Will bury alive those who raise slogans against Modi and Yogi: UP Minister

Feb 6: India has been ranked 40th out of 53 countries on a global intellectual property index, even as the country has shown improvement in terms of scores when it comes to the protection of IP and copyright issues, a top American industry body said on Wednesday.

India was placed at 36th position among 50 countries in 2019.

India's score, however, increased from 36.04 per cent (16.22 out of 45) in 2019 to 38.46 per cent (19.23 out of 50) in 2020, a 2.42 per cent jump in an absolute score.

However, India's relative score increased by 6.71 per cent, according to the International IP Index released by Global Innovation Policy Center or GIPC of the US Chambers of Commerce.

This year, it finds itself on the 40th place among 53 countries. Two new Index economies (Greece and the Dominican Republic) scored ahead of India. The Philippines, and Ukraine leapfrogged India.

"Since the release of the 2016 National IPR Policy, the government of India has made a focused effort to support investments in innovation and creativity through increasingly robust IP protection and enforcement," the GIPC said.

Since 2016, India has improved the speed of processing for patent and trademark applications, increased awareness of IP rights among Indian innovators and creators, and facilitated the registration and enforcement of those rights, it added.

According to the eighth edition of the annual report, India's score on the Chamber's International IP Index demonstrates the country's growing investment in IP-driven innovation and creativity. The Index specifically highlights a number of reforms over the last year that strengthen India's overall IP ecosystem, it said.

"In 2019, the Delhi High Court used dynamic injunctions to disable access to copyright-infringing content online, resulting in an increase in India's score on two of the copyright-related indicators," it said.

"The use of these injunctions places India alongside global leaders in copyright enforcement, including Singapore and the UK. As a result, India scores ahead of 24 other economies in the copyright indicators," the report said.

The Delhi High Court also issued a series of judgements that provide clarity on existing statutes related to trademark protection online, resulting in a score increase on one of the trademark-related indicators, it added.

The courts issued two precedential rulings that raised the bar for the damages awarded in IP-infringement cases and may provide a deterrent for future infringement. This resulted in an increase in score on one of the trademark-related indicators, it said.

Global Innovation Policy Center or GIPC said India also continues to score well in the Systemic Efficiency indicator, scoring ahead of 28 other economies in these indicators.

"This is a result of a concerted effort by the Indian government to consult with stakeholders during IP policy formation and create greater awareness about the importance of IP protection,” it said adding that India also remains a leader in the use of targeted incentives and IP assets for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

“To continue this upward trajectory, much work remains to be done to introduce transformative changes to India’s overall IP framework and take serious steps to consistently implement strong IP standards," the report said.

GIPC has identified several challenges for India. Prominent among them being patentability requirements, patent enforcement, compulsory licensing, patent opposition, regulatory data protection, transparency in reporting seizures by customs, and Singapore Treaty of Law of TMs and Patent Law Treaty.

"We are encouraged that Indian policymakers seem to recognize this Index as a valuable resource in their efforts to strengthen the country’s promising innovation ecosystem and enhance its competitiveness in an increasingly knowledge-based global economy,” the report said.

Observing that no other economy stands to gain more from strong Indian IP than India itself, the report said for example, no industry has been hurt more by copyright violations in India than the country’s own Bollywood industry, which loses almost USD3 billion to piracy each year.

"The number one way the Modi administration can demonstrate its commitment to the success of the Atal Innovation Mission, Accelerating Growth for New India’s Innovations, Make in India, Digital India, and Startup India is to strengthen its IP framework in ways that promote the legal and regulatory certainty necessary for greater R&D investment, high-value jobs, and greater innovative and creative outputs,” it said.

"Strong IP standards can further solidify India's position as the world’s fastest-growing economy, bolstering its reputation as a destination for doing business, foreign businesses’ ability to invest and make in India, thereby supporting the growth of India’s own innovative and creative industries," the report said.

New Delhi, Jan 1: On the New Year's eve, the railways announced fare hike across its network effective from January 1, 2020, according to an order issued on Tuesday.

While suburban fares remain unchanged, ordinary non-AC, non-suburban fares were increased by 1 paise per km of journey.

