Author(s): Abhinav Gupta, Pranshu Negi

Email(s): abhinavgupta@nls.ac.in , pranshunegi@nls.ac.in

DOI: 10.5958/2454-2687.2019.00050.9   

Address: Abhinav Gupta1, Pranshu Negi2
1Assistant Professor of Law at Renaissance Law College, Indore and Renaissance University, Indore.
2PhD Scholar at National Law School of India University, Bengaluru.
*Corresponding Author

Published In:   Volume - 7,      Issue - 4,     Year - 2019


ABSTRACT:
This paper begins with a brief discussion about the Plant Varieties and their value as an intellectual property for the breeders and the farmers. This paper then discusses the evolution and current state of Plant Varieties protection across various jurisdictions such as US, EU and India. This paper further discusses the rights provided to the farmers and the breeders in the different jurisdictions. This paper then makes a comparative study of farmers rights and the breeders rights in different jurisdictions. The paper also discusses the various approaches to protection of the rights of the stakeholders including the Sui genesis legislation of India. The paper finally provides the suggestions to balance the rights of the farmers and the breeders.


Cite this article:
Abhinav Gupta, Pranshu Negi. Protection of ‘Plant Varieties’ Vs. Balancing of rights of Breeders and Farmers. Int. J. Rev. and Res. Social Sci. 2019; 7(4): 741-745. doi: 10.5958/2454-2687.2019.00050.9

Cite(Electronic):
Abhinav Gupta, Pranshu Negi. Protection of ‘Plant Varieties’ Vs. Balancing of rights of Breeders and Farmers. Int. J. Rev. and Res. Social Sci. 2019; 7(4): 741-745. doi: 10.5958/2454-2687.2019.00050.9   Available on: https://ijrrssonline.in/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2019-7-4-8


REFERENCE:
1.        Cary Fowler, “The Plant Patent Act Of 1930’: A sociological history of its creation”, p. 624
2.        Asexually reproduced plants are produced from one parent without any exchange of genetic information between two parents, which happens in the case of sexual reproduction. So, the off springs are clones of parent. The plants obtained by seeds are sexually reproduced.
3.        Asgrow Seed Co. v. Winterboer 513 U.S. 179 (1995)
4.        447 US. 303, 309, 206 U.S.PQ. 193 (1980)
5.        “AIPPI was not in favor of patenting plant varieties “on the grounds that doing so would stretch basic patent law concepts like inventiveness to the point of undermining the credibility of the patent system” (G.Dutfield, Intellectual Property Rights and the Life Science Industries, Ashgate, 2003, p.186)”.
6.        1991 Act of UPOV, Art 30(2)
7.        TRIPS Agreement, Art. 27(3)(b)
8.        UPOV 1991, Art. I(iv)
9.        UPOV 1991, Art 14
10.      Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, Sec. 28
11.      Twenty-fifth session of the FAO conference- Rome, 1989, Resolution 5/89
12.      International Treaty on Plants and Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, 2001, Article 9
13.      Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, Section 39.
14.      UPOV 1991 Act of Convention, Article 15
15.      Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, Sec. 15(2)
16.      Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, Sec. 23
17.      Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001, allow farmers to freely save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seeds except under the brand names of the protected varieties.

Recomonded Articles:

Author(s): Oyemwinmina Christopher, S. Aibieyi

DOI: 10.5958/2454-2687.2019.00043.1         Access: Open Access Read More

Author(s): Wangshimenla Jamir, Md. Anjar Ali

DOI:         Access: Open Access Read More

Author(s): Akram A. Khan, Zainab Hussain

DOI: 10.5958/2454-2687.2019.00023.6         Access: Open Access Read More

Author(s): Sandipta Padhee

DOI:         Access: Open Access Read More

International Journal of Reviews and Research in Social Sciences (IJRRSS) is an international, peer-reviewed journal, correspondence in....... Read more >>>

RNI:                      
DOI:  

Popular Articles


Recent Articles




Tags