Skip to content
2000
image of Intellectual Property Rights Effects on India's Pharmaceutical Industry

Abstract

The Indian pharmaceutical industry took full advantage of the “process patent regime”. It aggressively pursued the expansion of its market share by offering the most reasonably priced generic versions of pharmaceuticals to emerging and developing nations. The Indian government remained neutral over the implementation of the TRIPS agreement until 2005. Indian pharmaceutical patent law is distinct from legislation in other nations in several ways, some of which are among the most critical intellectual property issues in the nation. Over the past thirty years, the lack of product patent protection has been a significant setback for the Indian pharmaceutical business. “Molecules” that were patented and protected internationally but which India failed to protect. The Act's ambiguity makes it common for opponents of pharmaceutical patents to file unreasonable serial pre-grant oppositions. In addition, the number of pre-grant opposition filings is surging exponentially. The potential for revocation, oppositions before and after the grant, and counterclaims in cases of infringement are just a few of the challenges that may arise during the process of a patent. The TRIPS Agreement compliance of the Indian patent system will be guaranteed by the Patents (Amendment) Rules, 2005, and the Patents (Amendment) Ordinance, 2004. Nonetheless, another notable accomplishment of the Ordinance and the Rules is the progressive change of the Indian patent prosecution system. In keeping with its international obligations, the Indian government is working to create a patent system that encourages technical development. Additionally, India is working to alleviate concerns about the inadequate enforcement of its current intellectual property rules.

© 2025 Bentham Science Publishers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/biot/10.2174/0118722083344893250411032817
2025-04-21
2025-09-27

