Abstract Intellectual property (IP) is a loose cluster of rights. Every IP possesses unique characteristics. The same is true for Geographical Indication (GI). GI encompasses goods associated with the respective territory that have gained a reputation over the period of time. Because of this reputation, corresponding goods have captured the market. Therefore, from an economic perspective, GI protection becomes necessary. GI is not an individual right but a cumulative or community right. The local people typically produce the goods. These local people are involved in manufacturing, production, sale, and so on. This makes GI a model for regional growth, providing economic and growth opportunities to the local people. GI also stands in contrast to traditional knowledge (TK). Though limited, this contrast carries its own significance. It plays a significant role in preserving TK and enhancing its economic potential. The academic discourse reveals that GI may have more potential than initially thought. A robust and effective GI regime can extract the potential. The GI landscape in India indicates that significant planning is necessary to get the most out of it. The paper discusses the GI regime in India, contrasting it with the GI regime in the European Union (EU). The paper suggests means and measures that may be beneficial for establishing a robust GI regime in India. The paper also makes other important points, like the “advantages of GI,” “the association of GI with TK,” and “perceiving the GI landscape.” The theme of the paper inherently postulates this articulation and the arguments it advances, as and when applicable.
Parveen Yadav (Tue,) studied this question.