ONE DAY SEMINAR ON  “WOMEN ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM - CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES” ON 28^TH SEPTEMBER, 2007 AT JACARANDA-II, INDIA HABITAT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

A one-day Seminar on “Women Entrepreneurship Development Program - Challenges and Opportunities”  will be held on 28^th September 2007 at JACARANDA -II, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi

This Seminar will address some of the critical issues which are useful to those who are willing to start entrepreneurship and business for self-fulfilment and have an ambition to achieve economic prosperity and social equity

Beneficial to whom and how

Women are perfect combination of Beauty and Brain.  

The power of women can be boosted by giving them the skills and strategies for increasing their capabilities.  In addition to social and self-defense skills, there are many areas of daily life which the women could use to better protect their interests. Women Entrepreneurship Development Programme (WEDP) is one such area which helps to enhance the economic opportunity for women, especially the young girls looking for job opportunities.

Topics to be Covered

• Introduction to Women Entrepreneurship Development Program (WEDP)
• Government Initiatives in promoting  WEDP
• Role of NRDC in promoting appropriate technologies
• Success stories by Women entrepreneurs
• General Discussions

Registration

The participation is free for girl students and women Lecturers/Readers and Rs.100/- (per participant) for other women delegates. A certificate will be issued to all the candidates who participate in this seminar.

To confirm registration, names should be received  latest by 15^th September 2007. For any clarifications, contact Mrs Rama Rani (Seminar Coordinator) on mobile No. 9910496551, Phone-011-29240401-08, Fax : 011-29240409/29240410, E-mail ramarani@nrdc.in

As the capacity of the seminar hall is limited, registration should be done as early as possible to avoid last minute rush with details of the participant and a bank draft in favour of National Research Development Corporation payable at New Delhi .

IPR Awareness Programmes :  

National  Seminar on Patenting in Biotechnology, New Delhi                        

 A National Seminar on Patenting in Biotechnology organized by National Research  Development Corporation (NRDC) and supported by Department of  Biotechnology, Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India was held on 19th October 2006 at New Delhi .

Dr. M.K. Bhan, Secretary, Department of Biotechnology in his inaugural address stressed that we will have to go to those places and institutions where the awareness of  IPR  is still not satisfactory.  IP and licensing can not be separated, he said.  The stakeholders should come together to chalk out a right strategy to benefit all. We will have to work on a national agenda and work for bench marks.  IPR and transfer of technology are to be  integrated. College syllabi will have to have IPR courses and get connected to online programs.  

Earlier, Shri Somenath Ghosh, CMD, NRDC delivered the welcome address. Emphasizing the importance of knowledge era, he said,  “today we are increasingly a part of knowledge driven society”.

Shri U.N. Behera, Joint Secretary, Department of Biotechnology gave an overview of IPR activity of DBT. He said that DBT supports patenting through funding, helping filing a patent and finding a party for transferring technology.  He elaborated the IPR policy of DBT. 

 Shri S. Chandrasekaran, Controller General of Patents, Designs, Trademarks & Geographical Indications explained. ‘What is a patent?’ ‘use of a patent’ and the ‘criteria of patentability’.  The patent processing time is now shortened to half, if properly drafted specifications are given, he said.

The First session was Chaired by Mr. V.K. Gupta, Director,  National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources.

Speaker Shri K. S. Kardam, Assistant Controller,  Patent Office gave an overview of how patent law evolved in the last decades.  He tried to differentiate the situation in this area before and after 2002 when we brought IIIrd Amendment to the Patents Act.  He observed a lack of data base  in biotech field.

Dr. A. Chakraborty, Assistant Controller,  Patent Office explained the sufficiency criteria in patenting biotech related inventions. To make the society benefited in a wider sense, patenting is required, he said.  He referred to the Ayyangar’s Report of 1959 on this subject.

Dr. Tapan Chakrabarti, Scientist ‘G’ told that IMTCC,  IMTECH, Chandigarh was the only IDA of this country under Budapest Treaty.  He observed  that at present there is no definition of  a micro organism.

