Skip to main content

“Laws regarding Geographical Indication Tag”- By Yashika Soni

 “Laws regarding Geographical Indication Tag”- By Yashika Soni

 

Meaning of a GI tag:

A Geographical Indication (GI) tag is a type of intellectual property, a certification granted to certain items or products from a specific location, state, or nation that are unique to that area. India is a World Trade Organization member, passed The Geographical Indications Of Goods (Registration And Protection) Act, 1999 from 15th September 2003.

A Geographical Indication, like other Intellectual Property Rights, is a non-physical asset that combines special rights and advantages to create a legal claim to future benefits. GI items are often agricultural, natural, or made items such as handicrafts. It is a mark or symbol used to identify a certain product.

Geographical Indications are an important aspect of the development process that promotes economic goals. These tags are used to safeguard natural resource and manufactured products ownership rights. Because GIs are collectively held by the state, they cannot be sold, rented, or transferred. GI tags on items prohibit illicit usage and provide financial advantage for producers by exporting the products.

How is a GI tag granted in India?

The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act of 1999 grants the Geographical Indication tag. All producers of goods or organisations are eligible to apply for GI. The geographical map of the territory or region in the nation where the products are made, as well as the class of goods to which it applies, must be included in the application. It must be in a prescribed form and a particular fee should be submitted along with a signature.

Groups of authorities will study and assess the application. To claim any rights in relation to such an indication, it is necessary to have the GI registered. A GI tag on a product prohibits unlawful usage and increases financial gain for manufacturers by exporting the goods. The price of a GI product rises on the international market as exports rise. Sec. 21 of the GI Act states that registration provides a right to file a suit for infringement. Sec. 23 attests to the existence of prima facie proof of GI ownership and validity. 

Laws regarding Geographical Indications and GI tags

The TRIPS Agreement establishes minimum requirements for the protection of GI that must be met by all WTO members. TRIPS Part II Section 3 establishes rules for the availability, scope, and application of GI. TRIPS Article 22 deals with the protection of Geographic Indication. The following is a list of the provisions:

  1. Geographical indications (GIs) designate a good as having originated in the territory of a member nation when the good's reputation or feature can be traced back to its location.

  2. The member nations shall establish legislative mechanisms to prevent:

  • Usage or exhibition of the commodity to deceive the public about its geographical origin,

  • Any usage of that good that constitutes an act of unfair competition within the meaning of Article 10 bis of the Paris Convention (1967).

  1. A member country's legislation may deny or invalidate a trademark for a GI for products not originating in the territory covered if the member country's use of that good may deceive the public about the precise place of origin.

The GI for wines and spirits is given further protection under TRIPS Article 23. In addition, the Paris Convention, Lisbon Agreement, Madrid Agreement, and Protocol for the Madrid Agreement, among others, are managed by the WIPO and deal in part or entirely with the protection of GI.

The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, as well as the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Rules, 2002, were enacted in India in order to comply with TRIPS.

Gruyere cheese from Switzerland, Mexican tequila, Roquefort cheese from France, Georgian wines, and Pinggu peaches from China are just a few of the well-known international GI Tags.

Many major items have been given GI tags in India, including Darjeeling Tea, Alphonso Mango, Kanchipuram Silk Saree, Basmati Rice, Kolhapuri Chappal, and others, for which the Indian government had to fight a legal struggle for decades in international courts to obtain the tag.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more