Intellectual properties are considered in different categories of abstract objects. The past reflects their abstract (non-material) substance. They are now created, but unable to allow, pass, limit, adjudicate, bind, disperse, etc.
Not all of them are safe, but those whose list is finalized in the national law of the given country in accordance with the rules of international law. From the types of intellectual property rights (moral and / or economic rights) that are approved, intellectual property institutions can be divided into 2 groups: the results of intellectual property and their association with legal means, the means of identifying services, business, work and equipment.
In many areas of daily life, the protection of intellectual property is very important because it is a direct result of the various rights that people enjoy in society. It stimulates the development of skills, computers, art and artistic discovery. Protecting intellectual property rights means better creativity, higher cost of goods and services, which makes participants in the global market more economical.
Currently, Intellectual has become a new regime with the value of requests, as issues and problems associated with the subject are gradually gaining more and more theoretical and practical importance. While serious efforts are being made to deal with the problems related to intellectual property, great efforts are needed to study and appreciate the technical concepts and ideas of the intellectual concepts, its roles and implicationsgained in today’s stadium of socio-economic development.
The real fact is to highlight the very fascinating achievements in the discipline of intellectual creativity, confirmed by good technological discoveries and manufactured products. Alternatively, informality and increasing motivation for manipulation, paramount tomany difficulties in its legal protection, are vulnerable and legislative in dealing with similar cases and finding consequences. Even duplication is a real conflict.
Intellectual property rights, patents, WIPO, industrial designs, copyright, trademarks and related rights
Table Of Contents
|II||Classification of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)…………….||4|
|C||Indian Trademark Act…………………………………………..||7|
|E||Copyright and its related rights…………………………………||7|
|III||Global Vs Indian Perspectives in IPR…………………………..||8|
|A||Indian IPR policies in global scenario………….………………||8|
|B||Linkages old and new: IPRs and trade………………………….||10|
|C||A regime complex: More linkages and overlaps……………….||12|
|D||Towards Sui Generis System……………………………………||13|
|V||Intellectual property management in India……………………..||14|
|VI||Enforcement of IPR in India…………………………………….||15|
|A||Looking forward at the Indian IPR Policy………………………||17|
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are identified as innovations, ideas and creatively established words upon which there is a communal readiness to give status to property. Many difficult tasks are required to find or produce something new in terms of talent, dynamism, manpower input, time, cash, and so on. Patents, trademarks, copyrights, etc., protect a variety of intellectual property. The best sign that creation or invention has occurred is the intangible property of a person who has taken pains to create or invent. Therefore, by law, legal rights or cartel rights are called upon by the inventor or reformer to gain financial advantage over their production or invention, .The society as a whole depends on the IPR and its development policy framework,. In addition to being generally contemporary, intellectual property is an intangible idea; Jurisprudence is intertwined with the three most difficult fibers of patent, trademark and copyright – each with its own share of achievement in pre-modern practice and each has its own path in our own years.
Intellectual property (IP), or Intellectual property rights (IPRs), intellectual property (IP) or intellectual property rights (IPR) are becoming increasingly important, especially for innovative companies. The main goal is the increasing importance of fact control in business. The progress of innovation is very dependent on facts10 (Gloet and Terziovski, 2004), and capitalizing on facts is an important feature of innovation management, particularly in baroque firms, (Carneiro, 2000; Sullivan, 1999). Intellectual property rights generate profits and protect the firm’s economic health, as well as increase the effectiveness of warning signs ,(Allen, 2003; Blomqvist et al., 2004). In innovation management, the need for a free adoption of IPRs is prominent for several reasons.
