Why I Always Contended To Equate Geographical Indications Similar To That Of Copyrights (Minus Timelines Of Rights Bestowed & Requirement For Registration)!

 

Because, alike in BERNE for Copyrights; and as Article 22 of TRIPS also provides G.I. protection to the member nations of the Agreement, but now, delete the expiry timelines, as one is perpetual, whilst the other not; and albeit one can seek protection of G.I. even in other nations, alas, needs to be registered therein with the address of service. But, as per my theory, this part should be removed and circumvented aka the provisions of filing of the application in other countries wherein the address of service is needed; as this requirement I was always opposed to, which dilutes the provisions of the G.I. definition itself, making it equivalent to the simple Trademarks (note: a trademark cannot be registered if it represents a geographical indication). Rather, I wanted it to become equivalent to like BERNE’s Copyright! Universally applicable, BUT further, not making its registration prima facie evidence of validity, rather, making its registration Mandatory, wherein it is manufactured, produced, originated from.

Again, at the time of dispute, a wrong terminology is always used to describe any case i.e. using the term ‘Design’; instead of using G.I., which is more appropriate.  

Take this example-> When one introduces something as Champagne; then that person is referring to the French G.I.’s, and not equating the ingredients’, processes used to create it that gives a similar taste and texture used by someone else at some other place; because, at the end of the day, latter argument doesn’t matter in the case of G.I.s. You know why?

Because to manufacture any G.I., you’ve to be associated and present at that particular region or place as an -> AUTHORIZED USER. Of course, you can make something similar, BUT, one must be present therein! And if not, then, it’s not G.I., and further, if that’s been manufactured even on the other side of the World, that may constitute deception and passing off, as well as infringement (in case G.I. is registered in the territory from where it is originated); and further, contrary to any of this, the local authorities of that nation therein can ask for cease and desist to stop bamboozling the guileless public at large by selling someone else’s G.I.s.

Now you’re noticing the similarity between why I contended to equate Copyright with the G.I.? There should be absolutely no need whatsoever for the registration of any G.I. in any other Country, EXCEPT, where that particular G.I. originates from, is manufactured / produced. By mere having the Address of Service for registration in any other nation is irrelevant, wherein there can’t be any authorized user.   

Another thing that I’ve always contended that, and as mentioned above; rather making G.I. as prima facie evidence of validity, make it compulsory & mandatory, BUT only in the place and territory or region wherein such G.I. are being manufactured, produced. Then, this would make G.I. somewhat similar to Copyrights! 😊

© Pranav Chaturvedi