too said that the amendments should streamline the overall GI regime by making it more consistent with parallel practices of patents, designs and trademarks.
“Providing for a fully electronic system, covering electronic filing, prosecution, and communication, is one such area. Indeed, the amendments should provide for a more efficient system for registration of GIs, one that corresponds to regimes across major jurisdictions,” Mishra said.
He added that the system concerning authorised users, including process of registration as an authorised user would also benefit from a thorough review and possibly a more specific framework.
“This revision would be significant pursuant to the 2020 amendment of the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Rules, 2002, whereunder consent from the registered proprietor was no longer required to be provided along with applications for registration as an authorised user,” Mishra said.
Under the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, GI is covered as an element of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). They are also covered under the WTO’s Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement.