Interface between Competition law and Intellectual Property Rights: A Comparative Study of the US, EU and India
International Law at Rajiv Gandhi School of IP Law, IIT Kharagpur and Life Member, Indian Society of International Law, New Delhi, India
- *Corresponding Author:
- Raju KD
Associate Professor of International Law at Rajiv Gandhi School of IP Law
IIT Kharagpur, India and Life Member
Indian Society of International Law, New Delhi, India
E-mail: [email protected]
Received Date: January 31, 2014; Accepted Date: April 04, 2014; Published Date: April 10, 2014
Citation: Raju KD (2014) Interface between Competition law and Intellectual Property Rights: A Comparative Study of the US, EU and India. Intel Prop Rights 2:115. doi: 10.4172/2375-4516.1000115
Copyright: © 2014 Raju KD. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
It is generally viewed that Intellectual property protection and competition law are odds with each other. Is there really any tussle between intellectual property protection and competition law? Intellectual property law creates and protects monopoly power and the other seeks to exclude it. IP exclusion provisions are included in the Indian Competition Act, 2002 in Section 3(5). This is to provide enforcement to intellectual property rights. But protection of intellectual property rights are not per se violates any competition provisions. The objective of competition law is to prohibit anti-competitive practices and the objective of both the stream is wealth maximization in any economy. Intellectual property protection is necessary to foster innovation and choices of products in the market. It infuses efficiency in the market and increases consumer welfare. India is in the nascent state of its administration of competition laws. There are sizable number of cases came before the Indian competition authorities (CCI) and Indian courts. Cases against Microsoft India and abuse of dominant case against Ericsson filed by an Indian company named Micromax is only the beginning of the interface cases on intellectual property and competition law. There is no sufficient case laws and jurisprudence is available in India in guiding the Indian authorities and courts on the interface between intellectual property and competition. It is necessary to make an analysis of the jurisprudence in the US and EU. First part of this paper deals with the US Antitrust Act, 1890 and analysis of a number of cases dealt by the US courts. The EU Regulations and cases are clearer on issues of intellectual property and competition law. Indian jurisprudence is not clear so far and few cases are dealt by the CCI and Indian courts. The study concludes that Indian authorities should learn from other jurisdictions and the jurisprudence will act as guideline for Indian authorities.