Two Facts! The Biodiversity approval can be standalone, or, can float in parallel to the Patent. Correct? Whilst the Patent approval can’t work in separate (if in case biological resource is involved), and until and unless, the approval from the Biodiversity Authority is further obtained. Correct? Thus, the two converge, when filing of any Patent is initiated and then, the approval of the Biodiversity is required to be obtained, but, never the other way around, as the latter is independent to that. Correct? But here my dilemma ripens.
In most of the cases, until and unless, steroidal compounds are involved, or such been extracted from the roots or plants or trees or animals, or any of their derivatives are involved, or genetic components taken; the inventive steps usually are not considered! Except, of course if in case the value-added products are invoked. And with this I completely agree, as it is a much-needed step to stop exploitation of biological resources, without any iota of doubt! But my dilemma ripens when we’re discussing those admixtures that may circumvent S.3(e), just like when software programs ‘per se’ can circumvent S.3(k).Issue is, let’s say, can a basic lemonade then be also made to fall under the ambit of biodiversity approval? And If you add more of the herbs in it, then, can that further make a point of its necessity to take the approvals of basic admixtures as they too involve biological resources, both under S.3 and S.7 of the Biological Diversity Act?
It is an important part of discussion, as albeit a person didn’t derive nor used the genetic materials of any plant or animal nor their derivatives; but, as all the procured ingredients available in the open market were further derived from biological and scientific means; thus, can all the admixtures, whether contended for inventorship or not, be also considered under the ambit of Biodiversity approvals? If yes, then can now the eatery outlets be also asked for the same before introducing their let’s say from Mojito to Cocktails?
My dilemma changes everything! Now just alike the scope of S. 3(k) has been expanded in the Software Programs (‘per se’), wherein now, even it is said that algorithms too could be considered as an invention subject to if other criteria it fulfils of invention; then can this admixture part also, be expanded under the scope of S. 3(e), and not only in the Patents, but also wherein a person, using the admixture of the ingredients falling under the scope of Biodiversity, would now also be included under this ambit to get the approvals?
I’m not confusing anyone but just expanding the definitions; alike this space is expanding and the galaxies running from each other; so as my dilemmas! 😊
© Pranav Chaturvedi
No comments:
Post a Comment