Introduction
Patents are bestowed upon inventors as a form of limited monopoly rights, contingent upon the requirement that inventors disclose all technical intricacies associated with their invention. The information mentioned above is commonly referred to as the “patent specification.” As per the Faustian pact, it is incumbent upon the applicant to divulge their invention, thereby enabling a “person skilled in the art” to utilize or manipulate it. The applicant, in the context of an exchange, is bestowed with a patent by the state through its Patent Office. This patent grants the applicant exclusive rights to commercialize their patented invention, thereby providing them with a twenty-year period to generate financial gains from it.
A considerable proportion of a database containing technical information that could have been considered confidential under alternative circumstances has been revealed. The disclosed information adds to the collective body of technical knowledge that has been accumulated by humans. The proliferation of the public knowledge corpus serves as a catalyst for individuals to actively participate in novel endeavours and generate original ideas. In addition, patents serve as a means of transmitting knowledge and inspiration to future generations of inventors and scientists, while also providing protection to the patent holder. According to historical accounts, Abraham Lincoln, the esteemed sixteenth President of the United States, purportedly expressed the notion that the patent system serves to augment the fervour of intellectual brilliance.[1]
Evolution of Patent Law in India:
The historical records of the Indian patent system document the enactment of a substantial volume of legislative measures. The legislation pertaining to patent rights, known as Act VI of 1856, was enacted in the fiscal year of its inception. Under this legislation, individuals who created new inventions were granted exclusive rights for a period of fourteen years. The Act No. XV of 1859, which was reenacted under British rule, is commonly referred to as the Act of 1959. This legislation bestowed inventors with exclusive privileges. This reenactment took place following the recognition of shortcomings in the initial legislation. The primary purpose of these two Acts is to bestow upon inventors the privilege of possessing exclusive rights.
Two legislative acts were passed in the years following 1872: the Patent and Designs Act of 1872 and the Protection of Inventions Act of 1883. The 1888 Inventions and Designs Act can be considered as an amalgamation of various preceding chapters. The Patents and Designs Act was subsequently enacted in 1911, thereby rendering all preceding Acts ultimately redundant. The Patent Act of 1970 held a prominent position in India, despite the introduction of several amendments at different points in time. The Act of 1911 in India introduced a novel patent administration system overseen by the Controller of Patents. This system incorporated a time-bound framework for handling various tasks such as processing applications and filing objections. One notable instance of significant legislation implemented in the year 1970 was the enactment of the Patent Act of 1970. The foundation of this argument is based on the assessments and findings of two renowned legal scholars.
The Bakshi Tek Chand Report was issued by the Justice Department in the year 1950. In the year 1948, the government of India established a committee with the primary aim of undertaking an examination of the patent laws in the country. The committee’s presider was Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand, a former judge of the Lahore High Court. The committee aimed to enhance the alignment of the patent system with the nation’s interests. The Act of 1911 underwent amendments through Act 32 of 1950, specifically targeting Sections 22, 23, and 23A to 23G. These amendments were prompted by the interim report submitted by the committee on August 4, 1949. The 1911 Act incorporates the following amendments. The President received the final report of the Committee in April 1950. The Bill of 59 of 1953 was introduced with the objective of repealing provisions related to opposition proceedings. The origins of this legislation can be primarily traced back to the United Kingdom Patents Act of 1949. Nevertheless, as a result of the absence of subsequent efforts, this legislative proposal reached its conclusion without any additional measures being taken and ultimately lapsed. [2]
A Critical Examination of the Compilation Authored by Judge RajagopalaAyyangar during the Period of 1957-1959: Following this, in 1957, the Government of India sought the expertise of Shri. Justice N. RajagopalaAyyangar and Dr. S. Venkateswaran for guidance regarding the amendment of the Patent Law. This committee has identified specific prerequisites that must be met by a nation in order to obtain benefits from a patent system. The aforementioned attributes encapsulate India’s crucial need to promote innovation by offering financial incentives to its innovators, expediting industrialization, emphasising the importance of technical education, establishing renowned research institutes, and facilitating further advancements. The Committee underscores the necessity of making adjustments to the current patent protection system in order to better address the unique circumstances prevailing in India. After thorough deliberation, a three-fold approach is suggested: (i) the identification of inventions necessitating safeguarding; (ii) the assessment of whether foreign entities should be barred from acquiring Indian patents or compelled to operate the patent within India; and (iii) the rejection of succumbing to pressure to ratify international agreements that acknowledge solely claims related to chemical substance processes. Furthermore, a proposal has been put forth advocating for the limitation of patent eligibility solely to the manufacturing procedures utilised in the creation of similar substances, encompassing various domains such as food production, pharmaceuticals, insect control, and fungicide development. The aforementioned proposal was presented with the objective of facilitating India’s independent economic growth, free from the influence of more advanced nations and without the need to adhere to their guidance.
In 1959, Shri Ayyangar presented a report that delineated several recommendations aimed at implementing significant reforms within the legal system. In 1965, the Lok Sabha introduced a Patent Bill based on the aforementioned report. However, the Bill was not enacted due to the dissolution of the House of Representatives in 1966. The current legislation governing patents in India is the Patents Act of 1970. This act was enacted as an amended bill following the inauguration of the new Lok Sabha in 1967. The Draught Patent Rules were made accessible for public scrutiny in November 1971. The Act and its final rules were made enforceable on April 20, 1972, with only a few provisions being exempt from this requirement. There exist several similarities between the Patents Act of 1970 in India and the Patents Act of 1949 in the United Kingdom. Nevertheless, significant differences can be observed between the two legislative acts, specifically in relation to patent licencing, the duration of drug and medicine patents, and product patents.
The Patents Act of 1970 underwent several amendments in the year 1999. The Patents (Amendment) Act of 2002 and the Patents (Amendment) Act of 2005 provided the necessary provisions for making further modifications in compliance with the obligations outlined in the TRIPS agreement. The 1971 Patent Rules have been rendered obsolete by the subsequent publication of the more recent rules in 2003. The Patents (Amendment) Rules of 2005 and the Patent (Amendment) Rules of 2006 have implemented supplementary alterations to the Patent Rules of 2003. The Patents (Amendment) Rules, 2014 came into effect on February 28th, 2014.
[1]Pammolli F, Magazzini L, Riccaboni M (2011) The productivity crisis in pharmaceutical R&D. Nat Rev Drug Discov 10(6):428
[2]Anderman Steven D.(Ed), “The Interface Between Intellectual Property Rights and Competition Policy”, Cambridge University Press, 2007