Introduction to Intangible Property

John Locke believed that people have a natural right to their property, especially when it results from their own labor. The concept of "property" brings to mind the idea of ownership, which defines the relationship between a person and an object. Ownership involves a complex mix of rights, duties, and obligations. This concept is so deeply embedded in our lives that it's hard to imagine a world without it. Ownership extends beyond physical objects to intangible ones as well, such as brands, identities, copyrights, trademarks, and patents. These intangible assets, although lacking a physical form, allow individuals to claim ownership based on their creativity.

For example, consider a pharmaceutical company that invents a new medicine effective in curing cancer. The company has the right to prevent others from copying the medicine without permission. This right is known as intellectual property (IP) rights. With the rise of industrialization and rapid technological advancements, there is a growing need for and awareness of IP rights globally. These rights protect artistic and scientific works by providing patents, trademarks, copyrights, and more, for specific periods—20 years for patents, 10 years for trademarks, and 60 years for copyrights, for instance.

Is Intangible Property Also a Human Right?

In the late 19th century, intellectual property rights were not seen as crucial, but today they hold significant value in the market, bringing with them various obligations. This shift led to the creation of international agreements and organizations, such as the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in 1995 and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). As technology and global awareness have grown, so has the intersection between human rights and IP rights.

Following World War II, there was a major push for human rights treaties, leading to what has been called the "age of rights" and the "era of humanitarianism." The United Nations played a significant role in this movement through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). This gave rise to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, specifically Article 17 of the UDHR. Both human rights and IP rights have since grown in significance, and their relationship has become increasingly important.

An example of this intersection can be seen in a case involving an Australian artist whose aboriginal designs were copied by a manufacturer without permission. The designs were sacred, intended to be seen only during special ceremonies. The court ruled that this was not just a violation of IP rights but also of human rights, as it infringed on the religious and cultural sentiments of the artist's community. The court ordered the manufacturer to compensate the artist, recognizing that while financial compensation could address the IP infringement, the deeper cultural violation required consideration from a human rights perspective, as it was vital to the survival of the community's identity.

How Does Intangible Property Affect the Economy?

Intellectual property, such as patents, has always been a subject of debate, especially regarding its impact on a country's growth. Despite its immobility, intangible property plays a crucial role in economic development, earning it the title "the currency of the knowledge economy." When innovations are analyzed from an economic perspective, the creation of intellectual property rights (IPR) laws can be justified as essential. IPR encourages innovation by allowing individuals to explore new possibilities with existing resources, making it a key factor in economic growth.

In the 1970s, the introduction of the Patent Act in India aimed not only to grant rights to inventors but also to accelerate technological development, thereby improving the country's economic condition. Before the establishment of TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights), the Indian market struggled due to the lack of such rights, particularly in areas like medicine. The Central Drug Research Institute played a significant role in drug development, but recognition and innovation were limited. However, after TRIPS was implemented, new opportunities emerged, boosting the Indian economy by opening up markets for innovation. A survey showed that the Indian market began to thrive with the promotion of IPR.

Take, for example, Ranbaxy, an Indian company founded in 1961 in Gurgaon. After the introduction of IPR, Ranbaxy achieved a total sales figure of $1.03 billion and expanded into major markets in the U.S., Brazil, Russia, and China. This growth illustrates how the harmonization of IPR laws has opened new avenues for innovation in developing countries like India.

How Is It Emerging in India?

In India, the concept of fair dealing serves as a limitation and exception to copyright law, allowing the use of copyrighted material under certain conditions without infringing on the original creator's rights. This balance between fair use and copyright protection is rooted in the doctrine of equity, which distinguishes between the moral and dishonest intentions behind copying work. This doctrine was incorporated into TRIPS, and all member countries are required to adhere to it.

Indian and UK copyright laws are considered strict and limited, allowing minimal flexibility compared to the more open U.S. laws, which permit easier modifications of existing works. Despite India's significant progress, the country still faces challenges in the area of fair dealing. India's strict adherence to rules means that even minor violations can lead to copyright infringement.

A notable example is the case of Independent News Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Yashraj Films Pvt. Ltd. and Supercassettes Ltd. In this case, "India TV" aired a documentary featuring a singer's life, performances, songs, and movie clips, leading to a copyright infringement lawsuit. The defendants argued that their actions fell under fair use, but the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendants from using any music, songs, or movie clips, as it would constitute a violation of the law. This judgment highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to fair dealing in India, allowing the system to be more flexible while distinguishing between appropriate and inappropriate use.

Conclusion

Intellectual property rights have gained significant importance in the modern technological landscape, driven by increased awareness of their societal and economic benefits. As we progress through the 21st century, new technologies and challenges arise, each with its own set of opportunities and burdens. The modern approach to intangible property is a boon for inventors, encouraging them to innovate, learn, and earn more. This not only fosters growth in the artistic world but also gives the imaginative realm a platform to prove its worth and make a mark in the world.