The railways also announced a two paise/km hike in fares of mail/express non-AC trains and four paise/km hike in the fares of AC classes.

The fare hike is also applicable to premium trains such as Shatabdi, Rajdhani and Duronto, according to the order.

In the Delhi-Kolkata Rajdhani, which covers a distance of 1,447 km, the hike at the rate of 4 paise per km will be around Rs 58.

According to the order, there will not be any change in the reservation fee and superfast charge and the hike in fares will not be applicable to tickets already booked.

The last such hike was announced in 2014-2015 when fares of all classes of trains were raised by 14.2 per cent and freight charges by 6.5 per cent. However, since then, the railways introduced the flexi-fare scheme which significantly raised fares on select trains and launched trains like Vande Bharat Express and Tejas Express which have relatively higher fares. Trains with dynamic pricing like Suvidha Express were also introduced.

New Delhi, Jul 24: The Delhi High Court on Friday asked the ICMR to come out with a clarification that mobile number, government-issued identity card, photographs or even a residential proof ought not to be insisted upon for Covid-19 test of mentally ill homeless persons.

According to an Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) advisory of June 19, every person who was to be tested for Covid-19 has to provide a government-issued identity proof and should have a valid phone number for tracing and tracking the individual and his/her contacts.

A bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan said that ICMR should issue a clarification by way of a circular or an official order that the identity proof, address proof and mobile number are not required for testing mentally ill homeless persons.

The high court said a camp can be organised for testing such persons as is being done across Delhi for others.

"Guidelines have to be given by you (ICMR). You put it in black and white for the states'' benefit. You only need to clarify in two-three lines that mobile number, address proof and identity cards are not required for testing mentally ill homeless persons," it said.

"Use your powers for the public at large. Once you do so (issue the clarification), all states will comply," the bench added.

Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, appearing for ICMR, sought time to take instructions from the government regarding the observations made by the bench.

The high court, thereafter, listed the matter for further hearing on August 7.

The bench was hearing a PIL moved by advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal seeking directions to ICMR and Delhi government to issue guidelines for Covid-19 testing of mentally ill homeless persons in the national capital.

Coronavirus India update: State-wise total number of confirmed cases, deaths on July 24

The high court on July 9 had asked the ICMR to consider the plight of the mentally ill homeless persons and see whether they can be tested without insisting upon a mobile number, government issue identity card and residential address proof.

The bench had said to ICMR that many homeless mentally ill persons are institutionalised or in shelter homes and therefore, traceable, so there was no need for their identity proof or phone numbers to test them for Covid-19.

In response to the court''s query, ICMR has filed an affidavit stating that the purpose behind the submission of government identity card and telephone number was to ensure proper tracking and treatment of positive cases and their contacts as ''Test/Track/Treat'' is the best strategy for control of Covid-19 pandemic. 

It further said that since health was a state subject, the concerned state health authority may consider adopting a suitable protocol to ensure that the strategy of ''Test/Track/Treat'' is followed and the grievance raised in the PIL is also addressed.

ICMR, in its affidavit, has said that it has only advised facilitating contact tracing as well as tracking of the Covid-19 infected patients.

"The modalities regarding the contact tracing as well as tracking of the Covid-19 infected patients completely falls under the domain of IDSP. NCDC and state health authorities. 

"ICMR is a research organization and the contact tracing, as well as tracking of the Covid-19 infected patients, is not under the domain of ICMR," it has said in its affidavit.

Bansal has claimed in his petition that the Delhi government has not taken seriously the lack of guidelines with respect to Covid-19 testing of mentally ill homeless persons.

Coronavirus Worldometer | 15 countries with the highest number of cases, deaths due to the Covid-19 pandemic

He has said the high court had on June 9 directed it to address the grievances raised by him in another PIL with regard to mentally ill homeless persons in accordance with law, rules, regulations and government policy.

He said that on June 13 he also sent a representation to the Chief Secretary of Delhi government for providing treatment to mentally ill homeless persons in the national capital who have no residence proof. 

However, nothing was done by the Delhi government, he had told the court.