Skip to content

CS Executive · Economic, Commercial and Intellectual Property Laws · Law relating to Geographical Indications of Goods

Kalpana Traders in Surat, not an authorised user of a registered GI for a handloom saree from Odisha, labels its Surat-made sarees so that buyers are led to believe they come from that Odisha region. Under the Act, what is the legal position?

It is an infringement. A person who is not an authorised user infringes a registered geographical indication by presenting goods so as to suggest a false place of origin in a way that misleads buyers. Notification for additional protection is not required for this kind of infringement.

  1. AIt infringes the registered GI because the label suggests a wrong place of origin in a way that misleads buyersCorrect
  2. BIt is not an infringement because the sarees are genuine handloom goods
  3. CIt is an infringement only if the Central Government has notified the goods for additional protection
  4. DIt is permitted because only an authorised user can sue, not the trader

Explanation

Under section 22(1)(a), a non-authorised user infringes a registered GI by using it in designation or presentation of goods suggesting origin in an area other than the true place, in a manner misleading persons. Notification under section 22(2) is needed only for the additional protection in section 22(3), so that option is wrong.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Geographical Indications of Goods shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Law relating to Geographical Indications of GoodsFree diagnostic mock

More Law relating to Geographical Indications of Goods questions