Patenting Biotechnological Innovations: Comparative Assessment of Legal Structures in the US, India, and TRIPS Agreement

Abstract

Human curiosity, a perennial trait, propels innovation across diverse realms, shaping history and progress. The establishment and evolution of patent systems globally aim to incentivize innovation, though challenges arise, particularly in biotechnological patenting, due to technological pace and jurisdictional diversity.This study conducts a comparative examination of patenting frameworks in the US, India, and under the TRIPS Agreement. The US, rooted in its Constitution's Patent Clause, sets a precedent for biotech patentability, as demonstrated in landmark cases like Diamond v. Chakrabarty.

India's patent laws seek a balance between innovation and economic advancement, aligning with global norms while considering societal concerns. Amendments and TRIPS compliance have modernized India's patent regime, emphasizing patents' role in industrial growth.TRIPS mandates minimum intellectual property standards but fails to harmonize gene patent criteria, highlighting jurisdictional disparities.Key legal principles such as novelty, non-obviousness, and utility shape patentability, while exclusions, like natural substances and medical methods, underscore consistency needs.Procedural aspects, including sequence listing and material deposit requirements, are vital for patent acquisition and specification clarity.This study provides a thorough overview of patenting frameworks, offering insights for policymakers, inventors, and legal professionals navigating biotech patent law's complexities.