- Classification Of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
The IPR are provincial rights that allow the owner of retail, purchasing or licensed intellectual property (IP) related to physical property14. The recording of intellectual property rights must be done in a legitimate manner in an appropriate or visible form to enable them to privilege their interests. All forms of intellectual property rights give inventors or creators unique rights to maintain and realize financial well-being, which further promotes proficiency and social reform,,,
Viewing the various kinds of invention, establishment of mortal thoughts & their applications, the IPR are categorized as follows:
iii) Industrial designs,
Patent, also said in IPR, has been approved by the relevant government agencies as a discoverer in honor of its unprecedented technical invention.It puts a sophisticated control system under the control of patent management and imposes some time-limited procedure requirements such as processing applications, filing challenges, etc. After some committee reports and various amendments, the Act of 1970 was approved. Some suggestions on actions to be taken were made by the Indian patent system, which did not encourage production and encouraged the use of modern inventions for manufacturing regulation. They are:
1. Compulsory delivery of licenses;
2. To tackle problem of abuses, efficient machinery is a must.
|1856||Act for protection of inventions on the basis of British law of 1852|
|1859||Patent monopolies called exclusive privileges|
|1872||Patents and Designs Act|
|1883||Production of Inventions Act 1888 Inventions and Designs Act 1911-1947 Modern patent era by Patents and Designs Act. First time an authority call Controller General of patents appointed|
|1959||Justice Ayyangar’s report|
|1967||Patent Act bill|
|1970||The Patents Act passed by the parliament|
|1972||The Patent Act – 1970 came into force on April 20, 1972|
|1994||Amendment by ordinance to include Exclusive Marketing Rights (EMR’s)|
|1999||Amendment passed by the parliament. New patent amendment bill referred to select committee.|
|2003-2005||Patents Act 1970 with second amendment comes into force Patent Act 1970 (2005 Amendment) comes in to force from 1.1.2005|
Table 1: History of Patent Acts in India
These recommendations were later incorporated into Indian Patents and Design Amendment Act 1950 which defines the important preconditions for a country to control the funds of the entire patent system. These characteristics include the advances in high technology that the country has achieved, encouraging inventors and encouraging people who work in this area of education. After careful discussion, the committee proposed several measures to enhance the inventor’s area of interest, which should be protected after proper identification of inventions, in order to allow foreigners to participate in the market within the borders of India or impose restrictions on them and resolve any pressure to adopt international conventions38.The reason for this assumption is the improvisation of the successful development of the Indian economy. At the end of a long debate, the Patent Act of 1970 was passed,.
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) was activated in Stockholm in 1967, becoming part of the United Nations in 19746, 14 as one of the agencies to protect intellectual property rights around the world. The structure of the WIPO controls a number of relevant IPR directions around the world. The main goal of the WIPO is to improve social, sustainable and economic art while maintaining traditional literacy and biodiversity through an effective and balanced international IP system. Moreover, the adoption of international control is responsible for harmonizing the differences between many countries, mainly between developing and industrialized countries, thereby giving equal opportunity to each country of developing world6,13,.
Trademark names help identify standard companies by disclosing their reputation, recognition and trust. Consumers rely heavily on trademarks to validate manufactured goods and services and to quickly define their value21-22,,.A symbol, image, phrase, logo, design, drawing, or group of these elements can distinguish a service or company from other companies9.
C. Indian Trademark Act
Any trademark that is unique, that is, good at distinguishing one product from another and expressed explicitly, can be called a trademark under the Indian trademarks act.27 Exclusive abusers do not acknowledge their rights, as their validity is required. However, without a deadline, the unnecessary increase in incompatible registered trademarks is initiated by the trademark11,
D. Industrial Design
It deals with design, shape or pattern or color texture, or grouping of 3D shapes of patterns and colors, which have artistic value. It can be a 2D or 3D pattern, which gives a product. Old-fashioned handicrafts like carpets, cotton bed spreads can also be displayed for safety purposes, like industrial design, (Kannan, 2010). It is necessary to register the concept against wrong and illegal theft. For five years, protection is provided and for the next 15 years, can be renewed .To be safe under maximum national laws, an industrial design must be new or original and passive. Therefore, the artistic structure is the primary concern and design registration does not protect the official features or characteristics of the product. Although features, if genuine, can be protected through patent8
E. Copyright and Its Related Rights
The Western development of IP law has had a huge impact on India in the development of intellectual property rights. The East India Company extended the English copyright law in India from 1872.In 1911, copyright in England was coded by laws such as the Copyright Act 1911, and the Imperial Copyright Act 1911.This law was applicable to the entire Indian Territory.The salient delivery of the act of 1957were:
1. Creation of a copyright council;
2. Expanding the definition of copyright;
3. Right to reinstate the author’s rights after seven years but before the end of his ten-year term;
4. License of the library to make a copy of the book;
5. Regulations of performing arts groups, including fees or charges collected.
Therefore, copyright encourages such activities. The literature and works of art that are protected by copyright are as follows 39,40,,Musical work, Motion pictures, Literary& scientific works, Photographic work, Computer programs, Artistic work.
