Day 51 – Q.2. Balancing the protection of intellectual property rights with the larger public interest remains a key policy challenge in developing countries. Examine in the Indian context. (150 words, 10 marks)

Q.2. Balancing the protection of intellectual property rights with the larger public interest remains a key policy challenge in developing countries. Examine in the Indian context. (150 words, 10 marks)

Introduction 

Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) incentivize innovation, yet excessive protection can hinder  public access. In a developing country like India, balancing innovation and social equity remains a persistent and nuanced policy challenge.  

Body  

Importance of Balancing IPR and Public Interest in India  

1. Access to Affordable Medicines: Excessive patent protection can limit access to life-saving  drugs. Example: India allowed Natco to produce a low-cost generic version of Nexavar in  2012.  
2. Encouraging Indigenous Innovation: Strong but flexible IPR regime supports local R&D  without stifling competition. Example: Startup India helps new firms with IP filings and  awareness.  
3. Agricultural Sustainability: Over-patenting of seeds can hurt farmers’ rights and food  security. Example: PPVFR Act lets farmers reuse and share seeds legally. 
4. Educational and Research Access: Strict copyright laws can hinder academic sharing in  resource-poor settings. Example: DU photocopy case highlighted fair use in education.  
5. Traditional Knowledge Protection: Global patents on indigenous knowledge can lead to  biopiracy. Example: TKDL prevents misappropriation of Ayurveda formulations. 
6. Digital Innovation vs. Monopoly: Tech patents can restrict the growth of startups in AI  and software. Example: India excludes software patents to support open innovation.  

Challenges in Striking the Balance  

1. International Pressure: Trade agreements push India to adopt stricter patent regimes.  Example: India is targeted in the U.S. Special 301 Report.  
2. Judicial Ambiguity: Courts vary in interpreting the scope of compulsory licenses and  public interest. Example: Inconsistent rulings create legal uncertainty. 
3. Enforcement Issues: Weak IPR enforcement deters foreign investment and local  innovators alike. Example: India ranks low on the Global Innovation Index. 
4. Lack of Public Awareness: Many startups and grassroots innovators remain unaware of  IPR protections. Example: MSMEs underuse patent filing schemes.  

Way Forward  

1. Strengthen Legal Clarity: Streamline judicial guidelines for interpreting public interest in  IPR cases.  
2. Expand Compulsory Licensing: Use it judiciously in health, agriculture, and  environmental sectors.  
3. Boost IP Literacy: Integrate IPR awareness in higher education, R&D institutions, and  startup incubators.  

Conclusion 

India’s IPR policy seeks to balance innovation incentives with inclusive access. The National  IPR Policy 2016 promotes this balance through legal reform, education, and traditional  knowledge protection—key to ensuring both development and equity.