The Cutting Edge Of IPR

India has tremendous heritage in the creative arts. Extending the protection of rights of individuals to a whole gamut of creativity will give the industry a great comparative advantage.

- Rajeev Srinivasan

THERE IS MONEY in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). In case you don’t believe me, I refer you to a “Paradise Papers”-related report in the New York Times on 6 November (“After a Tax Crackdown, Apple Found a New Shelter for Its Profits”), which suggests that Apple sheltered $200 billion worth of intellectual property in Ireland, using a peculiar provision in Irish law; $200 billion — a serious chunk of change.

India woke up relatively late to this fact and to the related fact that there is a global regimen of IP rights that you have to play in properly to get value out of it. The country has been busy fighting fires over IP (especially as related to the pharma industry and to accession to the World Trade Organization) and US Super 301 trade sanctions, and it was only in 2016 that a comprehensive IPR Policy was finally adopted. (Disclaimer: I was a member of the six-person panel that wrote it, but what I say here is my personal opinion, which may not coincide with the opinions of the Government of India or the rest of the panel).

There is a curious dichotomy in Intellectual Property. On the one hand, IP rights are private rights guaranteed by a government to the inventor or creator of something new, which, in effect, gives them monopoly power over the use of their idea. On the other hand, these rights are given for a limited period of time, so that the ideas can and eventually will be available to the entire public, in an equitable manner.