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/biot/10.2174/0118722083344893250411032817
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Sahai S. Indian patents act and TRIPS. EPW 1993 28 29/30 1495 1497
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Grossman G.M. Lai E.L.C. International protection of intellectual property. Am. Econ. Rev. 2004 94 5 1635 1653 10.1257/0002828043052312
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Dhulap S. Kulkarni M. Nonobviousness of pharmaceutical inventions: Implications for patent prosecution and litigation. Pharm. Pat. Anal. 2019 8 4 91 107 10.4155/ppa‑2019‑0014 31414965
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Gomase V. Kemkar K. Potnis V. Intellectual property rights: Protection of biotechnological inventions in India. Recent Pat. Biotechnol. 2024 18 2 128 143 10.2174/1872208317666230612145600 38282443
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Mehrotra N.N. Indian patents act, paris convention and self-reliance. EPW 1987 22 34 1461 1465
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Ganguli P. 1998
  7. Kumutha N. Amutha N. Venkatesh G.S. Compulsory licensing of patents. Pharm. Pat. Anal. 2022 11 6 225 231 10.4155/ppa‑2022‑0039 36802922
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Mudur G. Indian health groups welcome country’s first compulsory licence. BMJ 2012 344 mar16 3 e2132 10.1136/bmj.e2132 22427312
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Samadar P. Patent in medicines. Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2017 6 9 19163 19166
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Zacharias N. Farias S. Patents and the Indian pharmaceutical industry. BB: Pharmatech 2002 2002 42 47
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Verma S.K. Enforcement of intellectual property rights: TRIPS procedure & India. J. Indian Law Inst. 2004 46 2 183 206
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chaudhuri S. TRIPS agreement and amendment of patents act in India. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2002 37 32 3354 3360
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Tiwari G. Rai A.K. Srivastawa B. Tiwari R. Management of intellectual property rights in India: An updated review. J. Nat. Sci. Biol. Med. 2011 2 1 2 12 10.4103/0976‑9668.82307 22470229
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Kaddar M. Kaddar M. Managing the effect of TRIPs on availability of priority vaccines. Bull. World Health Organ. 2006 84 5 360 365 10.2471/BLT.05.028431 16710544
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Chaudhuri S. The WTO and India’s pharmaceuticals industry: Patent protection, TRIPS, and developing countries. Oxford University Press India 2008
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Chaudhuri S. Multinationals and monopolies: Pharmaceutical industry in India after TRIPS. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2012 47 12 46 54
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Chowdhury P. Khan S.A. Dutta P. Mahanta J. Pharmaceutical and biotech product patents in India: Doldrums or blissfulness? Nat. Biotechnol. 2014 32 2 133 134 10.1038/nbt.2809 24509757
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Singh J. Singh P. Structure and growth performance of indian pharmaceutical industry in the post-trips period: An empirical analysis. J. Econ. Policy Res. 2014 9 1 1 11
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Waghmode K.A. Kshirsagar S.R. A study of marketing strategy impact on physicians’ prescription behavior with special reference to Pune city. Int. J. Adv. Appl. Res. 2018 5 2 75 80 10.5281/zenodo.10664366
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Pharmaceuticals industry report. 2022 Available from: https://www.ibef.org/industry/pharmaceutical-india#
  21. Middha M. Patents in pharmaceutical industry and competition law: An interface. Notion Press 2021
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Mermelstein S. Stevens H. TRIPS to where? A narrative review of the empirical literature on intellectual property licensing models to promote global diffusion of essential medicines. Pharmaceutics 2021 14 1 48 10.3390/pharmaceutics14010048 35056944
    [Google Scholar]
  23. McGIVERN L.A. Trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights flexibilities and public health: Implementation of compulsory licensing provisions into national patent legislation. Milbank Q. 2023 101 4 1280 1303 10.1111/1468‑0009.12669 37646392
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kamiike A. The TRIPS agreement and the pharmaceutical industry in India. J. Interdiscip. Econ. 2020 32 1 95 113 10.1177/0260107919875573
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Bijle M.N. Intellectual property rights. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 2013 14 1 0 10.5005/jcdp‑14‑1‑i 23579917
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Kasi V.S. Intellectual property rights. Science 2000 288 5469 1173 1174 10.1126/science.288.5469.1173c 10841735
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Raj G.M. Priyadarshini R. Mathaiyan J. Drug patents and intellectual property rights. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2015 71 4 403 409 10.1007/s00228‑015‑1811‑5 25640303
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Bhattacharya S. Saha C.N. Intellectual property rights: An overview and implications in pharmaceutical industry. J. Adv. Pharm. Technol. Res. 2011 2 2 88 93 10.4103/2231‑4040.82952 22171299
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Sampat B.N. Shadlen K.C. Indian pharmaceutical patent prosecution: The changing role of Section 3(d). PLoS One 2018 13 4 e0194714 10.1371/journal.pone.0194714 29608604
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Basheer S. Reddy T.P. The “efficacy” of Indian patent law: Ironing out the creases in section 3(d). SCRIPTed 2008 5 2 232 266
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Ecks S. Global pharmaceutical markets and corporate citizenship: The case of Novartis’ anti-cancer drug Glivec. Biosocieties 2008 3 2 165 181 10.1017/S1745855208006091
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Gabble R. Kohler J. “To patent or not to patent? the case of Novartis’ cancer drug Glivec in India”. Global. Health 2014 10 1 3 10.1186/1744‑8603‑10‑3 24393270
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Saha P.K. Kaushik S. Patents (Amendment) Rules 2020: India’s patent working requirement at stake. JIPLP 2021 16 12 1340 1346 10.1093/jiplp/jpab149
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Nair G.G. Impact of TRIPS on Indian pharmaceutical industry. JIPR 2008 13 432 441
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Kirschenbaum S.R. Patenting basic research: Myths and realities. Nat. Neurosci. 2002 5 S11 1025 1027 Suppl. 10.1038/nn932 12403976
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Andrade C. Shah N. Chandra S. The new patent regime: Implications for patients in India. Indian J. Psychiatry 2007 49 1 56 59 10.4103/0019‑5545.31520 20640067
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Haley G.T. Haley U.C.V. The effects of patent-law changes on innovation: The case of India’s pharmaceutical industry. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2012 79 4 607 619 10.1016/j.techfore.2011.05.012
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Banerji S. Sengupta A. The effect of the Indian Patents (2005) Amendment on the pharmaceutical industry and access to medicines in India. Indian J. Intell. Prop. L. 2011 4 103
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Gopakumar K.M. Amin T. Patents (Amendment) Bill 2005: A critique. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2005 40 15 1503 1505
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Cullet P. Amended Patents Act and access to medicines after Doha. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2002 37 24 2278 2280
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Dhar B. Niranjan Rao C. Third amendment to 1970 Patent Act: An analysis. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2004 39 52 5568 5571
    [Google Scholar]
  42. George J. Patent (Amendment) Act 2002 and technological innovation. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2005 40 9 850 855
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Babu A.S. Implementing farmers’ rights under the plant variety protection law in India: Analysing the complex regulatory framework and its impact. J. World Intellect. Prop. 2024 jwip.12341 10.1111/jwip.12341
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Kalim Siddiqui International trade, WTO and economic development. World Rev. Polit. Econ. 2016 7 4 424 450 10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.7.4.0424
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Gupta I. Guin P. Trivedi M. The new patent regime and disease priorities in India. Glob. Public Health 2013 8 1 37 54 10.1080/17441692.2012.704060 22845021
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Singh K. Impact of Patent (Amendment) Act, 2005 on Indian Pharmaceutical Industry. JIPR 2022 27 6 397 414 10.56042/jipr.v27i6.63793
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Das A.M. India releases National Intellectual Property Rights policy. Curr. Sci. 2016 111 7 1140 1140
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Sivakumar S. Lukose L.P. Copyright Amendment Act, 2012: A revisit. J. Indian Law Inst. 2013 55 2 149 174
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Mishra N. IPR policies and impact on start-up culture in india. J. Manag. Res. 2023 15 1 50 58
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Krishna V. Jain S.K. Modes of collaboration in open innovation practice of pharmaceutical firms in India: The analysis of survey and patent data. J. Intellect. Cap. 2022 23 2 222 248 10.1108/JIC‑04‑2020‑0113
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Gomase V.S. Priyadarshi D. Kathikar P. Theories of grant for intellectual property rights. IJLMH 2023 6 3 1046 1059 10.10000/IJLMH.114827
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Gomase V.S. Kemkar K.R. Potnis V.V. Intellectual property rights perspective of patent in Indian pharmaceutical industry. IJPR 2023 15 1 109 117 10.31838/ijpr/2023.15.01.013
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Chaudhary A. Singh N. Intellectual property rights and patents in perspective of Ayurveda. Ayu 2012 33 1 20 26 10.4103/0974‑8520.100298 23049179
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Chakrabarty S.P. Kaur R. A primer to traditional knowledge protection in India: The road ahead. Liverp. Law Rev. 2021 42 3 401 427 10.1007/s10991‑021‑09281‑4 34099944
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/biot/10.2174/0118722083344893250411032817
Loading

  • Article Type:     Review Article
Keywords: pharmaceutical patents ; Intellectual Property Rights ; pre-grant oppositions ; TRIPS ; Pharmaceutical Industry ; Patents

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test