- Global Vs Indian Perspectives in IPR
A. Indian IPR Policies in Global Scenario
India is currently one of the largest and most important economies in the world. The growing global market of the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries plays a crucial role in economic development.TRIPS regulate IPR matters related to the discoveries and inventions of these industries. In many countries there is constant concern about whether the rules should be adhered to by mutual agreement60.Patents often lead to controversy between industries and countries due to specific rules and regulations developed by nations. (jurisnotes.com).
The patent is the essential standard for measuring all developments and inventions in research and technology. Some exciting and important discoveries have been made in biotechnology in recent years61. Understanding the laws and regulations of globalization and Understanding IPRs with the effect of globalization and TRIPS’s regulations and understanding intellectual property rights is a challenging task for emerging economies like ours (Chawla, 2005).
Intellectual property rights and patents were first announced in India in 1856. These rules were enacted in 1911 as the Patent and Design Act.Patent act of 1970 was introduced in a changing political environment. Patent act of 1970 meets the requirements for patents that are globally recognized for involvement in novelty, inventive step, and solicitation of manufacturing, but excludes pharmaceutical and agrochemical product patents, (Sharma et al., 2015). Many changes were incorporated into the Patent act of 1970 and a new amended form was introduced in 2005. This law was consistent with the WTO trade-related aspects of intellectual property or TRIP’s intellectual property. . Consistent with these conditions, Indian patent law introduced Section 3(d). This suggests that a mere innovation of a new practice of an approved element cannot be patented unless it is significantly effective. Moreover, patents are only for creation, not discovery (Chawdhuryet al., 2014).
All pharmaceutical and biotechnology inventions, including the necessary TRIPS agreements to create binding patent laws around the world. The existing patent laws in India were amended in accordance with WTO Trips (Archana, 2013). TRIPS, the agreement seeks to enforce United States design patent laws that exist worldwide and protect everything from drugs to IT software to human genes
The number of patents awarded to various entities and organizations during 1990-2002 has revealed that the country holds the highest number of patented chemical and pharmaceutical products in this decade (Malviya et al., 2010).
Fig 1 Top Countries of Provenance
Considering the countries of origin in terms of value, the order and the list of countries have changed compared to previous years. Hong Kong, China has managed to top the list of countries of origin in terms of value, due to the containment of high-value luxury goods. China, India and the United Arab Emirates are, as seen in previous years, also among the best countries with provenance by value. Singapore and Thailand rounds out the top six
B. Linkages Old and New: IPRs & Trade
IPRs are mainly suitable for some linkages as it is difficult and empowers various issues in important areas such as creativity, education, health, agriculture, competition, trade, biodiversity, technological innovation and transfer, human rights, development, investment, etc(Maskus and Reichman, 2004). To illustrate this fact, Price considered in the past that roughly such a link was needed or completed. For example, after World War II, when the United States was less concerned with the protection of intellectual property and wanted to support an international business model based on the American model at home and abroad, used a leading position to bind, it sought to destroy intellectual property rights in competition (Porter, 1986). This was effective because cartel events were widely welcomed as a result, but the case has not expanded. Alternatively, the 1970s included calls for a new information and communication system in countries struggling to create a New International Economic Order (NIEO), which disastrously tied intellectual property rights to economic and human development but failed, (Braithwaite and Drahos, 2000; Drahos, 2002). Non-state actors and some countries are trying to re-establish this link in the WIPO. As far as IPRs – trade linkage is concerned, IPRs have linked free trade in the past, but the linkage set by TRIP has contrasted. In the 19th century, free trade representatives in Europe denied that the protection of intellectual property prohibited free trade in goods with intellectual property claims. This linkage was successful and achieved considerable success in European powers withdrawing or abolishing patent protection, if only for a short period of time, (Machlup, 1958; Penrose, 1951).
