Licenses, When become Compulsory!

 

In the last few blogs, I briefly discussed certain provisions of IT ACT, IP including PCT, Madrid Protocol, Designs, Copyrights, UDRP Arbitration, What constitutes Originality in the World etc. So, continuing further the said journey, I discuss about the context of Compulsory Licensing.

Read Bayer vs. Natco case that would help elucidating the necessity of Compulsory Licensing in Invention & why it’s not being in any way Compulsive; under S. 84 & R. 96. Why Compulsory Licensing is needed; sometimes for -> Public Interest, Adequate Supply, Removing Monopoly (alike Antitrust, March-in Rights, Unfair Practice, in U.S. Patent), mitigate Abuse of Rights, etc. Do we need such Licenses in Trade Marks? Of course Not! Why one would as what one would do with any of such provision? And already provisions of Rectification, Invalidation are present for non-use. Do we need Compulsory License in Designs? Nope! Design Patent? Not Necessary! And what about Copyrights? Yup, provisions are mentioned & the reasons as well, why it sometimes becomes necessary, for instance, when the specific material is unpublished & author remined untraced, or when the Work has been disallowed from being republished, or for the benefit of disabled!

Again, I repeat, IP is necessary for Recognition of Original Creators/Inventors, &, NOT for Exploitation of Public in general. That’s why, I say, Nicola Tesla > Edison! 😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi