Geographical Indications as a Cultural Safeguard Tool for Communities: Kutch Ajrakh’s Path to Modern Markets

Exciting developments are underway for Geographical Indications in India, with over 60 products receiving the Geographical Indications (“GI”) tag recently. This is particularly noteworthy as it marks the largest number of successful GI applications in a single instance since the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 Act was implemented in 2003.

The international GI framework is quite diverse, and jurisdictions have adopted combinations of protections best suitable to them and their global trade. Depending on where you are, the framework covers many interesting subject matters ranging from agricultural and food products to wines. As far as a combined reading of the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999 and The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Rules, 2002 are concerned, it is used to identify “agricultural, natural or manufactured goods or any goods of handicraft or of industry and includes food stuff originating in a definite territory in India.” The legal protection granted through a successful registration certificate lasts for 10 years and needs to be renewed failing which the GI tag may be revoked. For an application to be successful, the applicant must be an association of persons, producers, organization or authorities established by or under the law. The key factor is that the applicant should represent the interests of the producers. This is a significant departure from the otherwise individual creator notion of IP laws.


Moving Beyond the Doctrine of Dilution in the Context of Well-Known Trademarks

Abstract This article seeks to argue against the doctrine of dilution for adjudicating on infringement of well-known marks and explores the doctrine of deceptive similarity as a potential solution. It establishes that the doctrine of deceptive similarity, as used by the court before the introduction of the Trademark Act of 1999, is not enough to Continue reading