What are the main characteristics of the 2016 National Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy? Discuss challenges linked to the new IPR policy while mentioning achievements under it. (250 words)


  • Define Intellectual Property Rights and why a country requires a solid IPR framework.
  • List the key characteristics of the 2016 National Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy.
  • Mention its accomplishments and difficulties that continue to plague the National Intellectual Property Rights regime.


Intellectual property rights are the rights granted to individuals over their mental works. They enable patent, trademark, or copyrighted work creators or owners to profit from their own work or investment in a creation. A strong IPR regime is required for a country to support innovation and indigenous creativity. For many years, India was deemed wanting on this front, thus the government enacted IPR policy in 2016.


The following are the key components of the 2016 National Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy:

It incorporates and consolidates all intellectual property rights into a single platform.

It establishes an institutional system for implementation, monitoring, and review by seeking to include and adapt worldwide best practises in the Indian environment.

It proposed making the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) the single point of contact for all IPR concerns.

The ‘Cell for IPR Promotion & Management (CIPAM),’ established under the auspices of DIPP, is to serve as the single point of contact for the implementation of the National IPR Policy’s objectives.

Copyright will be granted to films, music, and industrial drawings.

The Policy also aims to make domestic IPR filings easier across the whole value chain, from IPR creation to commercialization.

Since its implementation, the policy has achieved several things, including the following:

Global Innovation Index ranking rises from 81st in 2015 to 52nd in 2019.

Increased Patent and Trademark Filings, Clearing Backlog/Reducing Pendency in IP Applications, and Strengthened Institutional Mechanism TISCs have been developed in various institutions across various states in collaboration with WIPO.

Certainly, the national IPR strategy was designed to establish a strong IP regime as a crucial step toward a stronger and more competitive economy; yet, numerous challenges remain to be resolved. These are the problems:

Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act 1970 (as amended in 2005) prohibits evergreening of patents, which has been a source of concern for pharmaceutical businesses. For example, the Indian Patent Office invalidated a patent for Novartis’ medication Glivec based on this condition.

Issue of compulsory licencing (CL): Foreign investors bringing technology are concerned about the usage of CL to mimic their products.

Exclusivity of data: Foreign investors and multinational corporations claim that Indian law does not protect them from unfair commercial use of test results or other data supplied to the government during the application for market approval of pharmaceutical or agrochemical products.


The Copyright Act is poorly enforced, and piracy of intellectual materials is common. India has implemented a number of modifications to its intellectual property regime in order to improve efficiency, and the country’s innovation culture is taking centre stage. Still, greater reforms and better implementation of existing norms are required in India to provide a suitable climate for research and development.


No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *