How is the Government of India protecting traditional knowledge of medicine from patenting by pharmaceutical companies?
Approach · directive: “how”
What it asks · Explain the ways India prevents wrongful patents on its traditional medical knowledge: the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library, patent-office oppositions, domestic law and international efforts.
The question has 3 parts — answer each
- Explain how the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library and prior-art access prevent wrong patents
- Domestic law and oppositions: the Patents Act and the Biological Diversity Act
- International efforts, and the limits of the protection
Open with · After patents on turmeric and neem had to be fought in foreign courts, India shifted from costly reaction to a proactive defence of its traditional medical knowledge.
Cover
- TKDL (2001): CSIR and AYUSH converted Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha and Yoga texts into five international languages, structured through the TK Resource Classification.
- Prior-art access: examiners at offices such as the European Patent Office and USPTO can search TKDL under a non-disclosure Access Agreement and stop wrong grants.
- Opposition: CSIR files third-party submissions and pre-grant oppositions with TKDL evidence; hundreds of applications worldwide have been rejected, withdrawn or amended.
- Patents Act, 1970: Section 3(p) bars patents on what is in effect traditional knowledge; Section 25 allows opposition citing knowledge of local or indigenous communities.
- Biodiversity law: the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 requires National Biodiversity Authority approval before seeking IPR on Indian biological resources, with benefit-sharing for local communities.
- International: India has pressed for disclosure of the source of genetic resources and traditional knowledge in patents; WIPO adopted a treaty on this in 2024.
- Limits: TKDL covers documented texts of Indian medicine; oral community knowledge and other fields are harder to protect, so monitoring of patent filings must continue.
Close with · India's approach is to prevent wrong grants by giving examiners the evidence, not to lock knowledge away; extending it to oral and community knowledge and to more patent offices would widen the protection.
Add value (verified)
- CSIR's own description states the design principle of the TKDL: give examiners access to prior art so that wrong grants are prevented, without restricting the use of traditional knowledge. Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL), Council of Scientific and Industrial Research ↗“The key here is preventing the wrong grant of patents by ensuring access to TK related prior art for patent examiners, without restricting the use of traditional knowledge.”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2019, GS Paper III — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 273 words (UPSC limit 250) · Minimalist IAS
After India had to fight patents on turmeric and neem in foreign patent offices, it moved from costly case-by-case reaction to a proactive defence: give examiners the evidence that the knowledge is old, so that wrong patents are never granted.
Documenting prior art: the TKDL
- Set up in 2001 by CSIR with the Ministry of AYUSH, the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library converts formulations from Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha and Yoga texts into five international languages, organised under the Traditional Knowledge Resource Classification.
- Patent examiners at offices such as the European Patent Office and the USPTO search it under a non-disclosure access agreement, so prior art is visible before a grant.
- CSIR files third-party observations and pre-grant oppositions with TKDL evidence; hundreds of applications abroad have been rejected, withdrawn or amended.
Domestic law
- Patents Act, 1970: Section 3(p) bars patents on what is in effect traditional knowledge, and Section 25 allows opposition on the ground of knowledge held by local or indigenous communities.
- Biological Diversity Act, 2002: National Biodiversity Authority approval is required before seeking intellectual property rights on Indian biological resources, with benefit-sharing for the communities concerned.
International effort
- India has pressed for mandatory disclosure of the source of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge in patent applications; WIPO adopted a treaty on this in 2024.
Limits
- TKDL covers documented texts of Indian medicine; oral and community knowledge, and fields beyond medicine, are harder to protect, so monitoring of patent filings must continue.
India's method is to prevent wrong grants by giving examiners the evidence rather than lock knowledge away; extending it to oral knowledge and to more patent offices would widen the shield.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify). UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.