Abstract
The indigenous products are considered to be a symbol of a community’s cultural identity. These products form a major part of identity of one nation. These products play a major role in displaying the cultural diversity and heritage of the country and also a source of attracting tourism by way of advertising these products. These products being vulnerable to exploitation also require protection. The Indian legislature enacted the Geographical Indications (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999. However, the recent trends in the fashion industry displayed the products being exposed to evasion of the provisions of the statute through imitation. This issue being highlighted prominently in the Prada’s imitation of the GI – protected Kolhapuri Chappal. Prada being an Italian company which brings in the technicalities of inter-jurisdictional disputes. The paper aims that discussing the implication of the protection granted under the Geographical Indications Framework of the Indigenous products and provide possible solutions to resolve the inter jurisdictional disputes.
Keywords: Indigenous products, geographical Indication, alternate dispute resolution mechanism, imitation
INTRODUCTION
India is known for its well crafted indigenous products by the well experienced craftsmen. These products are well known for their uniqueness which makes them a representative of India’s culture and traditional knowledge systems. However, it can be noted that these products are produced by indigenous communities who are mainly dependent on the creation of these products as their main source of income generation. Additionally, it can be noted that the product makers are highly skilled in their craftsmanship however they lack formal education. The lack of formal education makes them vulnerable to their craft ships being imitated or copied by influential and powerful companies in the fashion industry This lack of formal education multiplies the issue of lack of awareness of the rights available to the indigenous craftsman in the case of imitation.
The inception of the public outrage on Prada began after the revelation of the brand’s Spring/Summer collection for men. The top highlight of the men’s collection was the open-toe leather sandals. The displayed sandals are found to be chappal produced by the Kolhapur artisans. The representation of the products being made by Prada without acknowledgement of the product originating in Kolhapur raised alarm about the possible intimidation and infringement of the protection of the indigenous product produced by the Kolhapur based Charmakar community who are given the status of a scheduled caste.[1] The high pricing of Prada’s leather sandals is seen as to the community’s income as the manufacture of these goods are an essential part of their livelihood. The Prada’ imitation of the Kolhapuri Chappal is also seen as an attempt of cultural appropriation of the Indian traditional cultures.
Kolhapuri Chappal had received its GI TAG in 2019. The authorized users of the GI Tag are the Sant Rohidas Leather Industries & Charmakar Development Corporation Ltd (LIDCOM) and Dr Babu Jagjivan Ram Leather Industries Development Corporation Ltd (LIDKAR) under the GI Act,
This case of Prada’s imitation of the Kolhapuri Chappal has brought into light this major area of concern. The Italian company Prada displays the inspiration of Kolhapuri Chhappal has raised concerns regarding the safety of indigenous products protected under the geographical indication law within one’s jurisdiction and the impact it can have on other territorial jurisdictions. The case highlights the lacunas in the legal framework of the impact on the imitation of indigenous products by a fashion brand in a different country.
[1]Sanjay Jain, Prada-Kolhapuri Chappal Controversy: Tip of the iceberg, BAR And BENCH (July 26th, 2025, 3:44 PM). https://www.barandbench.com/columns/prada-kolhapuri-chappal-controversy-a-tip-of-the-iceberg