This Article is written by Yash Pathak & this article shows Comparative Study: Intellectual Property Laws in UK, US and India.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- Introduction.
- What Are Intellectual Property Rights?
- Comparative Analysis Between the Three Countries.
- CONCLUSION.
“It is to the advantage of the community that there should be a government instrumentality, which can guide the inventor inexperienced in the ways of industry to make the best use of his discovery.”
–A. LAKSHMINATHI. Introduction
Inventions and developments that have facilitated and streamlined human existence are shielded by the intellectual property ecosystem. Intellectual property encompasses everything that has originated from the human mind, including innovations, ideas, poems, stories, sonnets, music, music samples, processes utilized in the development of products, and even methods for enhancing the efficacy of such processes. The realm of intellectual property law governs the distribution and manufacturing rights of such creations, in addition to the profits that result from them.
The Uruguay Round (1986-1994) of negotiations of the World Trade Organization (WTO) led to the initial integration of intellectual property regulations into the multilateral trading system, following seven and a half arduous years of deliberation. The Uruguay Round seeks to standardize intellectual property regulations under common international law in order to provide intellectual property with optimal and seamless protection. Notwithstanding these endeavors, certain inexorable disparities between economies continue to endure at present. Thus, despite the fact that each jurisdiction strives to have an IP law that is comparable and internationally uniform, there are variations. By means of the current article, the author intends to contrast and compare the intellectual property regimes and laws of the United Kingdom, India, and the United States.
II. What Are Intellectual Property Rights?
Intellectual property is a category of assets that are intangible. This means that they cannot be held and don’t necessarily have a physical presence. These assets are created using human intellect. Intellectual property can take many forms and includes things like artwork, symbols, logos, brand names, and designs, among others.
Companies are diligent when it comes to identifying and protecting intellectual property because it holds such high value in today’s increasingly knowledge-based economy. Also, producing value intellectual property requires heavy investments in brainpower and time of skilled labor. This translates into heavy investments by organizations and individuals that should not be accessed with no rights by others.
Extracting value from intellectual property and preventing others from deriving value from it is an important responsibility of any company. Although it’s an intangible asset, intellectual property can be far more valuable than a company’s physical assets. It can represent a competitive advantage and, as a result, is fiercely guarded and protected by the companies that own the property.
III. Comparative Analysis Between the Three Countries
Countries that have seen significant economic and technological advancements, such as the United States, have consistently been in the forefront of establishing and enforcing intellectual property rights. The United States Constitution stipulates that the exclusive right to their particular writings and discoveries shall be secured for authors and inventors, for a limited period of time, in order to foster the advancement of science and useful arts. This is an early and significant example of granting protection to discoveries, marking a significant milestone.[1]
Copyright
Regarding copyright, it has been found that there is a notable similarity in the copyright laws of the United Kingdom, the United States, and India. All three of the previously named countries adhere to the notion of ‘originality’ when granting copyright protection to “original literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic works.”
The term is mentioned in the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act (CDP Act) of the UK in 1988, and a comparable term was utilized in the United States’ Copyright Act of 1976. The Indian Copyright Act of 1957 adopted the terminology from Great Britain. One notable distinction in the copyright laws of these three countries is that the UK and India do not mandate copyright registration for protection to be valid, but the US requires copyright registration.
It is worth mentioning that the Brussels Convention, which deals with the unauthorized dissemination of satellite-transmitted program signals, has been ratified only by the US and not by both India and the UK.[2] While the UK and the US have ratified the Beijing convention, which addresses the intellectual property rights of artists in audiovisual performances, India has not yet acceded to the convention.
Patents
The Indian patent system includes the provision of “compulsory licensing,” which empowers the Indian government to give licenses to other parties if the patent holder fails to meet public requests or fulfill public obligations. This aspect of the Indian system indicates that the priority is placed on meeting the public’s needs for the invention, rather than prioritizing the protection of the creator. In contrast, the United States, as stipulated in its Constitution, seeks to provide significant protection to inventors under US law. If an innovation is publicly published without a patent, there is a one-year grace period to file for a patent.
