r2i forum

After (Bas)Texmati it is Yoga !!

"Members of Parliament (MPs) on Tuesday slammed the US patenting authority for granting yoga-related copyrights to American companies, saying yoga is a part of Indian heritage"

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/MPs_unite_to_slam_patenting_of_yoga_by_US/articleshow/2049365.cms

For a country where pirated western books, software and videos are sold for a pittance on the street, where Bollywood and Chennaiwood copy western stuff without even an acknowledgement, and which until recently mass produced and sold western medicines without recognizing patents, one cant help but feeling "Thou doth protest too much".

Alright, let me be charitable and assume there has been a change of heart and focus on the issue of Yoga. Need to distinghish among copyrights, trademarks and patents. Usually copyrights are awarded for written material, trademarks for product names, and patents for inventions.

If I apply for a trademark for "Bobus Ishtyle Boga Ischool" - GOI, Bha Jha Pa and Yoga Babas can protest kill kingdom come, and it will not help, except perhaps appeal to some who think I have stolen something that belongs to India. Same goes for a copyright on a book on Yoga that I have written (just because I use the concept of zero does not mean GOI has rights) as long as I do not engage in plagiarism, and a patent that I get for say "Yoga footwear" as long as the footwear has elements that constitute an innovation.

on a similar note, a few years ago a CA company tried to register "Basmati Rice" as a Trademark. I think that the GOI actually fought that one and won.
good for them!

The article has too little information to give any comments.

If they are copyrighting a yoga mattress, no problem. If they are patenting sun salutations, that will be a problem.

Little digression from the main topic. I didn't understand India's fight against patenting neem and turmeric. Does that mean that if turmeric is patented in US, Vicco turmeric in India becomes illegal? Or somebody selling a turmeric remedy is breaking a patent? Only thing I read was that India won that case, so it must some kind of all-inclusive patent which bars anybody from using that product (turmeric in this case).

Here is one article I found about some of the previous US patents revoked due to Indian protest. I don't know if any yoga patents fall into that logic.

TWO major decisions have revived the intensity of the patent debates that came to the centre stage of national politics during the finalisation of the Dunkel Draft Text of the GATT agreement and the subsequent coming into force of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

The first is the WTO ruling against India in the US-India dispute on TRIPs. In July, the WTO ruled that India had not fulfilled its obligations under the TRIPs Agreement for interim measures to receive and protect new product patents applications in pharmaceuticals and agro-chemicals (so-called 'mailbox' applications), and to provide under stipulated conditions exclusive marketing rights (EMRs) for such products.

The second is the decision of the US Patent Office to revoke the turmeric patent on the basis of a challenge filed by the New Delhi-based Council for Agriculture Research (CSIR). The patent had been granted in March 1995 to two non-resident Indians associated with the University of Mississipi Medical Centre, Jackson, USA. As turmeric has been used for thousands of years for healing wounds and rashes, CSIR challenged the patent on the ground that it lacked novelty. The US Patent Office upheld the objection and cancelled the patent.

The WTO dispute ruling is an attempt to put pressure on India to adopt US-style patent laws. However, as the turmeric patent case makes it evident, the US patent system has its own weaknesses which allow biopi-racy to be practised as a rule. The withdrawal of the turmeric patent is only a first step in reversing biopiracy.

http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/tur-cn.htm

I dont know what exactly is copy righted here but my 2 cents ..

Its one thing to copy it but it is another thing to copy right it as your own. Indian companies may be copying the western stuff but they dont copyright it. Thats the difference here. Western companies can copy the Indian stuff all they want to but should not claim as their own. Thats what the hue and cry is all about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikram_Yoga

Extracts

One legal commentator has argued that while Choudhury’s book is properly copyrighted, “Bikram's particular method of performing yoga postures cannot be protected via the copyright he holds on the book,” as copyright does not protect systems or ideas, only the expression of ideas.[3]
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied both sides’ motions for summary judgment on all issues except one. The court dismissed the claim that Choudhury misused his copyright. Questions of trademark invalidity, whether the sequence is in the public domain, the copyrightability of the sequences and the proper publishing date remain.

------------

From the link in the original post:

Till date, the US Patent and Trademark Office has granted 150 yoga-related copyrights, 134 patents on yoga accessories and 2,315 yoga trademarks.

Each case of alleged incorect issue of patent / copyright / trademark has to be examined separately, on its own individual merits. This applies to yoga related cases as well as other cases. Not all allegations will be necessarily valid or invalid.