Dr. K. Satyanarayana, Senior DDG (P&I), Indian Council of Medical Research explained the issue of patenting life forms.  He gave a beautiful picture of this area by giving the four famous examples of :-  

1.      Chakrabarti Case

2.      John Moore Case

3.      Oncomouse Case

4.      BRCA 1 & 2                                        

          He opined that patenting R&D ultimately improves life of people.

Dr. (Ms.) Rekha Chaturvedi, Head, IPR Cell, Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology spoke on ethical issues in biotechnology. Issues like human embryo and stem cell are highly controversial and being debated across the globe.  Crossing species boundaries was unnatural, she observed.  Biopiracy was also an issue of ethics.

To a question from the audience, ‘whether a new micro-organism was patentable or not ?’, the learned speaker explained that micro-organism as such was not patentable but the manner of its extraction and method of making a medicine from it may be patentable.

Agricultural biotechnology was the theme of Session – II. Dr. Rakesh Tuli, Director, National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow spoke on  ‘Biotechnology in relation to CBD and  traditional knowledge’. He appreciated the initiatives like National Gene Fund and National Biodiversity Fund coming up in India . New guidelines will evolve in due course, he hoped.                                                           

Dr. Sudhir Kochhar, Principal Scientist, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi spoke on ‘Biotechnology, plant variety protection and changing property institutions in agriculture’. He gave a gist of the evolution of agriculture through ten millennia. Though plants are out of the patent regime, there are various other systems of protection.  We have our own system of protection through the law. Giving an account of PVP, he explained the  Sui generis system of   protection.  Co-existence of patents and  PBR was an  area of concern according to him. To learn more about the subject, one can go to the UPOV site to explore.

The third session on ‘Industry Perspective’ was chaired by Prof. Ashish Duta, Chairman, National Centre for Plant Genome, JNU Campus, New Delhi .

Dr. P N Tandon deliberated on ‘Genomics and proteomics: moral and ethical issues’. According to him bio-ethics lies in the basic principle of using bio-systems for general welfare. Some percentage of budget on any new project must be reserved for ethical, moral, legal and economic issues. DBT and ICMR have jointly made a document for bio-ethics,  but  has not been legislated so far, he informed.

Quoting  the 1947 Human Rights Agreement, he expressed that any right granted under IPR should not go against the spirit of this Agreement.  He advised the West not to adhere to dual standards in ethical issues.  When taking tissue from any person ‘informed consent’ has to be a  must, Dr. Tandon demanded.                                                                  

Dr. S. Mukherjee, Incharge, Industrial Relations, International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, New Delhi was speaking on ‘Technology transfer issues in biotechnology: Challenges and opportunities’. Developing world has little facilities for transferring technologies in biotech areas, he observed. Genetic engineering needs to be developed for developing world at affordable cost. This is different because it involves a living organism.  Behaviour of living organism can not be predicted.  Reproduction of some process is again a very difficult thing in transferring a technology.  Appropriate pricing of IP is very important to get maximum people benefited. Collaborative technology development, shall have to be promoted, he suggested.

The seminar concluded with the valedictory note of Shri Somenath Ghosh, CMD, NRDC.   

Training on “How to Draft a Specification and Prosecute Indian Patent Application” , New Delhi         

Training on “How to Draft a Specification and Prosecute Indian Patent Application” was organized by National Research Development Corporation (NRDC) at New Delhi on 20th  October, 2006. The Progrmme  was supported by Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India, New Delhi .                

Shri Somenath Ghosh,  Chairman & Managing Director,  NRDC expressed how researchers can benefit from such programs and opened the program for the day.  Ms. Prachi Swaroop, Deputy Secretary, DBT graced the occasion by her presence.  

Dr.O.P. Aggarwal, CSIR Emeritus Scientist, ICMR, New Delhi chaired the First Session ‘On identifying inventions’.  Dr. A. Chakravorty,  Assistant Controller,  Patent Office, Kolkata explained  basic ingredients of patent through case laws.  He cited the  U.K. practices  in this regard and explained ‘anticipation’ and ‘inherency’. He observed that biotech molecules are very complex and difficult to describe. To explain ‘inventive step’ he cited case laws and told how EPO establishes an enabling prior art, for example, he cited the famous Brenner case.

