What is the present world scenario of intellectual property rights with respect to life materials? Although, India is second in the world to file patents, still only a few have been commercialized. Explain the reasons behind this less commercialization.
Approach · directive: “what / explain”
What it asks · Outline the global regime on patenting life forms and genetic material, then explain why India's growing patent filings rarely become products.
The question has 2 parts — answer each
- What: the present world scenario of IPR over life materials — patentability, TRIPS flexibilities, access and benefit-sharing
- Explain why India's patents are rarely commercialised despite rising filings
Open with · Since the US Supreme Court's Diamond v. Chakrabarty (1980) allowed a patent on a modified bacterium, the patenting of life materials has spread — and been contested.
Cover
- TRIPS Article 27.3(b): members may exclude plants and animals but must protect plant varieties by patents or a sui generis system.
- India: Patents Act Section 3(j) excludes plants, animals and seeds; PPV&FR Act 2001 protects breeders and farmers; Biological Diversity Act 2002.
- Access and benefit-sharing: CBD and Nagoya Protocol; the 2024 WIPO treaty requires disclosure of origin of genetic resources and traditional knowledge.
- Low commercialisation: many filings are metric-driven (academic, institutional) rather than market-driven.
- Weak industry–academia links and few technology-transfer offices; little proof-of-concept or venture funding.
- Low private R&D, long examination pendency, limited IP valuation and financing, and litigation risk deter scale-up.
Close with · Shift from counting patents to licensing them: tech-transfer offices, translational funds, industry-linked research and faster, predictable IP processes.
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2024, GS Paper III — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 207 words (UPSC limit 150) · Minimalist IAS
Since Diamond v. Chakrabarty (1980) allowed a US patent on a modified bacterium, patents on genes, micro-organisms and plant varieties have spread worldwide — and been contested on ethical, ecological and equity grounds.
World scenario on life materials
- TRIPS Article 27.3(b): members may exclude plants and animals from patents but must protect micro-organisms and plant varieties, by patents or a sui generis system.
- Divergence: the US and Europe patent life materials widely; India's Patents Act Section 3(j) bars plants, animals and seeds, while the PPV&FR Act 2001 protects breeders and farmers and the Biological Diversity Act 2002 regulates access.
- Benefit-sharing: the CBD and Nagoya Protocol, and the 2024 WIPO treaty requiring disclosure of the origin of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, aim to curb biopiracy.
Why few Indian patents are commercialised
- Metric-driven filing: many patents from academia and public institutions are filed for rankings and appraisals, not for a market need.
- Weak lab-to-market bridge: few technology-transfer offices, little proof-of-concept or venture funding, and thin industry–academia links.
- Ecosystem gaps: low private R&D, long examination pendency, weak IP valuation and financing, and litigation risk deter scaling up.
India must move from counting patents to licensing them — translational funds, tech-transfer offices, industry-linked research and faster, predictable IP processes.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify) — a little fuller than exam length, so every part of the question is covered; in the hall, keep the structure and trim the detail. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.