(..7..)
QUESTION BANK
Q.1. What is Traditional Knowledge? Discuss Global and Indian initiatives to protect Traditional Knowledge.
Q.2. Explain the meaning and importance of Traditional knowledge. Explain in detail the need for the protection of traditional knowledge.
Q.3. Explain the concept of traditional knowledge with its importance and discuss efforts taken by international concerns for the protection of traditional knowledge.
Short Notes
1. Importance of traditional knowledge.
SYNOPSIS
II. Need for Protection of Traditional Knowledge
III. Importance of Traditional Knowledge
IV. Efforts for the Protection of Traditional Knowledge
A. International Efforts to Protect Traditional Knowledge
2. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
3. TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights)
B. Indian Efforts to Protect Traditional Knowledge
1. Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL)
2. Legislative Framework and Landmark Judgments
a. The Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002:
b. The Biological Diversity Act, 2002:
c. The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 (PPV&FR):
*****
Knowledge is power. It moulds the life of an individual and fundamentally determines the quality of human existence. Traditional Knowledge (TK) refers to the cumulative body of knowledge, innovations, practical skills, and cultural practices developed, sustained, and passed on from generation to generation within a specific community. It frequently forms an integral part of the community’s cultural, social, or spiritual identity.
In the Indian ethos, this is vividly illustrated by everyday cultural practices; for instance, the leaves of the Neem tree (Azadirachta indica) hold immense spiritual and medicinal importance and are traditionally consumed or displayed during the Gudipadava festival in Maharashtra. This vast body of knowledge bypasses formal western education systems, passing through generations primarily through the medium of oral traditions, cultural practices, religious rituals, and community-specific carriers of skill.
Due to centuries of unbroken coexistence within their natural habitats, indigenous and tribal communities possess an immense, sophisticated understanding of complex ecosystems. This symbiotic relationship allows them to accurately comprehend the medicinal properties of local flora and fauna, the intricate functioning of local ecosystems, and the time-tested techniques required for managing and conserving them sustainably. Traditional knowledge is highly versatile and manifests in a variety of traditional concepts, including indigenous time calculation, unique food preparations, plant-based pharmacological properties, the therapeutic application of spices, Yoga, Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani systems of medicine, sustainable agriculture, ecological conservation, local building materials, and organic fuels.
In the contemporary era, the rapid advancement of biotechnology and the aggressive commercial practice of acquiring modern Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) over pre-existing traditional knowledge have posed a severe threat to indigenous heritage. There is a deeply concerning global trend where corporations and researchers exploit traditional knowledge for personal and commercial gains by acquiring exclusive patents over knowledge that rightfully belongs in the public domain or with local communities. This unauthorized commercialization directly affects the socio-economic framework and livelihoods of traditional communities who rely on these resources. Furthermore, indigenous peoples inherently lack the financial resources, legal literacy, and technical expertise required to navigate complex international IP frameworks to secure patents or safeguard their heritage proactively.
India’s vulnerability was starkly exposed when Western entities successfully obtained patents for utilizing age-old Indian remedies. Prominent examples include the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) granting patents for the wound-healing properties of Turmeric and the promotional claims over Basmati Rice, as well as the European Patent Office (EPO) granting a patent for the antifungal properties of Neem. These instances occurred despite the fact that the medicinal, agricultural, and therapeutic properties of these plants had been well-known and documented in the Indian sub-continent for centuries. This phenomenon, widely categorized as "biopiracy," highlights the critical need for robust defensive and positive legal protection frameworks.
Traditional knowledge makes a monumental contribution to the global mandate for sustainable development. The survival and economic subsistence of numerous rural and tribal communities depend entirely upon such knowledge systems. Through these deep-rooted practices, local populations effectively protect fragile ecosystems and promote robust biodiversity. The conservation techniques inherent in TK provide invaluable insights to the global scientific community, offering green alternatives to tackle modern environmental crises, climate change, and habitat loss.
Furthermore, traditional knowledge is uniquely vital for the socioeconomic subsistence of populations within developing and under-developed nations. Indigenous medicines and herbal formulations serve as affordable, easily accessible, and highly effective primary healthcare treatments for millions who cannot afford expensive synthetic pharmaceuticals. Similarly, Indian agricultural activities remain heavily dependent upon traditional weather forecasting, crop rotation, and seed preservation techniques. Beyond utility, a vast array of artistic expressions—ranging from classical and folk music to unique geographical handicrafts like Madhubani paintings or Dokra metal craft—are entirely anchored in traditional knowledge systems, preserving India's rich cultural fabric.
The absolute necessity of protecting traditional knowledge for the socio-economic well-being of its creators and the global community has received widespread acknowledgment. While customary laws and cultural taboos within indigenous communities historically regulated and preserved this knowledge, the modern surge in third-party commercial exploitation has turned it into a matter of international anxiety. Consequently, a series of legislative debates, institutional frameworks, and international conventions have been organized to preserve, promote, and legally protect traditional knowledge.
The World Intellectual Property Organization has emerged as a primary international forum addressing the intersection of IP law and indigenous heritage. In the year 2000, the WIPO General Assembly established the Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC). This committee serves as a dedicated international forum for rigorous debate regarding the exploitation of TK. By 2009, the IGC shifted its focus toward text-based negotiations to develop a legally binding international legal instrument that would effectively protect traditional knowledge, genetic resources, and traditional cultural expressions (folklore) worldwide.
Crucially, this culminated in a historic milestone in May 2024, when WIPO member states adopted the WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge. This landmark treaty mandates that patent applicants must disclose the country of origin or the indigenous community provider if the invention is based on traditional knowledge, closing a massive global loophole.