Shri V.K. Bali , Sr. Technical Director, National Informatics Centre, New Delhi , explained the method of searching the prior art. To make  a search exhaustive he gave an interesting tip – “consider the patent examiner your enemy”.   He said, we should know how to quickly narrow down to the smaller number of cases. Mr. Bali  made a live demo of patent search by going through sites like  USPTO  and EPO.  Apart from websites, other sources should also be searched, he said.   A question from the audience was “After a patent search  is made from an agency like NRDC, does it take responsibility for total search?”, his answer was.  “No,  the ultimate onus lies only on  the inventor”.

Dr.(Ms) S. Banerjee , from M/s. L.S. Davar & Co., Kolkata, elaborated on ‘Deciding the scope of disclosure and breadth of claims in patent specification’.         All specifications are different. Each drafting is different.  Little literature is available on biotech inventions in India .  Specification has to be in proper format. She stated various components of a specification.  Claims should be  based on disclosure, she stressed. Professional Agencies like cas.org should be engaged, she suggested. She informed that ‘DIALOG’ is a paid site.

Session –II  was on Prosecuting patent applications.

Dr. K.S. Kardam, Assistant Controller of Patents dwelt on ‘Examination guidelines and prosecution of application’. He explained the main steps in the  prosecution of application. He told that the person who has created has the right to file.  But the inventor may make endorsements and assignments in some one’s favour. At present  there are 35 IDAs under Budapest Treaty. To a question  “Why deposition in IDA is required?”, he answered, “when we are unable to describe some thing, then only IDA comes in picture”. 

Dr.(Ms) S Banerjee ,  of M/s. L.S. Davar & Co., Kolkata, explained to the participants ‘The study of examination reports and submission of response’. Citing a Swedish case, she was of the opinion  that Indian patent examiners were narrower in their approach. Claims are to be made in inverted pyramid sequence, she explained. But suggested that provisional specification is just an out line of the invention. Details should not be given there.  In complete specification, all details are to be given.                 

Session III – was on ‘Protecting inventions abroad’.  

Dr. Laxman Prasad Chaired the session. Shri Avinash Kumar, Joint Director, DRDO, New Delhi spoke on ‘Protecting inventions abroad’. After explaining the conventional  system of filing national patent application he told about claiming priority. Under Paris Convention,  maintaining a patent is very costly, he said.  So inventor has to see whether it is worth commercializing or not.  Huge money has to be spent in every country in filing and maintaining a patent.  This aspect of economics should be considered before selecting countries for making an application.  

Speaking on regional patent mechanisms, he said that it provides a cost effective system.  Though, search and examination are central but infringement suits are national.  And courts may  vary in their judgment on infringements.  The various regional systems are : EPC, EAPO, ARIPO, OAP, GCC. To further clarify the issue to the participants, those who were new to the subject, he expressed that any patent filing system merely facilitates patent application filing. It is not a patent granting body.  Patents are granted or rejected by  sovereign nations, individually and separately.  There is nothing like an ‘international patent’.   Search is carried out by an international search authority.  There are six international examination authorities, he informed. EPO is subscribed by almost 50% applications as a search and examination authority, he informed.

Concluding remarks were deliberated by Shri Somenath Ghosh, CMD, NRDC.

National Seminar on “Patenting in Biotechnology”, Hyderabad  

A National Seminar on Patenting in Biotechnology was organized in Hyderabad on 26^th October, 2006 by NRDC. Supported by DBT, Ministry of Science & Technology, Govt. of India, the one-day seminar was inaugurated by Mrs. D. Lakshmi Parthasarthy ,  Principal Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Industry & Commerce Department, Hyderabad .   In her inaugural address Mrs. Parthasarthy said “ Hyderabad , the capital of Andhra Pradesh (A.P.) enjoys the honour of being first in many fields and now hoping to play a lead role in the field of Biotechnology with its proactive BT policy.  There are exclusive BT parks in A.P., which are the excellent examples of public – private partnership.” Talking about the Pharma  industry, she said “ Hyderabad is the best place for this sector.  In view of all these activities this programme (seminar) is very useful and Govt. of A.P. will extend all support for such type of programmes”.  

Earlier, Shri Somenath Ghosh, Chairman & Managing Director, NRDC, while welcoming the Chief Guest, speakers, participants of the seminar and others present on this occasion, explained the importance and relevance of the seminar. He urged the speakers and participants to make the programme very interactive one.  