The formation of the TRPs is an interesting case, because of its ability to at least trade governance, primarily because of the ease of trade and increased competition, and the first monopoly rights that private owners have, incidentally, are often its members. Net-IPR importers were greatly reduced39 (Braithwaite and Drahos, 2000). By all frames, the IPR-trade connection was founded on instrumental and normative concerns. Beginning with the latter, engagement with IP-dependent business actors in economically advanced countries, namely, globally-based entertainment and high-tech industries (music, film, publishing, local, electronic and chemical) in the late 1970s and later 1980s in the European Union, Switzerland and Japan). It was installed elsewhere at the time.,, (Drahos and Braithwaite, 2002; May and Sell, 2006; Sell, 2003), the universal gradient of these actors’ private IPRs is seen as an important part of the profit interests of the countries – the US, the European Union and some other strong businesses. Members of the administration have important knowledge and data on economic makeup.
C. A Regime Complex: More Linkages and Overlaps
This section explains ways to organize, link, and manage problem areas that are not permanent. Instead, they rely on a few actors to develop that one technique for them. However, when the thoughts, facts, understanding, and curiosity of the actors change, dissertations that legalize certain structures can decrease and welcome the possibility of additional change. This proclaims that the relationship between intellectual property rights and trade, which is regulated by TRIPS, could collapse, on the one hand, because not all actors in the regime share the IPR regulatory agreement as a trade issue, and on the other hand, because of the subsequent change in the position of the test subjects. The latter did not seem to be expected at this moment; Of course, a further consolidation of specific IPR frameworks in national instruments around the world is currently being observed. By then, under international law, a plausible way of overcoming this institutional link between intellectual property rights and trade should be exhausted and finalized by negotiating a new intellectual property agreement that is new and has the same or a wider scope, membership and has enforceability The problem with this choice is that actors who dispute the relationship between intellectual property rights and trade are not currently reaching an agreement on how intellectual property rights should be regulated globally. To some extent, they tried to formalize intellectual property rights in different ways, often at the same time, instead of linking them to other problem areas and regimes such as human rights, social suitability or development. This is usually when there are many interests or areas of interest that have been infringed by intellectual property rights. Therefore, there is no agreement at this time. In addition, due to many other issues and concerns, the recently stranded IPR trade creates hostile and ethically unjustified desires. This is because TRIPs have been classified in many contests of the IP guidelines, are associated with different participants, and are intended for a relatively short period after being deployed in different modes. As a result, new intellectual property rules have been considered, existing rules have been reviewed, and intellectual property reports, recommendations, declarations and statements have been distributed on various mediums:
- The WIPO, regional or bilateral FTAs,
- The WTO,
- The World Health Organization (WHO),
- The UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO),
- The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),
- The World Bank,
- The Convention on Biodiversity (CDB),
- various human rights commissions (ECOSOC, CHR),
- The UN Development Programme (UNDP),
- The G8 and
- The World Customs Organization (WCO).41
D. Towards Sui Generis System
“Knowledge is proprietary. It belongs to corporations and is not easy to get to farmer” 
Due to current IP regime restrictions, such as lack of awareness of community rights and dissemination of “traditional knowledge”, directed the parties to TRIPS insert an article which is new i.e. Article 27(3)(b) that permits the WTO member states to apply a sui generis protection system. Article 27(3)(b) allows Member States to omit patentability of plants and animals. This provision is important from a food security perspective. Countries developing into member categories can enact national legislation in this area and use it as an advantage to meet their specific needs85. This flexibility in TRIPS is called sui generis. IPRs, which refer to special protection methods, need to take into account requirements beyond the legal framework86.
