Kathmandu School of Law Review

P-ISSN : 2091-2110, E-ISSN : 2773-8159, DOI : 10.46985, Publisher : Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal
Annual flagship journal of Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal

Volume 7, Issue 1, April 2019
Articles

Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights at Custom Checkpoints: An Analysis of Various Jurisdictions

PDF
  • Kanwal D. P. Singh
Kanwal D. P. Singh
Professor of Corporate Law, Law and Poverty and Taxation at University School of Law and Legal Studies Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi and Legal Aid Centre of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University

Published 2021-03-05

How to Cite

Singh, K. D. P. (2021). Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights at Custom Checkpoints: An Analysis of Various Jurisdictions. Kathmandu School of Law Review, 7(1), 52–68. Retrieved from https://kslreview.org/index.php/kslr/article/view/1200

Abstract

The vitals of modern economic growth is dependent on fair and free trade. Any economic and fiscal improvement requires wide and rampant foreign investment and in absence of any credible and concrete law for the protection of invention, trade secrets, patent or for that matter the trademark/brand, the scheme of foreign investment cannot be successful, which in turn jeopardizes the national, economic, social and scientific growth. Border customs agencies world over are an important arm of governments that play a vital role in the protection of Intellectual Property ("IP") rights. The research looks into the Indian framework for the protection of Intellectual Property Rights ("IPR") at custom checkpoints i.e. Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007. It also analyzes the processes in different jurisdictions to judge whether they are better equipped to deal with piracy. The shortcomings of the Indian law are ascertained and suggestions are made for better enforcement.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Garima Budhiraja Arya & Tania Sebastian, 'Exhaustion of Rights and Parallel Imports with Special Reference to Intellectual Property Laws in India', vol. 2, no. 1, Journal of National Law University Delhi, 2014, pp 26-53 available at https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2277401720140102, accessed on 15 March 2019.
  2. National Academy of Customs, Indirect Tax and Narcotics, 'Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights at Border', 21 February 2016, National Academy of Customs, Indirect Tax and Narcotics, Zonal Campus, Kanpur available at https://www.nacenkanpur.gov.in/mysiteadmin/media_images/Enforcement%20of%20IPRs%20at%20Border%20Book%20No.02.pdf, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  3. National Academy of Customs, Indirect Tax and Narcotics, 'Study Report on Export Control System in India and Role of Customs Officers', National Academy of Customs, Indirect Tax and Narcotics available at https://www.nacenkanpur.gov.in/mysiteadmin/media_images/5476e06e4bd9117.pdf, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  4. National Academy of Customs, Indirect Tax and Narcotics (n 2).
  5. National Academy of Customs, Indirect Tax and Narcotics (n 3).
  6. Frontier Economics Ltd, "The Economic Impacts of Counterfeiting and Piracy', International Chamber of Commerce available at https://iccwbo.org/content/uploads/sites/3/2017/02/ICC-BASCAP-Frontierreport 2016.pdf, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  7. Pratistha Sinha, 'India: Recourse against Counterfeiting', 24 November 2017, Mondaq available at https://www.mondaq.com/india/Intellectual-Property/649674/Recourse-Against-Counterfeiting, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  8. Tara J. Radin & Ozgur Toraman, 'Piracy of Intellectual Property', Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society, Sage Knowledge available at https://sk.sagepub.com/reference/ethics/n619.xml, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  9. See Vincent Chiappetta, 'The Desirability of Agreeing to Disagree: The WTO, TRIPS, International IPR exhaustion and a Few Other Things", vol. 21, no. 3, Michigan Journal of International Law, 2000, p. 333; The creator of intellectual property may hold a set of national IPRs covering the same IP in a variety of jurisdictions.
  10. The international law on copyright, patent and trademark does not exist. Some guidelines have been provided for the members under different treaties. But protection can be granted by the respective members beyond the guidelines stipulated in the treaties. Each member has to provide certain basic minimum protection prescribed by the TRIPS. The minimum standard provides for the subject matter that is to be protected; rights that can be conferred; and the minimum time period for such protection.
  11. Surinder Kaur Verma, 'Exhaustion of Intellectual Property Rights and Free Trade- Article 6 of the TRIPS Agreement', International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 1998 available at https:// www.econbiz.de/Record/exhaustion-of-intellectual-property-rights-and-free-trade-article-6-of-the-tripsagreement verma-surinder-kaur/10001249344, accessed on 20 June, 2019.
  12. IPRs viz., trademark, copyright and patents are regarded as the 'negative rights'. These IPRs generally give an exclusive right to the holder of the right to exclude others from the market. A patent owner protects his right by way of prohibiting or excluding others to make or use his invention. In case of copyright, the author does not allow others to reproduce or distribute his expressive work. Similarly, a trademark gives a right to the owner of a business preventing others from making use of his distinctive mark commercially.
