Patented problems

India continues to display a strange dichotomy with regard to protecting intellectual property rights. By now, there is probably consensus that, given the country's human resource strengths and its enormous potential in software, music, entertainment, films, television content and publishing, stronger copyright protection is desirable. Perhaps because of this, the enforcement of intellectual property rights is gradually improving. Nor is there great resistance to forms of intellectual property like geographical indications, trade marks and industrial designs. The resistance is centred on patents, since patent protection is inaccurately equated with rights granted to global pharmaceutical companies. This is despite documentation, such as by the National Innovation Foundation, that barring resource-intensive research areas like chemicals, fertilisers or pharmaceuticals, innovations and inventions don't always require big companies. Commercialisation of inventions and access to venture capital are different. There are also issues connected with the lack of an IP (intellectual property) culture.

The department of industrial policy and promotion (DIPP) has proposed an international institute for intellectual property management, with WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organisation) support. This will undertake research and offer training to policy makers or lawyers. But the lack of an IP culture runs deep, because the education system thrives on learning by rote and downplays questioning. It also encourages risk aversion, although risk-taking is an essential prerequisite for innovation. These problems can't be solved overnight. What can be solved relatively easily is the state of the four patent offices in Delhi, Kolkata, Mumbai and Chennai. High transaction costs associated with patent offices drive patent seekers to file patent applications overseas, or use the PCT (Patent Cooperation Treaty) route. However, this is a route available only to those who can afford it.

As an indication of transaction costs, it takes four years (if the application is not lost or misplaced) to obtain a patent in India, compared to half that time elsewhere in the world. And the backlog of patent applications keeps increasing. Patent offices haven't been able to keep up with the increasing number of patent applications. In part, there is a hardware issue. The physical infrastructure in patent offices may have improved, but computerisation is incomplete and the four offices aren't linked to the same network. Nor is there access to global patent databases, access being limited to gratis data alone. Even more intractable is the software problem. India has 300 patent examiners, 200 having been added recently. But look at the numbers elsewhere: there are 3,700 in the US, 4,000 in China and 6,000 in the European Union. India has a solitary staff training centre in Nagpur, whereas China has 12 training centres. Under bilateral arrangements, some patent examiners have been sent for training to Frankfurt, Washington, Tokyo and Pusan and there is also a training agreement with WIPO. But the first-best solution is more training centres in India.

There is yet another issue that is rarely mentioned. Patent examinership is rarely an attractive career option and it may be difficult to deviate from civil service pay scales. Perhaps, the answer lies in outsourcing some of the preliminary search functions, provided the confidentiality issues involved can be taken care of. As things stand, despite strength in research and development and human resources, India is not in a position to tap the potential that better intellectual property protection throws up. But the reason is not the diabolical designs of multinational corporations. The reasons are internal.