IV. Intangible Assets
The Intangible Assets (IA)is a rapidly evolving identifier. The supporting statistics are given below. (WIPO, 2008) has 30 % scratches, but in 2000 the physical asset in corporate in 1982 was 62%. The Netherlands has more assets than accounting in the IA in 1990, during the early stages in Europe in 1992and 35% of total public and private investment compared to others. (Idris, 2003)
IA is part of the wealth accumulated by an organization that has working capital and fixed assets (Stewart & Ruckdeschel, 1998). Dynamic IA management will help leverage IA assets (Collis, 1994) values and they don’t the organization, advantage of competition in IA. IA has now made its way in accounting book maintained by an organization. USA recently introduced the, Federal Accounting Standards Board (FASB) 141 and 142, accounting standards front and they own two accounting.IA which values and identifies the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) requirements in USA in companies required all new standards and (Chang, 2003) corporate the vale regarding certainty that have greatest investment which provide sheets balance in their valuations will be included.
IA can be seen differently in respect to law, finance& business perspectives. The focus was given by Authors to classify IP in terms of law. IC and IP are two categories of IA.Further classifications of IC are relational capital, human capital & organizational capital. The further classification in IP are copyright, protection of plant varieties, trade secrets, industrial design, geographical indication, layout design of integrated circuit, trademark & farmer’s rights. In many countries, separate act are enacted for each type of intellectual property based on the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Most countries have no special legal provisions for their protection, but trade secrets as intellectual property have been considered. A “trade secret” has significant confidentiality regarding the protection of degree in very small laws. An organization has an IPM, and IPM plays an important role in trade secret games. It maintains a process that prioritizes many organizations. Copyright or intellectual property means are the appropriate type for the same protection of others in place of trade secrets.
V. Intellectual Property Management In India
The Indian outcome led to realignment on the Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in general agreement and in 1991 the Government of India realized the economic liberalization of the dynamic sectors of various Indian firms in the new business environment. The global R&D centres was setup by many multinational companies (Gargateet al.) the giant corporate India have practices IP, they also manage to innovate new technology for necessary to look for India (MNCs). The multinational R&D facilities in total in India is over 871 in 2011 compare to 70 in 2008 and this new trend is fast increasing (Shrivastav, 2012). It has been recognized that India is a major hub for R&D activities which is mainly for the industrial sectors. It particularly relates to pharmaceutical, drugs, entertainment, biotechnology, information technology, space research& other fields which are developing. The chance is there by the helping environment to investigate the best & create the judicial vibrant then have strong enforcement mechanism for TRIPs compliant IP. The commercial activities have its diversity for community within the industrial sector that enable to protect the couple of India in law by ordering in the IP rights.(Indian patents, designs and trademarks workplace yearly account, 2011).
Fig2: Classification of IA
VI. Enforcement Of IPR In India
Indian IP policy being in accord to the International standards delivered by TRIPS Agreement is frequently meant to be frail and useless, mainly as regards protection for patent. According to newest GIPC Index delivered by US Chamber of Commerce in 2015, India at present has slightly improved during the last 2 years in IP enforcement but yet there is more to be done – it currently comes up at second last position.
It seems poor in approval of the patentability necessities to International Standards & in defining and yielding damages upon IP infringement.
Fig 3: GIPC International IP Index – 2015
In specific, it is very demoralizing for the Patent right as the Indian court does not permit injunctions simply& are not very lavish in computing and granting damages. This cause the IP right holders, to not get a chance to enjoy their IP assets at the full.
Frail IP implementation – Lower Barriers to Entry in India – India is the world’s largest science and technology group and thus is likely to be one of the world’s top markets for property-based industry intellectual. India has a lot of technological progress and production is generated – but does not correspond to IP protection. There is a curse due to the violation of intellectual property rights and it is a major obstacle to the economic development of India. This problem is commonly found in concessions and in the implementation of patent rights and other areas of intellectual property: trademarks, copyrights, etc.
Therefore, it is very important that a strong intellectual property law is formed, accompanied by equally robust and important enforcement mechanisms. Strong and fair protection of intellectual property rights is important. This is not only to provide innovative and rewarding incentives for innovative technologies, but also to provide financial incentives to owners.
