The Role of IPR in Plant Genetic Engineering
DOI:
Abstract
The role and status of Patent laws in the protection of plant species which have been genetically modified is currently uncertain in India. Discussions and debates regarding the same are rife and experts have different views regarding the whole aspect concerning economical and ethical considerations. Genetically engineered plants and modified crop plants are of significant economic value. In India, they face critical challenges, for instance, the requirement of dependable public policies and vigorous frameworks for regulatory control. This becomes much more vital since India desires to be an economic superpower primarily based on innovation. It is very important for a person from the legal field, especially those interested in the field of IPR, to have clarity regarding the protection of genetically modified plants. This humble attempt at a research paper seeks to clarify the same and discusses the various aspects on which one should think while concluding their views on the topic.
Downloads
Views : 349
Downloads : 226
References
K. Yadav, The High-Yielding Varieties Program. Agropedia. [Online]. Available: http:// agropedia.iitk.ac.in/content/high-yielding-variety-programme. [Accessed: June. 26, 2010].
C. Webb, Introduction to Engineering Fundamentals of Biotechnology. Manchester: The University of Manchester, 2011.
K. C. Liu and U. Racherla, Innovation, Economic Development, and Intellectual Property in India and China. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2019.
UPSTO, “Agreement on Trade- Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights,” United States Patent and Trademark Office. 2017. [Online]. Available: https:// www.uspto.gov/ip-policy/patent-policy/trade-related-aspects-ip-rights. [Accessed: November. 6, 2019].
IPTF Luncheon, Is a Sui Generis System Necessary?. New York City: IIPI, 2004.
B. P. S. Singh, The Patents Act, 1970. India: Intelectual Property India, 2015.
P. Sinha, Monsanto Technology LLC And Ors Vs. Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd. And Ors. Mondaq. 2018. [Online]. Available: https:// www.mondaq.com/india/trademark/701912/monsanto-technology-llc-and-ors-vs-nuziveedu-seeds-ltd-and-ors. [Accessed: November. 6, 2019].
C. J. McLachlin, G. L’Heureux Dubé, M. Iacobucci, B. A. Bastarache, and J. LeBel, Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents), (2002) 4 SCR 45. Canada: Supreme Court of Canada, 2002.
Indiacode, The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001. India: Acts of Parliament, 2001.
Cambridge. (n.d), Meaning of microorganism in English. Cambridge Dictionary, 2020. [Online]. Available: https:// dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/microorganism. [Accessed: May. 28, 2020].
UPOV, International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. Geneva: UPOV Publication, 1991.
Legislative, The Essential Commodities Act. 1955. India: http:// legislative.gov.in/sites/default/ files/A1955-10.pdf. [Accessed: November. 6, 2019].
Ministry of Law, Justice, and Company Affairs, The Trademarks Act, 1999. India: Acts of Parliament, 1999. [Accessed: November. 6, 2019].
C. J. McLachlin, M. Iacobucci, B. A. Bastarache, D. LeBel, and J. Fish, Percy Schmeiser v. Monsanto, 2004 1 SCR 902. Canada: Supreme Court of Canada, 2004.
R. V. Raveendran and H. L. Gokhale. Alka Gupta vs. Narender Kumar Gupta (2010) 10 SCC 141. India: Supreme Court of India, 2010.
Vikaspedia, Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmer’s Act. India, Vikaspedia, 2001. [Online]. Available: https:// vikaspedia.in/agriculture/policies-and-schemes/crops-related/protection-of-plant-varieties-and-rights-of-farmers/protection-of-plant-varieties-and-farmers-rights-act-2001. [Accessed: March. 14, 2020].
Department of Agriculture and Co-operation., The Plant Varieties Protection Appellate Tribunal (Applications and Appeals) Rules. New Delhi: Ministry of Agriculture, 2010.