-------------------

If they are copyrighting a yoga mattress, no problem. If they are patenting sun salutations, that will be a problem.

Agree, except that a Yoga mattress, if it involves a novel design, would be patented not copyrighted.

Little digression from the main topic. I didn't understand India's fight against patenting neem and turmeric. Does that mean that if turmeric is patented in US, Vicco turmeric in India becomes illegal? Or somebody selling a turmeric remedy is breaking a patent? Only thing I read was that India won that case, so it must some kind of all-inclusive patent which bars anybody from using that product (turmeric in this case).

In the neem case, what was sought to be patented was a neem emulsion - the patent was granted and later revoked after proper legal procedure. In the turmeric case, what was sought to be patented was the use of turmeric as some kind of wound healer, and again the patent was granted and later revoked. In both cases the patents were revoked because there was not sufficient novelty to justify a patent.

-----------------
on a similar note, a few years ago a CA company tried to register "Basmati Rice" as a Trademark. I think that the GOI actually fought that one and won.

It was a patent issue:

http://www.rediff.com/money/2001/sep/04rice.htm

Also, India and Pak want rice grown in other areas to be barred from being called Basmati - like in the case of Champagne and Scotch Whisky - a geographical trademark, if you will.

How original are we Indians --- first patenting the DNA and now yoga!!!:emteeth:


Members appear to confound trademark, copyright and patents.

No trademark or symbol has been obtained for the book or the yoga organization. Even if Bikram gets a TM it does not affect the practice of yoga around the world.

From what has been posted it appears that a publication has been copyrighted and any reproduction of any part of that book without permission is in violation of the law.
The specific conditions for Bikram Yoga do not appear to have any original or novel features -- if they have , then certainly the novel features are entitled to (copyright) protection and Bikram has the right to enforce them.
It'd be worth investigating if yoga postures like choreographed dance steps and postures can be copyrighted.
It is not at all clear to me that a patent has been granted for the yoga practice. Certainly yoga postures do not fall within the purview of patents.

As for bio-piracy the US patent law allows improvements or variations to
existing products, processes/methods, compositions etc. If a pharma identifies and isolates the active ingredient of a traditional cure then it may be eligible to patent that ingredient. Others may not use that ingredient in their products. What has been patented is a chemical composition and a method of using it.
My last remark: the only relevant portion of a patent are the claims. What is claimed for protection and the language of the claims are critical to the validity of a patent. This is a double-edged sword. If the claims are vague or too broad one can find prior art to invalidate them. If they are narrow and specific then one can go around those specifics with variations that would be unobvious. Meaning? -- I'd not worry too much about neem and turmeric patents or anything that might come down the pike.

ksheer3

In both cases the patents were revoked because there was not sufficient novelty to justify a patent.

Were they revoked due to GOI intervention? If so GOI's actions are in the right direction. With GOI making a lot of halla gulla if some one wants to copyright dance moves based on Yoga (khseer3's comments) then US Patent office may look at it more critically.

ksheer3,

Do you think GOI's attempt to create the massive database of tradiotional medicines will dissuade biopiracy as they hope?

TEXMEX;25065ksheer3,
Do you think GOI's attempt to create the massive database of tradiotional medicines will dissuade biopiracy as they hope?

It certainly will. However as I said in my post there is always some clever inventor who can get around the novelty issue by wording the claims.
A pat.examiner at the US-PTO came across an application claiming medicinal property of copper in cleaning pollutants in water. When googled, it came up that this was Indian practice for centuries (water in copper pots) if not millenia. However the practice does not prove that it was for medicinal or purification purposes-- not explicitly. [Found that elsewhere]
In light of this: A compendium of medicinal herbs & plants is good -- however if someone identifies the active ingredient(s) and how it works on the human body those might be patentable. If another person shows that the active ingredient's efficacy is trebled or multiplied by the addition of a second substance then it becomes patentable. For these reasons and numerous other minutiae of pat.law it is not feasible to build a fence around a knowledge - base;[should knowledge bases be fenced off from others?] but vigilance and fighting each case on its merits can keep the pirates at bay.
Have seen considerable resch.publication in bio-sciences & traditional herbal medicines from Indians in mid-east universities. That might be good.

Worried about pharma-funded research teams going into S.American tribal areas to discover traditional healing plants and medicines. The protection against bio-piracy is less than in India!!

ksheer3