A. Looking Forward at the Indian IPR Policy
So in the end, strong intellectual property law is not enough, enforcement is just as important. Legal experts in India have prepared to provide stable and hard work so that IP rights in India are sufficiently respected and protected. Courts order injunctions and personal injury if the courts deem it necessary.
Although additional hard work could be done to get rid of liability for poor enforcement of intellectual property rights. The current government is focusing on promoting R&D and protecting intellectual property; the situation in India could improve. The IPR’s Think Tank and the government’s ‘Make in India’ initiative presented a new draft of the National IPR Policy in this regard.
Intellectual property rights are legal rights that, in good view, offer more legal options. It can be shared between various and legal entities who value them, transferable to third parties and therefore useful in transactions. This applies in particular to the exclusive (economic) right that is permitted to every object of intellectual property and contains the basic legal options for its owner; use a legal person in any legal way and have that right. Developing countries should use the substitutions contained in the TRIPS Agreement and develop legal instruments and public policies to use the best potential of basic licenses for greater justice in society. In recent years we have seen many difficulties in developing the IPR regime, where IP rules and standards come from different means and regimes and practically overlap, reinforce or conflict with all. However, there are very different interests and no common understand or consensus on how to manage an area of concern, it is more likely to lead to complex, overlapping and inconsistent regimes – this is a broader point that can be addressed. One needs to understand the need for compulsory licensing and understand the TRIPs agreement. Numerous efforts have been made, some of which are very damaging to the country’s welfare and prevent it from complying with public regulations.
 School of Law, Galgotias University.
 Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi.
Creativity and Intellectual Property Rights,Rajesh A M, (July12, 2020, 09:42 AM),retrieved from: https://www.ifp.co.in/page/items/46959/creativity-and-intellectual-property-rights/
What is Intellectual Property?, World Intellectual Property Organization(July12,2020,
10:12 AM),retrieved from: https://www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/
Narayanan, S. (2010). Intellectual property rights economy vs. science and technology. International Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 1(1), 6-10.
Sharma, D. K. (2014).Intellectual Property and the Need to Protect it. Indian J. Sci. Res, 9(1), 084-087.
Intellectual Property Rights in India,Legal Service India (July 12,2020, 10:30 AM), retrieved from:
Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy,(July12,2020, 10:46 AM), retrieved from: http://www.iprcommission.org/papers/pdfs/final_report/CIPRfullfinal.pdf
Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy,World Intellectual Property Organization(July 12, 2020, 01:03PM),retrieved from:https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/intproperty/450/wipo_pub_450.pdf
Carneiro, A. (2000). How does knowledge management influence innovation and competitiveness?. Journal of knowledge management.
Sullivan, P. H. (1999). Profiting from intellectual capital. Journal of Knowledge Management.
Allen, K. R. (2003). Bringing new technology to market.Pearson College Division.
Blomqvist, K., Hara, V., Koivuniemi, J., &Äijö, T. (2004). Towards networked R&D management: the R&D approach of Sonera Corporation as an example. R&D Management, 34(5), 591-603.
An Introduction to Intellectual Property Rights and their Importance in Indian Context,World
Intellectual Property Organization(June 23, 2020, 09:39 AM), retrieved from: http://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/intproperty/450/wipo_pu b_450.pdf.
,Rationale of Copyright Protection,Copyright(June23, 2020, 10:20 AM), retrieved from:
, Intellectual Property Rights, Legal Services India(June23, 2020, 10:44 AM), retrieved from:
World Intellectual Property Organization. (2004). WIPO intellectual property handbook: Policy, law and use (Vol. 489). WIPO.
Nair, M. D. (2010). TRIPS, WTO and IPR-World Patents.
Intellectual Property Statistics, World Intellectual Property Organization (June16, 2020,
11:57 AM),retrieved from:www.wipo.int/ipstats/en/statistics/patents/wipo_pub_931.html
Manual of Patent Practice And Procedure The Patent Office, INDIA,Intellectual Property India
(June18, 2020,07:53 AM),retrieved from:
Julian-Arnold, G. (1992). International compulsory licensing: the rationales and the reality. Idea, 33, 349.