The inaugural session concluded with the vote of thanks proposed by Dr. Anand K. Kondapi,  Reader, School of Life Sciences ,  University of Hyderabad .  

The inaugural session was followed by three technical sessions.  The topic of first session was “National Perspective”. The chairman of this session was Dr. M.D. Nair, Chennai.  The first speaker of  this session was Mr. T.V. Madhusudan, Assistant Controller, The Patent Office, Chennai and his topic was “Indian Patent Act: Biotechnological Related Provisions”.  He talked about non-patentable inventions and patentable inventions.  He explained the mandatory requirements in respect of the specifications to biological materials.  He also talked about Budapest Treaty, provisions of 9 rule of the Patent rule 2003, National of Biodiversity Authority, the Indian Bio-diversity Act-2002, probable redraft of the claim, problems with claims and  other related issues.  

The second speaker of this session was Prof. V.C. Vivekanandan, Nalsar university of Law , Hyderabad and his topic was “Patentability of Biotech Products & Processes: Novelty, Inventiveness & Industrial Applicability”. In his address he explained in detail the limitations of patentability, particularly in the Indian context. He also talked about patentable and non- patentable biotechnological inventions, universal norms, prior list, disclosure, novelty, testing, confidentially, non-obviousness, industrial utility part and  other related issues. 

Third speaker of this session was Dr. K.K. Tripathi, Adviser, DBT, New Delhi and his topic was “Budapest Treaty & Importance of International Depository Authority”.  He talked about Principal Characteristics of the Budapest Treaty, International Depository Authority, patentable microorganisms, TRIPS and other related issues.                                                                                                            

The fourth speaker of this session was Ms. Catherine Grosset-Fournier, European Patent Attorney, Paris , France .  Her topic was “IPR issues in Biotechnology”. She talked about Biotech Drafting and talked about patentability criteria.  She gave the example of Turmeric patent issue which was successfully fought by CSIR ( India ) in US Court .  In her address, she explained the significance of confidentiality and avoidance of disclosure.  She also explained the description and  claim part of the draft, patent writing, kinds of claim, easy way of drafting claims etc.  Then she came to Biotechnology issues and talked in detail about patentable and non-patentable inventions, biotechnological processes, patent issues related with PCR, DNA, Recombinant DNA Technology, Transgenic plants and transgenic animals.

The fifth speaker of this session was Dr. M.D. Nair, Chennai, who also Chaired this session.  His topic was “Ethical issues in patenting for Biotechnology Drugs”.  He said that over 65% activities in biotechnology were associated with drugs.  Talking about patentability he said, “Biological material is patentable be it obtained by an essentially non-biological process (NBP)”.  He cited the example of the Dr. Anand Chakarvorthy whose application was rejected by the US Patent  office and then the case was fought in the US court, in which the landmark judgment came in the favour of Dr. Chakarvorthy, the first patent holder of a microorganism.  Dr. Nair also explained the types of biotechnological patents.  He also touched upon the issues related with quality of patent, methods of treatment of patents, gene patenting, ownership of genetic data, patents and reproductive cloning.                          

In this first technical session questions were asked about depository cell; repeatability, revocation of patent, whether or not biological material can be given to someone for R&D purposes; plant products; plants variety protection act; whether or not synthetic DNA sequences are patentable; about International Depository Authority;  G.M. Organism; progeny validation, patent examination, hypothetical use, scope of biogenetics, regulatory problems; patentability of the second medical use.  

“Agricultural Biotechnology” was the topic of the second session which was Chaired by Dr. M.V. Rao,Chairman, AP Netherland Biotechnology Programme Osmania University, Hyderabad .  

The first speaker of this session was Dr. Sudhir Kochar, Principal Scientist, Indian Council of Agriculture Research, New Delhi .  His topic was “Plant Variety Protection and Farmers’ Rights”. He talked about plant variety protection and farmer’s rights, plant variety patent, sui generi’s of protection of plant varieties and Farmer’s Rights Act 2001 and other related issues.    

