Bilateral Buzz on IPRs’

A fortnight of hectic parlays on trade negotiations where key accords where signed and strategic understandings arrived at .

Swiss Fondue and fine Basmati do not a meal together make’, but yes, the Indian bilateral menu has been served with a generous serving of Swiss and Pakistani fare comprising of key IPR issues.

India and Switzerland on Tuesday signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) on safeguarding intellectual property rights (IPRs). The agreement envisages setting up of a joint committee to develop a dialogue on issues of intellectual property. The MoU was signed by Union Commerce and Industry Minister Kamal Nath and Federal Councillor of Swiss Confederation’s Department of Economic Affairs Doris Leuthard.

As per the MoU, a joint working group would be established to respond to questions relating to intellectual property, such as preventing the production, distribution and sale of counterfeit products, as well as raising awareness of the risks associated with these products. The agreement also envisages the setting up of a joint committee he committee, which will meet once a year in India or Switzerland alternately, will serve as a forum for consultations to address specific issues in the area of intellectual property in the bilateral relations and help in the development of continued institutional cooperation for regular technical exchanges between intellectual property institutes in the two countries.

Playing host to one and toast to another, talks with Pakistan resumed inter alia on matters of geographical interest. In the light of current chronicles- I would read that as a run up to the much coveted Super Basmati issue and:-

Post fanfare and ‘journalistic whoopsies’ traded between the India and Pakistan,

the Third Meeting of India-Pakistan Joint Study Group (JSG) at Commerce Secretary-Level was held in New Delhi on 2 August 2007, co-chaired by Mr. G.K. Pillai, Commerce Secretary, Government of India, and Syed Asif Shah, Secretary, Ministry of Commerce, Government of Pakistan.

The JSG report is primarily aimed a developing a policy framework to maximize benefits of geographical proximity, identifying opportunities for enhancing economic cooperation.

Given the geographical proximity, issues pertaining to products of geographical appellation, where origins of product or practice of the craft line bear a common line of ancestry attributable to both countries (and more) bear significance.

Seizing attention in this context are the border crafts such as the Kutch embroidery, the Phulkari, the Kantha practiced on both sides of the border. The LOC or the frontiers adjoining neighboring countries not only establish geo-political interests, or determine occupation based on religion; creed, but also would be a key determinant in establishing equations on traditional crafts and knowledge characteristic to both countries. While we engage in debates over ‘Whose frontier? Yours or mine?……traditional crafts for want of appropriate protection mechanism are slowly falling prey to Chinas’ poach of the traditional crafts(Yes the China menace is real- and issues at length will feature in a blog to follow)

As is the popular saying ‘when elephants fight, it’s the ants that die.’ With the U.S. all set to take the China issue to the WTO, lets hope that the counterfeiting of traditional crafts features in the cause list of complaints as well and prominently so!