Lee, L. L. (2008). Trials and TRIPS-ulations: Indian patent law and Novartis AG v. Union of India. Berkeley Tech. LJ, 23, 281.
Dhavan, R., Harris, L., & Jain, G. (1991).POWER WITHOUT RESPONSIBILITY ON ASPECTS OF THE INDIAN PATENTS LEGISLATION. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 33(1), 1-75.
Mithal, V. P. (1948). Patents in India. J. Pat. Off. Soc’y, 30, 62.
Savale, S. K., &Savale, V. K. (2016). INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR).
Basheer, S. (2005).’Policy Style’Reasoning at the Indian Patent Office. Intellectual Property Quarterly, 3, 309-323.
Chaudhuri, S. (2002).TRIPS Agreement and amendment of Patents Act in India. Economic and political weekly, 3354-3360.
Bagchi, A. K., Banerjee, P., & Bhattacharya, U. K. (1984). Indian patents act and its relation to technological development in India: A preliminary investigation. Economic and Political Weekly, 287-304.
Ganguli, P. (1999). Towards TRIPs compliance in India: the patents amendment act 1999 and implications. World Patent Information, 21(4), 279-287.
Basheer, S. (2005). India’s tryst with TRIPS: the patents (amendment) act, 2005. Indian JL & Tech., 1, 15.
Guha, J. (2005). Time for India’s Intellectual Property Regime to Grow Up. Cardozo J. Int’l & Comp. L., 13, 225.
Patent Law in India, Mondaq(June26, 2020, 11:18 AM), retrieved from :
Lemley, M. A. (1996). Economics of improvement in intellectual property law. Tex. L. Rev., 75, 989.
Glaxo Smith Kline PLC v. Controller of Patents and Designs, MIPR 2008 (3) 131: 2008 (38) PTC 1(SC);
J. Mitra and Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Design, MIPR 2008 (3)31: 2008 (38) PTC 6 (SC).
A Detailed Study of Patent System for Protection of Inventions, India Journal of PharmaceuticalSciences(June 23, 2020, 12:16 AM), retrieved from: http://www.ijpsonline.com/articles/a-detailed-study-of-patent-system-for-protection-of-inventions.html
Using Patents, Patents, Trade Secrets, Secrets, Industrial Industrial Designs, Designs, Trademarks
Trademarks and Geographical Geographical Indications Indications for the Business Success Success of
SMEs,World Intellectual Property Organization(June 16, 2020, 09:45 AM), retrieved from:
Roth, M. E. (2005). Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue: A new tradition in non traditional trademark registrations. Cardozo L. Rev., 27, 457.
Trademark, Intellectual Property Office Of The Philippines(June26, 2020, 07:10 AM), retrieved from: www.ipophil.gov.ph/images/Design/republicactno9150.pdf.
Intellectual Property Law in India, Nishith Desai Associates (NDA) (July 12, 2020, 10:46 AM), retrieved from:http://www.nishithdesai.com/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/Research%20Papers/Intellectual_Property_Law_in_India.pdf
Standing Committee On The Law Of Trademarks, Industrial Designs And Geographical Indications,
World Intellectual Property Organization(July 12, 2020, 12:09 AM), retrieved from :
Kannan, N. (2010). Importance of intellectual property rights. Int. J. Intellec. Prop. Rights, 1, 1-5.
DratlerJr, J., &McJohn, S. M. (2020). Intellectual Property Law: Commercial, Creative and Industrial Property. Law Journal Press.
De Freitas, D. (1986). THE MAIN FEATURES OF COPYRIGHT PROTECTION IN THE VARIOUS LEGAL SYSTEMS. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 28(4), 441-449.
Myneni, S. R. (2003). Law of intellectual Property.Asia Law House.
Naseem, M., &Naseem, S. (2017). Energy law in India. Kluwer Law International BV.
The Copyright Act, 1957
Intellectual Property, Business And Intellectual Property Authority(July 10, 2020, 08:27
AM),retrieved from: www.bipa.gov.na/intellectual-property/copyright/
Copy Right, Intellectual Property Office(June10, 2020, 09:15 AM), retrieved from :
Sharma, V., Rajpurohit, G.S., Sharma, S. and Agarwal, A.,INDIAN IPR POLICIES IN GLOBAL
SCENARIO: A BREIF REVIEW,(2016).