  13. Irene G. R. Moses, 'The Law and Practice under the Trade Marks Act, 1940', 2 November 1946, Nature available at https://doi.org/10.1038/158604a0, accessed on 15 March 2019.
  14. Sharad D. Abhyanker & Nikhilesh N Panchal, 'Concept of Trademarks under the Trademarks Act, 1999 and the protection of domain names under the Indian Law', 11 July 2001, IFLR available at https://www.iflr.com/Article/2027427/Concept-of-trade-mark-under-the-Trade-Marks-Act-1999-and-the-protectionof domain-names-under-Indian.html, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  15. Vijay Pal Dalmia, 'India: IPR & Criminal Remedies in India: Civil vs. Criminal Remedy in IPR: Search, Seizure & Raids By Police', 19 November 2015, Mondaq available at https://www.mondaq.com/india/Intellectual-Property/444510/IPR-Criminal-Remedies-In-India-Civil-vs-Criminal-Remedy-In-IPR-Search Seizure-Raids-By-Police, accessed on 25 March 2019.
  16. Rajesh Garg v. Tata Tea Ltd and ors. (2011) 123 DRJ 186.
  17. Anil Kumar v. State of Punjab & others in High Court of Punjab & Haryana No. 2012 (51) PTC 159 (P&H), available at https://vlex.in/vid/anil-kumar-vs-state-545983370, accessed on 13 March 2019.
  18. Radhika Shukla, 'Trademark Infringement and Remedies', Legal Service India available at http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1740/Trademark-Infringement-and-Remedies.html, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  19. Mahendra Kumar Sunkar, 'Copyright Law in India', Legal Service India available at http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l195-Copyright-Law-in-India.html, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  20. FICCI Knowledge Paper Series, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry available at http:// ficci.in/ficci-Knowledge-Paper-series.asp, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  21. Vinod Khurana et al., 'Trademark Filing/Portfolio', Khurana and Khurana Advocates and IP Attorneys available at https://www.khuranaandkhurana.com/ip-protection-and-portfolio-management/trade-markportfolio/, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  22. 'India IPR Custom & Border Protection', Altacit Global Attorneys-at-Law available at https://www.altacit.com/publication/india-ipr-customs-border-protection/, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  23. Frank Muller-Langer, 'Creating R&D Incentives for Medicines for Neglected Diseases', 2009, Springer Science and Business Media LLC available at https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm%3A978-3-8349 8323-7%2F1.pdf, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  24. In the case of Deepak M. Sarvaiya versus CC (Airport), Mumbai, the passenger opted for the green channel. However, three suitcases and one shopping bag were detained in the warehouse and dutiable goods consisting of 945 pieces of recorded compact discs, 2100 blank compact discs and 125 pieces of Ram SIM modules, cigarettes, liquor, etc. were recovered from the baggage. The protection under baggage rules is available only for bona fide baggage within permissible limits and not otherwise. Recorded compact discs valued at Rs. 1, 41,450/- were found to be pirated and violative of the provision of the Copyright Act, so the same were destroyed. So while de minimis import for personal use is allowed, but no commercial activities are permitted. The case was reported in Excise Law Times vide 2006 (206) ELT 0633 (Tri.- Mumbai).
  25. The adjudication order is available to departmental officers only.
  26. Shamnad Basheer, "Ram Kumar Patent Case: New Delhi Customs favours Samsung, Loses Before Indian Customs Authority", available at https://spicyip.com/search/ram+kumar+patent+case, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  27. Aditya Gupta, 'Border Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in India: Recent Developments', vol. 1, no. 2, Trade, Law and Development, 2009, p. 192.
  28. 'IP Infringement', Australian Government, IP Australia, available at https://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/ipinfringement, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  29. Min Li, 'Improving Australian border enforcement of IPR by referring to the Chinese experience', vol. 8, no. 2, World Customs Journal, pp. 39-46.
  30. 'Counterfeiting and Piracy', Australia Government, IP Australia available at https://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/ ip-infringement/more-about-ip-infringement/counterfeiting-and-piracy, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  31. Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Government of Canada, available at http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/home, accessed on 18 March 2019.
  32. William R. Morrison, 'Showing the Flag: The Mounted Police and Canadian Sovereignty in the North', vol. 92, no. 3, The American Historical Review, 1985, pp. 1894-1925.
  33. Brian P. Isaac, 'Stopping infringing products at the Canadian border', 21 July 2010, Smart and Biggar available at https://www.smartbiggar.ca/insights/publication/stopping-infringing-products-at-the-canadianborder, accessed on 24 March 2019.
  34. Permanent Mission of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Others International Organizations in Switzerland, 'New Progress in China's Protection of Intellectual Property Rights' April 2005, available at http://www.china-un.ch/eng/bjzl/t193102.htm, accessed on 17 March 2019.
  35. 'Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in China', 2013, China IPR SME Helpdesk available at https://www.china-iprhelpdesk.eu/sites/all/docs/publications/EN_Enforcement_Aug-2013.pdf, accessed on 23 March 2019.