Nevertheless, in order to encourage the development of new findings and innovations by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and educational institutions, provisions for safeguarding and reduced fees have been provided for patent registration in both the United States and India. In the United Kingdom, according to Article 60 of the European Patent Convention (EPC), and in India, according to Section 2(y), 6, and 7 of the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005, the individual who files the patent application first is recognized as the inventor. This means that the date of filing is given primary importance, even if another person comes up with the invention before the first person. In the United States, when multiple applications for the same invention are filed, a determination is made to establish the priority of the first inventor.
India, the US, and UK, as signatories of the Patent Cooperation Treaty, have the privilege of securing patent protection for an innovation simultaneously in each of the signatory countries by submitting a “international” patent application.
Due to Section 3 (k) of the Indian Patents Act, which limits the patentability of “computer programs per se” unless they have a technical application, many inventors are choosing to focus their interest on the United States rather than India. This shift is driven by the breakthroughs in artificial intelligence.[3] Nevertheless, US patent law allows for a wider range of software patents.
Trademark
Trademark rights in most countries are created by registering the trademark, a process commonly referred to as ‘First to File’. Nevertheless, in the United States, just like in the United Kingdom, the ownership of a trademark is determined by the individual or entity that initially utilizes it in commercial activities. This technique is referred to as the ‘First to Use’ system, which mandates the actual utilization of the mark in association with products or services as a prerequisite for safeguarding your trademark. Consequently, in the event of a disagreement between you and another party about a trademark, the party who initially utilized it for commercial purposes will possess the rights, regardless of whether they have not officially registered it.In the United States, the party that first utilizes a trademark for commercial purposes is the rightful owner of the trademark rights.
The US and UK have a highly advanced system that mandates the use of trademarks in the US or abroad, as well as the building of goodwill among the relevant consumers. In India, the focus lies on the significance and practical use of the term “use”, which might extend beyond physical objects. In the UK, the use must be considered “genuine” rather than being seen as “mere token use”. In contrast to the United States, India offers criminal sanctions for trademark infringement.[4]
India has not ratified the Singapore Treaty, which aims to establish an up-to-date and flexible international system for streamlining administrative trademark registration procedures. However, both the UK and the US have signed the treaty due to its broad applicability in the era of communication technology.[5]
India is a signatory to the Madrid pact, an important international pact that focuses on combating misleading and fraudulent indications about the origin of commodities.
IV. CONCLUSION
The intellectual property laws of India, USA, and UK exhibit both parallels and contrasts, which are indicative of their respective historical, economic, and social settings. Each of the three countries adheres to the doctrine of common law and provides patent safeguard for innovations that are novel, innovative, and industrially useful. Nevertheless, there are discrepancies in the qualifying requirements, registration procedure, length, and implementation of patents in each state.
The disparities in the legal frameworks of India, USA, and UK can have ramifications for the innovation and commerce endeavors of these nations. India’s patent regime may deter foreign investment and hinder knowledge transfer from developed countries with more robust patent protection. Conversely, India’s patent system can also promote domestic innovation and provide its enormous population with access to affordable medications and technologies. The patent systems of the USA and UK have the potential to draw increased international investment and facilitate the transfer of technology from other advanced nations. This can contribute to enhancing global competitiveness and establishing leadership in innovation. Nevertheless, the patent systems in the USA and UK may encounter difficulties such as patent trolling, high litigation expenses, and concerns over societal welfare.
Consequently, the intellectual property rules in India, USA, and UK are not standardized and possess their individual merits and drawbacks. IP protection strategies cannot be universally applied and must be tailored to the specific demands and objectives of each country.
[1]Shariq Khan, ‘India Climbs five places to 52 on Global Innovation Index’ (Economic Times, 24 July 2019), <accessed 10 January 2024>.
[2]WIPO, ‘Brussels Convention’, <accessed 10 January 2024>.
[3]Ferrad Allani v Union of India 2019 SCC OnLine Del 11867.
[4]Hardie Trading v. Addison Paints 2003(27) PTC 241.
[5]WIPO, ‘Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks’, <accessed 10 January 2024>.