ShikhaChaturvedi,Patents & Biotechnology,(June 12, 2020, 10:24 AM), retrieved from:
Chawla, H. S. (2005). Patenting of biological material and biotechnology.
Nair, G. G. (2008). Impact of TRIPS on Indian pharmaceutical industry.
 , 75Sharma, V., Rajpurohit, G.S., Sharma, S. and Agarwal, A., Indian IPR Policies In Global Scenario: A Brief
Correa, C. M. (2000). Intellectual property rights, the WTO and developing countries: the TRIPS agreement and policy options. Zed books.
Chowdhury, P., Khan, S. A., Dutta, P., &Mahanta, J. (2014). Pharmaceutical and biotech product patents in India: doldrums or blissfulness?. Nature biotechnology, 32(2), 133-134.
Archana, K. (2013). Do We Need Patent Protection to Biotechnology Inventions?. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 3(1), 2250-3153.
IPR Infringements: Facts and Figures,European Commission(June22, 2020, 12:55 AM), retrieved from:
Maskus, K. E., &Reichman, J. H. (2004).The globalization of private knowledge goods and the privatization of global public goods. Journal of International Economic Law, 7(2), 279-320.
Fuller, M. B., & Porter, M. E. (1986).Coalitions and global strategy from. Competition in global industries, 315, 344.
Braithwaite, J., &Drahos, P. (2000). Global business regulation.Cambridge university press.
Drahos, P. (2002). Developing countries and international intellectual property standard-setting. J. World Intell. Prop., 5, 765.
Machlup, F. (1958).An Economic Review of the Patent System. Study no. 15 of the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate. In 85th Congress, Second Session. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
Penrose, E. T. (1951). The economics of the international patent system (No. 30). Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins Press.
Drahos, P., & Braithwaite, J. (2002). Information feudalism: Who owns the knowledge economy?.Earthscan.
May, C., & Sell, S. K. (2006). Intellectual property rights: A critical history (p. 37). Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Sell, S. K., & Sell, S. K. (2003). Private power, public law: The globalization of intellectual property rights (Vol. 88). Cambridge University Press.
Muzaka, V. (2011). Linkages, contests and overlaps in the global intellectual property rights regime. European Journal of International Relations, 17(4), 755-776.
Food Patents—Stealing Indigenous Knowledge?,Anup Shah,Global Issues(June22, 2020, 11:23 AM), retrieved from : http://www.globalissues.org/article/191/food-patents-stealing-indigenous-knowledge
, 90What is Sui Generis System of Intellectual Property Protection?, Moni Wekesa, African Technology Policy Studies Network(June 14, 2020, 10:27AM), retrieved from: https://atpsnet.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/technopolicy_brief_series_13.pdf
Wipo. (2008). Intellectual Property Audit Tool, Ip Assets Management Series, ISBN E: 978-92-805-1450-6, WIPO Publication No. 927E
IDRIS, K. (2003). Overview-Intellectual Property: A Power Tool for Economic Growth.
Ruckdeschel, C. (1998). Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations by Thomas Stewart. Performance Improvement, 37, 56-59.
Collis, D. J. (1994). Research note: how valuable are organizational capabilities?. Strategic management journal, 15(S1), 143-152.
Chang, K. Y. (2003). Reforming US disclosure rules in global securities markets. Ann. Rev. Banking & Fin. L., 22, 237.
Gargate, G., Siddiquee, Q., &Wingkar, C. (2019).Intellectual property audit of an organization. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 22(1-2), 16-35.
Shrivastav I ,MNC R&D on the Upswing in India, Times Of India(June23,2020, 08:05AM), retrieved from:
Is Weak IP Law Enforcement In India A Deterrent To Indian Industry And Innovators? Economic Times
(July19, 2020, 12:36 AM), retrieved from: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/legal/is-weak-ip-law-enforcement-in-india-a-deterrent-to-indian-industry-and-innovators/articleshow/47862231.cms