The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity introduces legally binding obligations for its signatory states regarding environmental conservation. Under Article 8(j) of the CBD, member nations are explicitly mandated to respect, preserve, and maintain the knowledge, innovations, and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles. The article further dictates that the wider commercial application of such knowledge must only occur with the prior informed consent, approval, and active involvement of the holders of such knowledge. Additionally, it strongly encourages the equitable sharing of benefits arising from the commercial utilization of these genetic resources and innovations.
The World Trade Organization's (WTO) TRIPS Agreement sets out the baseline global standards for IP enforcement. Article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement outlines guidelines for patentable subject matter across all fields of technology. Under Article 27.2, member nations are permitted to exclude plants, animals, and essentially biological processes from patentability to protect public order or morality. While this clause initially appears to shield traditional knowledge, subsequent provisions create loopholes by legalizing patents on microorganisms and microbiological processes.
To bridge this contradiction, Article 27.3(b) was reviewed in 1999 to harmonize TRIPS with the conservationist spirit of the CBD. This issue was raised again during the 2001 Doha Declaration and subsequently at the WTO ministerial meetings in 2008. Regrettably, due to deep ideological divides between industrialized and developing nations, these reviews ended inconclusively. Therefore, the global regime dictates that the mandate of protecting traditional knowledge is, by and large, left to the domestic legislation of individual sovereign countries.
India had to mount intense, highly expensive legal battles in international forums to successfully secure the revocation of misallocated foreign patents. A landmark instance was the Turmeric Patent Case (1997), where the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) successfully challenged a patent granted by the USPTO to the University of Mississippi Medical Centre for the use of turmeric in healing wounds. By producing ancient Sanskrit texts and published papers, India established a lack of novelty, forcing the USPTO to revoke the patent.
Similarly, in the Neem Patent Case (2005), the European Patent Office revoked a patent granted to the US Department of Agriculture and the multinational corporation W.R. Grace for a fungicidal neem oil formula, following a decade-long legal challenge led by Indian activists proving prior public use. Another monumental dispute involved the Basmati Rice Case, where India fought the Texas-based company RiceTec Inc., which had patented "Basmati rice lines and grains." India successfully forced the company to drop most of its sweeping patent claims.
These battles revealed that India was losing control of its heritage due to the absence of a structured, easily accessible digital database that foreign patent examiners could cross-reference. Learning from these grueling legal experiences, India took immediate defensive steps, establishing the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) as a pioneering global milestone.
Protecting India’s vast traditional asset pool from systemic patent piracy was an extraordinary administrative challenge. Recognizing this urgency, the Central Government, under the visionary guidance of Mr. V. K. Gupta, constituted an inter-disciplinary task force to create a comprehensive digital repository, specifically targeting the medicinal domain. Within an impressive two-year period, the task force launched the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library in 2003. The TKDL has since proven to be an invaluable defensive tool against biopiracy. WIPO has highly commended India's proactive implementation of the TKDL, officially advising other developing economies to replicate the Indian model to safeguard their domestic heritage.
The TKDL operates as a secure digital repository documenting traditional systems of medicine, including Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha, and Yoga. It utilizes a unique structured framework known as the Traditional Knowledge Resource Classification (TKRC). To date, the library has meticulously digitized and recorded approximately 3.6 lakh (360,000) formulations detailing exact medicinal preparations. Crucially, the TKDL broke the language barrier by translating ancient Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian, and Tamil texts into five major international languages: English, German, Spanish, French, and Japanese. By providing international patent offices with direct, searchable access to this database, India ensures that patent examiners automatically reject third-party patent applications targeting Indian heritage due to a documented lack of novelty and prior art.
In tandem with digital documentation, the Parliament of India has enacted and progressively amended several Intellectual Property laws to create a robust domestic defense mechanism against biopiracy. The pillars of this legislative framework include:
a. The Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002: Introduced Section 3(p), which explicitly states that an invention which, in effect, is traditional knowledge or which is an aggregation or duplication of known properties of traditionally known component(s) is not patentable. It also introduced mandates requiring patent applicants to disclose the source and geographical origin of biological materials used in their inventions.
b. The Biological Diversity Act, 2002: Enacted to fulfill India's obligations under the CBD, this Act regulates access to biological resources and associated knowledge. It mandates that foreign individuals and commercial entities must obtain prior approval from the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) before accessing Indian biological resources or applying for any IPR based on them, ensuring equitable benefit-sharing with local communities.
c. The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 (PPV&FR): Protects the traditional rights of farmers to save, use, sow, re-sow, exchange, share, or sell their farm-saved seeds, preventing corporate monopolies over traditional crop varieties.
The judiciary has strongly reinforced these legislative mandates. In the landmark judgment Divya Pharmacy v. Union of India & Others, 2018 SCC OnLine Utt 1035 , the Uttarakhand High Court fiercely upheld the concept of Fair and Equitable Benefit Sharing (FEBS) under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. The Court ruled that Indian commercial entities (such as Divya Pharmacy/Patanjali Ayurveda) are equally obligated to share their commercial profits with local and indigenous communities from whom they source traditional biological resources, affirming that traditional knowledge cannot be exploited commercially without compensating its original custodians.
In conclusion, India’s traditional knowledge is exceptionally rich, deeply rooted in antiquity, and passed down as a sacred trust across generations. The successful combination of defensive digital infrastructure like the TKDL, stringent domestic statutes, and proactive judicial enforcement underscores the necessity of making every possible effort to shield this invaluable heritage from international piracy and commercial exploitation.