-
Even The King Struggles..!

When I say King I mean It..It is easy to see why.. Alphonso Mango's voluptuous shape, sunshine yellow skin reveals saffron colored, smooth flesh...imagine an impeccable cross between peach, nectarine, apricot, melon with notes of honey and citrus..Alphonso is better than you imagined..! Alphonso becomes an obsessive passion not only for its producers but also for the consumers when it hits the market during the season.

Now coming back from the poetic yet real description of the King to the struggle it faces. Last season Alphonso suffered a major setback in the export market. I will not delve into the details of it since it has been discussed widely in media. What I would like to share is that Alphonso being a King of Mangoes is struggling to get a Geographical Indications tag in India...

Going by the facts there are three applicants who have sough to register Alphonso Mango as the Geographical Indication, namely- Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth (Appl. No. 139), Devgad Taluka Amba Utpadak Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit (Appl. No. 379), and Kelshi Parisar Amba Utpadak Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit (Appl. No. 497).

Appl. No. 139 seeks protection of Alphonso Mango on a wide GI area which includes few districts of Gujarat, Konkan region of Maharashtra, North Karnataka and State of Goa.

Appl. No. 379 seeks protection of Devgad cultivar of Alphonso Mango covering Devgad Taluk as GI area.

Appl. No. 497 seeks protection of Ratnagiri cultivar of Alphonso Mango covering Ratnagiri District as GI area.

Now, the conflict arises whom to grant what?? If Appl. No. 139 gets registration then Alphonso as a whole gets generalized protection on the sought GI area. If Appl. No. 379 & 497 get registration, then the name Alphonso becomes generic nomenclature according to many.

 Alors! Traditional and scientific facts tell us something else. Alphonso derived its name from Afonso de Albuquerque, the Portuguese explorer. He led the Portuguese invasion into India in the 1600s and therein the Portuguese introduced the Mango variety through grafts on Mango trees. Starting its journey in Goa, the Alphonso Mango traveled across the Western India. Later it became the treasure fiercely guarded by the locals. It can be observed that significant variation exists, among trees of the same clone in an orchard w.r.t. fruit shape, size, color, and quality ascribed to bud mutation. The generic divergence could be attributed to the differences in environmental and geographical conditions.

 M.D. Manchekar et al, Clonal variability studies in Alphonso Mango (Mangifera indica L.) by genetic divergence (D2) analysis, Karnataka J. Agri. Sci., 24(4):(490-492) 2011, evaluated nine location specific clones of Alphonso were used for testing divergence by employing Mahalanobis D2 analysis. [The clones are named as: DPL-I (Dapoli), RTN-1 (Ratnagiri), DVG-I (Devgad), VEN-I (Vengurla), DWR-I, II, III (Dharwad), BGM-I, II (Belgaum).]

 Following are the divergence values of intra and inter cluster distance-


Given this genetic divergence, one can easily see that there are fundamental differences between the different clones of Alphonso Mango.

In my opinion, different cultivars of Alphonso Mango who have established uniqueness and have geographical significance to that deserve a separate geographical indication protection.

Let's hope that the King won't be trapped in the never ending dispute just like the Basmati Rice where Madhya Pradesh and the Basmati growers therein are fighting for the inclusion of Madhya Pradesh in the application submitted by APEDA.

LONG LIVE KING OF MANGOES..!!

- until next time...



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Starbucks vs. SardarBuksh

-
Image
Branding your brand does not and must not mean that you copy somebody else's brand name and get a free ride upon their good will.  Trademark law is very clear in this aspect while keeping two most essential pre-requisites before registering a trademark as - 1. Trademark has to be distinctive; 2. Trademark must not be descriptive. Lot many brand owners make mistakes in understanding the concept of distinctiveness and start using brand names which are similar to the already existing trademarks which are famous. Making minor changes here and there either in spellings or color combinations or finding a rhyming words to the existing trademarks does not yield distinctiveness to your brand name. Some of the brand owners knowingly make use of such deceptively similar marks and then get sued.  In one of such interesting cases in Delhi High Court, the Court has ruled in favor of Starbucks who filed a case against a local coffee shop chain SardarBuksh for copying word mark a
Read more

Trade Marks and U(nu)sual Misunderstandings

-
Trade Marks registration process in India has seen enormous changes in past 2-3 years. The number of Forms have been reduced from 64 to 8. The examination time has reduced from 2 years to 5 working days - believe it or not but its true and one of the fastest all over the world!   However, the change in law or rules has not impacted some common misconceptions that are prevalent among business owners about the Trade Marks. Thought it would be good to address them here: 1. I don't need to perform search..My Trade Mark is Original in toto Applicants commonly believe that the trade name they thought is distinctive enough and don't see any need to get a search done or to get an opinion from a practitioner. Let me say something unpleasant that the name you want to trademark probably isn’t as original as you think it is, at least not in the eyes of the Trade Marks Registry. Every year, thousands of trademark applications are rejected without refunds because they too closely resembl
Read more

The Jurisdiction Saga on the interplay of the Design Act, 2000 and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015

-
In a very lucid judgment in the case of S.D. Containers vs. Mold-tek Packaging Limited (Civil Appeal No. 3695 of 2020), the Supreme Court of India decided the matter clearing the air of doubt on the interplay of the Design Act, 2000 and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Relevant facts on background of the case -  Mold-tek Packaging Limited (hereinafter Plaintiff/Respondent), a manufacturer and seller of plastic packaging material who obtained design registration for its container's lids, jars etc. in 2015 and 2017. In late 2019, the Plaintiff/Respondent came to know about S.D. Containers (hereinafter Defendant/Appellant) who allegedly infringed design of the Plaintiff/Respondent. The Plaintiff/Respondent filed a civil suit before the Commercial Court at Indore seeking permanent injunction against the Defendant/Appellant from copying and using the design of the Plaintiff/Respondent as described in Design Application No. 299039 and 299041 for the containers and lids, respectively. The
Read more