Protecting Our Heritage: The Battle Against Misappropriation of GI-Tagged Products

In an increasingly globalized world, the unique charm of traditionally crafted goods and agricultural produce from specific regions is undeniable. These products, often carrying centuries of heritage and skill, are safeguarded by Geographical Indication (GI) tags. However, the rising trend of foreign brands claiming "inspiration" or outright imitating these products raises a critical question: Is it copyright infringement, and what are the implications for local communities and global trade?

 

What are GI Tags and Why Do They Matter?

 

A Geographical Indication (GI) is a sign used on products that have a specific geographical origin and possess qualities or a reputation that are essentially attributable to that origin. Think of it as a quality stamp that links a product to its birthplace, ensuring its authenticity and unique characteristics. GIs are a crucial part of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), recognized globally under treaties like the WTO's TRIPS Agreement and the Paris Convention.

 

More than just a label, GI tags are:

 

Powerful marketing tools: They act like a brand name, signaling authenticity and unique qualities to consumers.

 

Drivers of rural development: Many GI products are made by local artisans and farmers, providing employment and income in rural areas.

 

Boosters of exports: GI-tagged products are often seen as high-quality, increasing their demand in international markets.

 

Enhancers of consumer confidence: Buyers trust GI products due to their verified origin and quality.

 

Preservers of cultural knowledge: GIs protect traditional skills, techniques, and cultural heritage from being copied or misused.

 

In India, the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, which came into force in 2003, allows for the registration of GI products and provides legal recourse against misuse.

 

The Rising Tide of Misappropriation: When "Inspiration" Becomes Infringement

 

Despite legal frameworks, the misuse of GI-tagged products by foreign brands is a growing concern. This often manifests in two ways:

 

1.  Direct Misleading Use: A foreign brand uses the GI-tagged name (e.g., "Darjeeling Tea" or "Kolhapuri Chappals") for products not originating from the designated region. This is a clear case of infringement.

 

2.  Cultural Appropriation with Design Imitation: Brands copy the unique designs, aesthetics, or traditional production methods of GI-tagged products but avoid using the specific GI name. While not always a direct GI infringement, it raises significant ethical and economic questions, often leading to accusations of "cultural misappropriation."

 

Recent examples highlight this challenge:

 

Prada and Kolhapuri Chappals (2025): The Italian luxury brand Prada launched a footwear line "inspired" by India's iconic GI-tagged Kolhapuri chappals. While Prada did not use the "Kolhapuri" name, the striking similarity sparked outrage and a Public Interest Litigation in India, raising debates about cultural appropriation and the effectiveness of GI protection beyond borders.

 

Basmati Rice Controversy (1990s - 2016): A US firm, RiceTec, attempted to patent a type of Basmati rice, leading to a prolonged legal battle with India and Pakistan. The EU eventually granted GI status to Basmati rice, recognizing its exclusive origin in the Indian subcontinent.

 

Turmeric and Neem Patents (1990s-2000s): Foreign entities attempted to patent the wound-healing properties of turmeric and the antifungal properties of neem, both deeply embedded in traditional Indian knowledge. India successfully challenged and revoked these patents, showcasing the importance of protecting traditional biological resources.

 

Is it Copyright Infringement?

 

The answer is complex and depends on the specific circumstances:

 

Direct Use of GI Name: If a foreign brand uses a registered GI name for a product not originating from the specified region, it is GI infringement, as defined under GI laws. This is a clear violation of intellectual property rights.

 

Copying Designs/Aesthetics (without using GI name): This is where it gets tricky. While GI laws protect the name and the link to origin, they don't necessarily protect the design or aesthetic in the same way copyright or design laws do for individual creations.

 

Copyright Law: Traditional designs, being community-owned and often centuries old, may not meet the "originality" and "authorship" criteria typically required for copyright protection.

 

Design Law: Similar to copyright, design laws are geared towards individual novelty, not collective heritage.

 

Legal Vacuum: This creates a legal vacuum where artisan communities often lack the formal IP registration overseas and the resources to litigate globally, even when designs are clearly mirrored.

 

The current legal consensus is that GI protection is primarily territorial. This means a GI tag registered in India doesn't automatically extend to other countries unless it's also registered there or protected through bilateral/multilateral agreements. Therefore, a foreign brand reproducing a design inspired by a GI-tagged product, without using the GI name, might not be a direct GI infringement in their country unless specific parallel protections are in place. However, it often constitutes cultural misappropriation and can be challenged on grounds of unfair competition or misleading practices.

 

Statistics and the Indian Context: A Growing Challenge

 

India has been a proactive nation in registering its unique products. As of July 2024, the number of GI tags issued by India stood at 605. Uttar Pradesh leads the states with the highest number of GI-tagged products, followed by Tamil Nadu.

 

However, India faces several challenges in effectively protecting its GI-tagged products globally:

 

Low International Registration Rate: India lags behind nations like China (9,785 GIs), Germany (7,586), and Hungary (7,290) in the total number of GIs in force within their territories (WIPO IP Facts and Figures 2024). This highlights a significant gap in international protection. More than 90% of GIs in force in India (93.6%) are national GIs, indicating a need for greater emphasis on global protection.

 

Regional Disparity: While some states are doing well, others have very few GI registrations.

 

Lack of Awareness: Many rural producers are unaware of GI benefits and the process for registration and enforcement.

 

Post-Registration Issues: Challenges exist in defining "authorized users" and establishing robust inspection bodies to ensure quality and prevent internal misuse.

 

Geographical Disputes: Multiple states sometimes claim GIs for the same product, leading to internal conflicts (e.g., Basmati rice between Indian states and Pakistan).

 

Moving Forward: Strengthening Protection and Promoting Authenticity

 

To effectively combat misappropriation and leverage the true potential of GI-tagged products, a multi-pronged approach is essential:

 

Aggressive International Registration: India needs to prioritize registering its key GI-tagged products in major international markets and through relevant global systems like the Lisbon Agreement.

 

Bilateral and Multilateral Agreements: Advocating for stronger GI protection clauses in Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) can provide a robust legal shield.

 

Raising Awareness and Capacity Building: Educating local communities, artisans, and producers about the value of GIs and the process for protection and enforcement is crucial.

 

Robust Enforcement Mechanisms: Establishing effective post-registration infrastructure, including quality checks and legal support for authorized users, is vital.

 

Promoting "Cultural Origin" beyond "Geographical Name": While direct GI infringement focuses on the name, addressing cultural misappropriation requires a broader conversation about ethical sourcing, fair compensation, and acknowledging the true origins of inspiration. Initiatives like "One District One Product (ODOP)" can further strengthen the branding and export potential of these unique goods.

 

The battle to protect GI-tagged products is not just about intellectual property; it's about safeguarding cultural heritage, supporting livelihoods, and ensuring fair play in the global marketplace. As global consumers increasingly seek authentic and ethically produced goods, the unique stories and traditions embedded in GI-tagged products offer a powerful narrative that deserves robust protection and celebration.

—-----------------------------

 

Let us help you forge deeper connections with your brand and people! Let’s connect -  

 

contact@upshotbrandmedia.com  / 8962429492