Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Section 3(d): ‘New’ Indian Perspective|
|Abstract:||Instead of the theoretical approach, this article attempts to visit the famed Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act from a practical viewpoint. Examining the relevance and actual working of this Section in the Indian context, this article not only emphasizes the need to retain it, albeit in a modified form, but it also attempts to strike a balance between the competing, and seemingly conflicting interests of various ‘interest groups[AK1] ’ and their ideologies of various shades at different levels, viz. <i>national</i> v <i>internationalism</i>, <i>under-developed/undeveloped/developing nations</i> v <i>developed nations</i>, <i>generics</i> v <i>innovators</i>, <i>Indian companies</i> v <i>MNCs</i>, <i>public interest</i> v <i>commercial interest</i>, <i>socialistic</i> <i>policies</i> <i>of a welfare state</i> v <i>capitalism</i>, etc. While still advocating for its (modified) existence, this article does not restrict its advocacy to narrow traditional jingoism; rather, it urges the Indian stakeholders, especially the Indian companies and the Indian Government to use this nobly-intended provision as an ‘opportunity’ to transform itself from the ‘inventing around’ players to the ‘inventing’ players, thereby enabling the nation as a whole to catapult itself into the big world pharmaceutical league. For the protection of incremental innovations, the author advocates enactment of a supplementary ‘petty’ patent system [AK1]I would like to retain the word 'interest', as the phrase "interest group" is a specific terminology, used to describe various factions/ advocacy groups who have their own sectarian interests.|
|ISSN:||0975-1076 (Online); 0971-7544 (Print)|
|Appears in Collections:||JIPR Vol.14(5) [September 2009]|
Items in NOPR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.