It was two years ago when PepsiCo India had provoked outrage by suing nine farmers from Gujarat for allegedly infringing upon the Patent Rights by growing its registered potato variety, and now, recently, the company’s registration has been revoked by the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights’ Authority (PPV&FRA).
The Convener at the Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture, Kavitha Kuruganti, said this judgment is undoubtedly a historic win for the Indian farmers. She further added that the judgment would prevent any other food or seed corporation from misbehaving with the legally granted farmers’ seed freedom in India. Ms. Kuruganti had filed the petition to revoke PepsiCo’s registration.
PepsiCo did review this recent judgment but declined to give any further comments.
The PPV&FRA questioned the documents submitted by PepsiCo, which claimed that the food giant was the owner of the potato variety and could therefore be considered the registered breeder under the law. The Authority accepted Ms. Kuruganti’s contention, according to which many farmers were put to hardship in this case, along with the threatening possibility of having to pay an enormous penalty on the purported instance of infringement they were supposed to have been committing. As per the order issued by K.V. Prabhu (the Chairperson at PPV&FRA), the same violates public interest.
Used in Lay’s potato chips, the FL-2027 variety of potatoes came into the limelight two years ago in April when it became the center of interest in the David v. Goliath dispute in the potato belt of northern Gujarat. It was 2009 when the potato variety was introduced in India. It was grown by somewhere around 12,000 farmers, with whom PepsiCo had an exclusive agreement corresponding to selling the seeds and buying back the produce. In 2016, PepsiCo registered the potato variety under the PPV&FR Act, 2001.
According to PepsiCo’s infringement lawsuit filed under the Act against nine farmers in Gujarat, including a Rs 4.2 crore lawsuit filed against four small farmers, many farmers who were not involved in the ‘collaborative farming program’ were also growing and selling this variety in the state.
Amidst the critical election season, boycott threats and widespread protests by different political and farmers’ groups forced the government of Gujarat to intervene, thereby pushing PepsiCo to withdraw all cases in May 2019. In the same year, in June, Ms. Kuruganti had then applied to revoke the food giant’s registration.
Shalini Bhutani (a legal researcher and agriculture Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) expert) saluted the judgment as a precedent. She said that the Authority’s acceptance of Ms. Kuruganti’s revocation application (including the grounds of the same being against the public interest) sends an important signal concerning the aspect that farmers’ rights cannot be taken lightly by the IP rights holders in the country.
Kapil Shah, a member of the Kisan Beej Adhikar Manch and one of the activists who spearheaded the initial protests in Gujarat, said in a recent statement delivered that both the Authority and the Government do have a responsibility to make all registrants and applicants under the PPV&FR Act understand well that their rights do not supersede the farmers’ rights. For more visit: https://www.trademarkmaldives.com
Don’t forget to follow us on social media:
Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/trademarkmaldives/
Twitter – https://twitter.com/trademarkmaldiv
Linkedin – https://www.linkedin.com/company/trademarkmaldives/
Pinterest – https://in.pinterest.com/trademarkmaldives/
Comments