Dr. M.V. Rao was  the second speaker of this session and his topic was “Status of Agricultural Biotechnology in India ”. Dr. Rao, a renowned Agriculture Scientist, recipient of Borlaugh Award, who had also worked with Dr. Normon Borlaugh gave the complete view of past & present status of agriculture in India . He said, “previously we produced without Biotechnology (BT) and now we have BT to increase the production”.  He emphasized the need of public – private partnership for the success of BT in agriculture.  

 Dr. Rao said “At present the Govt. is importing the foodgrain. One of the  reason for this situation is that in the last two plans agriculture was not given full attention but now in the eleventh plan agriculture is again given importance. Now we can hope that the situation will change and we will be able to produce sufficient foodgrains for ourselves”.

In this second technical session questions were asked about Essentially Derived Variety (EDV); molecular markers, fears of terminator technology, gene pollution, animal gene etc.  

The topic of the third and last session of this seminar was “Industry Perspective”, which was Chaired by Dr. J.S. Yadav, Director, Indian Institute of Chemical Technology, Hyderabad .  The first  speaker of this session was Dr. K.K. Tripathi, Adviser, DBT, New Delhi .  The topic of his lecture was “Evergreening of Biotech Patents”, in which he talked in detail about Data Protection Article 39.3 of TRIPS, current status NCEs & NBEs evergreening and other related issues including Regulatory Aspects.  

The second speaker of this session was Dr. Naresh Kumar Sahajpal, Head R&D Planning Division, CSIR, New Delhi and his topic was “Patent and Technology Transfer Issues in Biotechnology”.   In his lecture he covered the various issues related with Licensing Biotechnology driven know-hows/technologies and IPR licensing-: scope and coverage. He said “Innovations do not happen, they are planned and developed”. In support of this statement he cited the examples of Pop-top can; Velcro industrial fastener and ball point pen. In this third technical session questions were  asked mainly about regulatory aspects.                                                                                                                       

The seminar concluded with the valedictory address by Shri Somenath Ghosh, CMD, NRDC, who thanked all the speakers, participants, Department of  Biotechnology, MoS&T, Govt. of India, New Delhi for supporting the programme and all others present there and associated with the programme. 

Training on “How to Draft a specification and Prosecute Indian Patent Application”, Hyderabad

The seminar on Patenting in Biotechnology was followed by a Training Programme on “How to Draft a specification and Prosecute Indian Patent Application”, which was held at the same venue ( Hyderabad ) on 27th October 2006. Organized by NRDC and supported by Directorate of ER & IPR, DRDO, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi , the programme was inaugurated by Dr. R. Sreehari Rao, Director, Defence Electronics Research Laboratory, Hyderabad .    In his inaugural address Dr. Rao reminded that TRIPS agreement had made a turning point in the history of IPRs. He also talked about Patent Act. Earlier Shri C.M. Gaind, Sr. Manager, IPR, NRDC welcomed the Chief Guest Dr. R. Sreehari Rao, speakers, participants and all others present on the occasion.   

The inaugural session concluded with the vote of thanks delivered by Shri Avinash Kumar, Joint Director (ER & IPR), DRDO Ministry of Defence, New Delhi . He explained the importance and relevance of the programme.  He said that such types of programmes were being organized in the different parts of the country with the aim to reach out to scientists at there workplaces.  

The inaugural session was followed by the first technical session.  The topic of this session was “Identifying Inventions”.  

The first speaker of this session was Prof. T. Ramakrishna, Professor of  Law, NLSIU, 
Bang lore   His topic was “Identifying the Inventions - case studies”, in which he talked about patentability criteria, five filters through which the invention passes in order to get the patent grant.  His lecture was supported by a number of case studies.  

The second speaker of this session was Shri V.K. Bali, Sr. Technical Director, NIC, New Delhi and his topic was “State – of  - Art searches : Impact on Novelty of Inventions”, in which he explained and also demonstrated ‘Searching’. He showed the contents of a Patent Document and talked about websites, IPC codes: section; impact on novelty of inventions etc.  

The third speaker of this session was Dr.(Ms) Sudipta Banerjee, M/s. Davar & Co., Kolkata, and her topic was “Writing a Patent Specification”.  She said “Writing a patent specification is totally different from writing a research paper.  She added “Specially in biotechnology, most of the inventions are very close to each other”. A practicing Patent Attorney, Dr. Sudipta gave some examples of cases related with biotechnology patenting. Talking about the claim she said, “Claim should be based on specification and claims are made in pyramid form in which the first claim should be the strongest one”.  