  36. Taxation and Customs Union, 'Customs Protection of IPR in China', European Commission available at https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/userguide_china_ipr_en.pdf, accessed on 23 March 2019.
  37. Deanna Wong, 'China: IP Laws and their Enforcement in China', 8 June 2018, Mondaq available at https://www.mondaq.com/china/Intellectual-Property/702190/IP-Laws-And-Their-Enforcement-In-China, accessed on 22 March, 2019.
  38. Hong Kong, China, 153 texts, "Main IP Laws enacted by the legislature", available at https://wipolex.wipo.int/en/legislation/profile/HK, accessed on 17 March 2019.
  39. Adelaide Yu, 'A Brief Guide to Intellectual Property in Hong Kong', 30 June 2013, American Bar Association available at https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications/blt/2013/06/05_yu/, accessed on 22 March 2019.
  40. Peter Yam Tat-wing, 'Fighting Hong Kong's Organized Crime, The Organized & Serious Crime Ordinance', 116th International Training Course Visiting Experts' Papers, Resource Material Series No. 58 available at https://www.unafei.or.jp/publications/pdf/RS_No58/No58_06VE_Tat-wing2.pdf, accessed on 20 June, 2019.
  41. 'Intellectual Property Rights Protection', Custom and Excise Department, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region available at https://www.customs.gov.hk/en/enforcement/ipr_protection/ index.html, accessed on 23 March 2019.
  42. European Union Intellectual Property Office, 'Status Reports on IP Infringement', June 2018, European Union Intellectual Property Office available at https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/web/observatory/status-reports-on-ip-infringement?, accessed on 24 March 2019.
  43. Korean Intellectual Property Office, 'About KIPO', Korean Intellectual Property Office available at https://www.kipo.go.kr/kpo/MainApp, accessed on 24 March 2019.
  44. Nadezhda Volovik , 'On the Federal Law on the Customs Regulation in the Russian Federation', Gaidar Institute of Economic Policy available at https://www.iep.ru/en/on-the-federal-law-on-the-customsregulation in-the-russian-federation.html, accessed on 23 March 2019.
  45. Liew Woon Yin, 'Intellectual Property Rights, The United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement - Highlights and Insights', World Scientific, available at https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/9789812567161_fmatter, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  46. Alisha Gill et al., 'The Development of Singapore's Intellectual Property Rights Regime', May 2014, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, available at https://lkyspp.nus.edu.sg/docs/default-source/case-studies/lkwms_series01_sg_ip.pdf?sfvrsn=5135960b_2, accessed on 20 June 2019.
  47. Susanna Leong, Intellectual Property Law of Singapore, Singapore Academy Publishers, Singapore, 2013, p. 12.
  48. James W. Peters, 'Toward Negotiating a Remedy to Copyright Piracy in Singapore', vol. 7, no. 3, Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business, 1986, p. 563.
  49. 'IP Protection in the USA', Australian Government, IP Australia available at https://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/understanding-ip/taking-your-ip-global/ip-protection-usa, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  50. 'Intellectual Property Rights Experts Group', Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation available at https://www.apec.org/Groups/Committee-on-Trade-and-Investment/Intellectual-Property-Rights-Experts-Group, accessed on 20 March, 2019.
  51. Jinzo Fujino & Hideaki Yoshida, 'The Enforcement of the Intellectual Property Rights in Japan', 2018, Japan Patent Office available at https://www.jpo.go.jp/e/news/kokusai/developing/training/textbook/document/index/66_enforcement.pdf#view=fit&toolbar=1&navpanes=0, accessed on 20 March 2019.
  52. Richard V. Burgujian, 'Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Japan', vol. 91, Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting, 1997, p. 395.
  53. 'Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights', World Intellectual Property Organization, Intellectual Property Handbook: Policy, Law and Use, Chapter 4 available at https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/about-ip/en/iprm/pdf/ch4.pdf, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  54. National Academy of Customs, Indirect Tax and Narcotics, 'Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights at Border: Legal Provisions under Customs Act, 1962', 21 February 2016, National Academy of Customs, Indirect Tax and Narcotics available at https://www.nacenkanpur.gov.in/mysiteadmin/media_images/Enforcement%20of%20IPRs%20at%20Border%20Book%20No.03.pdf, accessed on 27 March 2019.
  55. The TRIPS effectively came into force on 1 January 1996 and it has explicitly been made part of the WTO. Therefore, the members of WTO and GATT are bound to comply with it. The basic principles of GATT had also been made applicable to TRIPS Agreement. It is significant to mention that the TRIPS is considered to be the 'first multilateral agreement' that had played a major role in enforcing and harmonizing certain minimum substantive IPRs.
  56. Shashank P. Kumar, 'European Border Measures and Trade in Generic Pharmaceuticals: Issues of TRIPs, Doha Declaration and Public Health', vol. 15, no. 6, International Trade Law and Regulation, 2009, p. 176.
  57. The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 of India.
  58. The 'efficacious alternate remedy principle' provides that, 'where an alternate remedy is available, which is equally adequate and efficacious, a court may refuse to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction.' Indian Courts have applied this principle in cases related to the supervisory and writ jurisdiction.