Signing up

The government's decision "in principle" to opt for the Madrid system of international registration of trademarks is a step, albeit belated, in the right direction.

In fact, joining the Madrid system should have preceded, and not followed, the other measures to align the country's patent, copyright and other such regimes with those of the intellectual property rights (IPR) norms laid down by the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

For, the Madrid system encompasses broad-range issues like trade marks, industrial designs, and geographical indications, which have acquired added significance of late.

Effectively, the Madrid system provides a means of obtaining trademark registration (read protection) in any or all of its member countries through a single application and by paying a single set of fees, instead of applying in each country.

Going further, it permits subsequent changes (such as change of name or address) and renewal of registration across all countries. As such, this system is of special use to small and medium enterprises which are incapable of incurring multiple registration costs and are relatively vulnerable to trademark poaching.

Indeed, the Madrid system is one of the oldest multilateral IPR regimes, and governed by two treaties.

The original accord, referred as the "Madrid Agreement" concerning the international registration of marks, dates back to 1891 and is still in vogue though it has undergone several revisions from time to time.

The second and in a way the modern avatar of the original one, is called the "Madrid Protocol" and came into force in 1996. The system as a whole is administered by the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) under the WTO.

Significantly, there are fine distinctions between trademark protection and patent or copyright. While the trademark registration essentially safeguards indications (such as logos) of the commercial source of product or services, the patent law generally protects new and useful inventions.

Copyright, on the other hand, seeks broadly to guard original literary, artistic and other creative works. However, what needs to be realised is that while the intellectual property laws may be theoretically distinct, they are not mutually exclusive as more than one law may apply to the protection of the same product.

Indeed the Madrid system, like most others of its clan, is not a wholly unmixed blessing. It has a none-too-positive side as well.

For one, international registration under Madrid is tied for the first five years to the underlying home-country registration. If the indigenous trademark is successfully opposed, the international registration will also lapse.

Besides, in the case of any legal battle abroad, the trademark owner has to hire lawyers from that country. Moreover, protection under the Madrid system is not available in several Asian and South American countries that have not yet joined it.

But, on the whole, since the merits of the Madrid system outweigh its demerits, it makes sense for India to join nearly 80 other countries, the major economies included, who have opted to be a party to this regime.