The fourth  and last speaker of this session was Shri R. Devan, Assistant Controller, Patent Office, Chennai and his topic was also “Writing a Patent Specification”, in which he dwelt on various aspects of Patent specification and writing.  

In this session questions were asked about scope of patent of inventions having no commercial value; Cross licensing; patent related websites;  current licensing information; keywords; wrong patent granting;  scope of inventions & scope of protection; position of a particular patent, etc.

The topic of the second technical session was “ Prospecting Patent Application”. The first speaker of  this session was Shri T.V. Madhusudan, Assistant Controller, Patent Office, Chennai and his topic was “ Examination Guidelines & Prosecution of Application. He gave an overall view of the examination guidelines & prosecution of application in which he talked about complete process of patenting starting from filing an applications for patent to granting of a patent.   

The second speaker of  this session was Dr.(Ms.) Sudipta Banerjee and her topic was “Study of Examination Report & Submission Response”,  in which she talked about various aspects and steps associated with the study of examination report and submission of response.  

The Third speaker of  this session was Shri Avinash Kumar, Joint Director (ER & IPR), DRDO, New Delhi and his topic was “Patenting abroad : various options”.  He talked about avenues for protecting   inventions abroad, the need of patenting abroad, issues related with patenting abroad, conventional system of patenting abroad; regional patent system; PCT; filing of international patent application; International Search; the  new EISPE system; International Search Authority  for India; International Examination Authorities for India, etc.

In this session questions were asked about pre-grant, post-grant, patent of addition, compulsory licensing, international examination breathing time etc.

The topic of third technical session was “Protecting Inventions Abroad” and the speaker of this session was Shri C.M.  Gaind, Sr. Manager, IPR, NRDC, New Delhi and his topic was “Commercialising Patented Inventions”. 

Shri Gaind defined the typical steps involved in the creation of an idea to its final success; assessment activities; non exhaustive check list for evaluating inventions; assessment ®production®marketing etc. His lecture was embedded with case studies.  He also gave a brief lecture on the IPR activities and role of NRDC specially in the area of patent assistance.

In this session questions were asked about No-objection certificates, filing patent, classification etc.

The one day training programme concluded with the closing remarks of Shri Avinash Kumar.

National Seminar on Patenting in Biotechnology at Varanasi                        

It  was Organized by National Research Development Corporation  (NRDC) on 6th November, 2006. It was sponsored by Department of Biotechnology,  Government  of  India , New Delhi . The Seminar was inaugurated by Prof. Punjab Singh, Vice Chancellor,  BHU, Varanasi .

Prof. Punjab Singh gave a historical account of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), including patents, both globally and in India .  ‘We should, therefore, understand the implications of Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) document and the WTO’, he said.  

Since inventions are based on basic research, in the ultimate end, the research should be done after due awareness of IPR on the concerned subject.  Area of patenting in biotechnology is specially important because it is a multi-disciplinary area.  Diseases like AIDS are a challenge before us.  Intellectual property management, particularly in ‘patents’, is highly important, because we have to address issues of public health with priority.  Management of intellectual property is not only a commercial area, we have to take a social view of it, Prof. Singh emphasized.    

Finally, our farmers have to be made IP aware, apart from our inventors and researchers.  If a farmer is well conversant with the intellectual property rights in his domain, then only he can save his interests in today’s competitive  global IP scenario. Health and agriculture should be our focus points while addressing patenting in biotechnology, the Vice Chancellor stressed repeatedly. 

Dr. Y.B. Tripathi, Head, Department of Medicinal Chemistry, Institute of Medical Sciences , BHU, was also present on this occasion.  He said that such programs are very important but suggested that these programs should also be organized more and more at university campuses to have a better and direct impact. Earlier Shri C.M. Gaind, Sr. Manager(IPR), NRDC welcomed Dr. Punjab Singh and the delegates of the Seminar. Dr. Y.B. Tripathi, while placing the vote of thanks, revealed an interesting information, that a proposal to protect traditional plants was made in 1992-93 at a conference held at this city Varanasi ; and later on we saw the TKDL being made a reality by the CSIR.

