Skip Navigation


Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice Advance Access originally published online on September 2, 2008
Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2008 3(11):732-738; doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpn160
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
3/11/732    most recent
jpn160v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Singhal, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved

Geographical indications and traditional knowledge

Shivani Singhal*
Legal context: This article examines the suitability of geographical indications (GIs) for the protection of traditional knowledge (TK), vis-à-vis other modes such as patents, copyright, and trade mark. It considers special difficulties like collective ownership which are associated with protection of TK, as well as the needs and expectations of the holders of TK, in order to gauge the effectiveness of GIs.

Key points: While GIs may be the best tool among the existing IP rights instruments for the protection of TK, they are inadequate in many ways. First, the definition and nature of GIs itself excludes certain categories of TK from its purview. Secondly, even when it is possible to obtain a GI, the level of protection rarely measures up to the expectations of TK holders. For instance, GIs cannot guard against offensive use of TK, nor can they prevent the knowledge from entering the public domain. Therefore, instead of pigeon-holing TK into one of the existing systems for protection of IP, an attempt must be made to formulate a sui generis model that will address concerns which are specific to protection of TK.

Practical significance: This article uses registered GIs in India to illustrate the variation in the level of protection depending on the nature of TK that is sought to be protected. Apart from indicating the types of TK which can be best protected by GIs, this article also indicates the concerns that must be addressed by any new sui generis system that may be devised in the future.

Key Words: This article discusses the circumstances under which geographical indications (GIs) can be effectively used for the protection of traditional knowledge (TK). • The author explores the degree of protection afforded by GIs, and whether this protection measures up to the needs and expectations of the holders of TK. • The author concludes that the protection provided by GIs is inadequate because they can neither guard against disrespectful use or misappropriation of TK, nor do they contain any explicit mechanism for benefit-sharing.

Correspondence: * National Law School of India University, Bangalore, India. Email: shivani{at}nls.ac.in


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.