The current Indian patent regime fulfils nearly all the requirements of the TRIPS mandate as well as the Patent Cooperation Treaty, 1970. As newer technologies emerge, Science throws challenges after challenges in the path of law. Protection of some of these technologies has grey areas in Indian Patent system. One such technology is "nanotechnology". Nanotechnology delas with manipulation of nano-metre scale materials. Nanomaterials being building blocks, can be manipulated to create complex materials and devices by regulating shape and size at the "nanoscale". The broad term "nanotechnology" encapsulates any scientific area or a combination of areas of biology, physics or chemistry, that deals with the manipulation of materials at nanoscale. The significance of nanotechnology is that materials reduced to the nanoscale show very different properties compared to what they show on a macroscale.
Issues faced by Indian's patent regime:
One of the major concerns with the nanotechnology inventions is it being multi-disciplinary in nature. Such a multi-disciplinary nature of nanotechnology inventions poses challenges for both the patent offices and courts in determining the patentability of nanotechnology inventions. They are faced with the issues of determining which context is appropriate across many disciplines and industries and include all of them in decision making. Additionally, a potential patentee as well as patent office are required to search for prior art not limited to one field but in wide variety of fields.
Another major concern with the multi-disciplinary nature of the nanotechnology inventions is that the corresponding patents bear overly broad claims. In scenario like this, the patentee tries to maximize the profit by preferring patent claims which could cover as many applications and potential markets as possible. Due to presence of high number of such patents with broad and overlapping claims, possibility of fragmentation of patent landscape and patent thickets arises. The broad definition of nanotechnology creates difficulties for both the inventor and the patent examiner in classifying new inventions for patent office purposes. For instance, a patent application may use broad terms, such as "microscale" or "quantum dot" to describe a nanotechnology invention or may use terms like "nano-second", thereby covering multiple fields. Lack of a standardized terminology for nanotechnology leads to patent overlapping and broad claiming, and due to which both the inventor and the examiner are required to take considerable caution in order to search for prior art in the area, since "nano" alone is not adequate term to search.
According to the Article 27(1) of TRIPS, a valid and enforceable patent can only be obtained on a certain invention if the claims are novel, non-obvious over the prior art and have industrial usage. However, patenting of nanotechnological inventions is not same as that of other technologies and how to contemplate a certain "invention" differs from country to country. In India, under section 2(1)(j) of the Patent Act, 2005, defines an "inventive step" as a feature of an invention that includes "technical advancement" as compared to the existing knowledge that makes the invention non-obvious to person skilled in the art. These provisions were later made stringent by post amendment in 2005, inclusion of Section 3(b) and 3(d) has posed challenges for new technologies in India. Section 3(b) of Indian patent act forms a barrier to nanobiotechnology based patenting due to assumptions about nanotoxicity caused by nanoparticles. Nano biotech inventions causes environmental damage and due to high permeation ability of the nanoparticles further the nanoparticles may get into the bodies of the humans and may result in nanotoxicity. In addition, according to section 3(d), there is vagueness in particle size to be considered patentable subject matter or not. The word "nano" covers inventions of 100nm in size or smaller. In many cases, the nano material may be combination of many particles or technologies or nano particle of an existing material, without substantial difference in character and industrial application. The invention may not pass the "standard efficacy" requirement demanded by Section 3(d). There is a lack of standard for determination of the efficacy and qualification of enhancement of efficacy in India. However, Section 3(d) could be important means to prevent frivolous grant of patents.
Conclusion:
At present, Indian Patent Act has no provision, and no guidelines or regulations has been framed with respect to regulating this technology through TRIPS agreement which in fact encourages protection of intellectual property across all fields of science. This gap between the technology and the patenting of the technology could be attributed to the lack of awareness about the traits and understanding of the technology.
One of the possible solutions to the problem of patenting nanotechnology inventions can be addressed by bringing amendments in the Indian Patent Act. The lawmakers must devise a mechanism to recognize the field of nanotechnology and formulate a comprehensive plan that deals with nanotechnology and patenting of nanotechnology inventions. Since, nanotechnology covers multiple scientific fields, setting up multiple inspections by a team of examiners from different fields instead of a single examiner would aid in better understanding of the claims. Further, a separate database similar to that of traditional knowledge database could be created for nanotechnology. A policy decision is needed for a separate classification for nanotechnology patents. These preliminary steps would surely encourage the research and innovation in the field of nanotechnology which in turn would render prosperity to Indian patenting system.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