Dr. S.K. Mitra, Assistant Controller, Patent Office, Kolkata spoke on ‘Patenting Issues in Botechnology’.  He explained to the delegates what are the special things to be kept in mind while dealing with patenting in this area, since it involved a living organism.       

Question from a delegate:    Can traditional knowledge be patented?  

The answer from the learned speaker was ‘NO’.  There are other ways of protecting this asset, he said.

Shri. K.S. Kardam, Assistant Controller, Patent Office, New Delhi deliberated upon ‘Inventions not Patentable in Biotechnology’.  To make the point home for the audience, he gave an account of case studies on the subject.

Dr. A. Chakravorty, Assistant Controller, Patent Office, Kolkata spoke on ‘Patentability of Biotech Products & Processes: Novelty, Inventiveness and Industrial  Applicability’. He explained the difference between discovery  and invention. Though  a discovery can not be patented as such but it can be a  basis for subsequent invention.

Dr. Tapan Chakrabarti, Scientist ‘G’, Institute of Microbial Technology , Chandigarh was putting light on ‘Budapest Treaty and Protecting Microorganism’.He expressed that confidentiality  is an important thing in IDA. 

Dr (Mrs) Rekha Chaturvedi, Head, Planning, Monitoring & Evaluation, Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology, New Delhi enlightened the delegates on ‘Ethical Issues in IPR for Biotechnology’. ‘Why should we bother about social norms and ethical issues in biotech patenting’?, she herself raised this question to deal with  the subject further. Public interest should also be protected while dealing with the law. Compulsory licensing is an example of public interest provision in the patent law.  TRIPS – Art.  27 (2) allows two exceptions in patenting for the benefit of people. She cited the famous Hormone Relaxin Case involving bio-ethics and patent law.

Prof. Ramesh Chandra  of BHU presided over session II. Dr. Sudhir Kochhar, Principal Scientist, ICAR, New Delhi explained the ‘Perspective for IPR Protection in Plant Kingdom ’.  Though the plants can not be patented, there are other methods of protecting the IP, he said.  He then explained the Sui generis system.

Dr. K.N. Nair of  National Botanical Research Institute (NBRI), Lucknow spoke on ‘Biodiversity, Traditional Knowledge and  Biotechnology’.  To understand the equation between traditional knowledge and agribiotechnology, one can resort to the ‘Pushpangadan Model’ of benefit sharing available at the site of NBRI, Lucknow .  This is an elaborate and just system and mechanism suggested by the eminent scientist  for benefit sharing between those who hold the patents and those who have the related expertise by virtue of their traditional wisdom. Convention on Bio-Diversity (CBD) and traditional knowledge compilation are the alternative ways of protecting IP.  National Innovation Foundation (NIF) also documents traditional knowledge, Dr. Nair said.

The third session was devoted to ‘industry perspectives’. Shri Avinash Kumar was  in the Chair.  Dr  (Ms) S. Banerjee dwelt upon ‘Difference Between, US, European and Asian Biotech Patent Laws’.She told that though a gene can be patented, the plant can not be. Dr S.K. Mitra discussed the issue of ‘Evergreening of Patents’. This term first emerged in USA. How to stop ‘evergreening’ of patent?  There are opportunities before the patent examiner in preventing ever greening and the examiner can be trained in this area.   An evergreen patent makes drugs costly.  Available safeguards against ever greening are  compulsory licensing and research exemptions. Controller of Patents should ensure that ever greening is discouraged and prevented at the level of Patent Officers.  

Shri Avinash Kumar,  Jt. Director, IPR, DRDO, shared his experiences in the field of technology transfer issues in biotechnology. The three steps in any technology are : (i)  Creation; (ii) Protection and (iii) Exploitation (commercialization). He said that License Agreement is an important document of this process and should be drafted carefully. Scope of rights should be very clearly spelt out.  Fixation of royalty is another important step in this process.  Other ingredients are: Termination Clause; Dispute Resolution and Arbitration.

The Seminar was widely covered by Varanasi Press.  Hindustan Tines, Times of India, Amar Ujala, Dainik Jagran and Hindustan Carried the news coverage.

Technologies Assigned to NRDC During the Year 2006-2007