Abstract
This article examines the moral and legal issue evoked by Prada’s introduction of sandals copying India’s celebrated Kolhapuri chappals. International luxury companies prefer not to have such intellectual property safeguards when introducing derivative forms to other countries, while Kolhapuri chappals are protected under Geographical Indication (GI) in India. In an attempt to bring to the forefront compelling reasons for enforceable protection, cross-border cooperation, and moral engagement among the international fashion community, the following analysis examines everything that is pertinent under the law, i.e., GI law, design protection, passing off, international agreements, and traditional knowledge regimes.
Introduction
Although it is not unusual for luxury fashion firms to take ideas for their products from indigenous heritage, the activity in itself carries severe ethical and legal concerns. Loopholes are still being left open in safeguarding intellectual property rights (IPR) for traditional crafts, as exemplified by the recent Prada sandals debacle of copying Kolhapuri chappals without any reference to origin. Multinationals risk economically and culturally excluding artisans while retailing origin-inspired heritage designs with unfair consideration of the communities of origin. The potential for passing off and legal recourse against unfair competition, the global aspects of cultural appropriation, and India’s GI and design law strengths and weaknesses are all emphasized in this analysis.
Keywords
Kolhapuri chappal, Geographical Indication, intellectual property rights, design law, passing off, traditional knowledge, Prada, protection of artisans, cultural appropriation, global fashion, remedies in law, ethical sourcing.
Geographical Indications (GI) tag in India
Kolhapuri chappals were awarded the Geographical Indications (GI) tag in India in 2019 as per the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Status) Act, 1999. GI refers to goods with reference to their place of origin, providing the legal right to registered manufacturers from within the region of Kolhapur and Sangli to use the “Kolhapuri” name solely and maintain claims of counterfeiting or fraudulence.
Legal Strengths
The GI protection ensures the communal ownership and prevents abusive or spurious origin description.
In India, the registrable GI owner has a right to bring criminal remedies, damages, and injunctions against infringement.
Limitations:
GI is usually enforced only within national boundaries. In the absence of treaties or Indian GI recognition by foreign countries, Indian law can’t automatically provide GI protection abroad.
Firms not referring to “Kolhapuri” by name, such as Prada, refuse outright GI abuse and make hurdles for litigation.
Restrictions against Copyright and Design Protection
The Designs Act, 2000, safeguards the appearance of products but requires distinctiveness and novelty. The century-old collective knowledge in Kolhapuri chappals is seldom registrable as designs. Because of their community nature due to culture and non-individual authorship, customary crafts are not typically copyrightable. Despite seldom being ever enforceable in court for purely aesthetic copying without expressed identification (e.g., Prada sandals), craftsmen have to rely substantially on GI for protection.
False Advertising and Unfair Competition
Indian law safeguards victims against unauthorized use that has the potential to cause confusion to customers regarding the origin of the product through passing off.
Misrepresentation, goodwill, and consequent damage are to be established by the plaintiffs.
Prada sandals, not having ever once mentioned Kolhapuri chappals or Indian origin, have a poor example of passing off.
Derivatives will be harmful only to confuse consumers if they replicate trade dress obviously or connote regional origin.
Anti-competitive acts are prohibited by unfair competition statutes but are typically enforced by costly civil action, which is inaccessible to under-funded or uncoordinated groups of artisans.
Enforcement and Legal Challenges
Domestic Enforcement
Only GI registrants can bring actions for infringement.
Though strong, concerted legal action is required to succeed, remedies are injunctions, damages, and criminal prosecution.
International Enforcement
Few countries automatically grant Indian GIs protection; protection is subject to bilateral or multilateral arrangements.
The majority of artisanal communities are unable to take on the technical litigation required to bring claims abroad.
Non-harmonized GI laws are exploited by international fashion producers, granting non-recognized commercial use of traditional designs.
Treaty Gaps and International Law
Reduced arts needs are mandated by WTO’s TRIPS Agreement with a minimum level of protection, effectively only for wine and spirits.
Bilateral arrangements, like India-EU, introduce greater GI protection, though automatic recognition is missing in the majority of international markets, including the U.S.
No binding international norms exist for traditional crafts, though the Lisbon Agreement and Paris Convention offer limited support.
Efforts persist and remain incomplete at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to establish “sui generis” regimes for traditional knowledge and cultural expression.
Traditional Knowledge: Surpassing Modern Intellectual Property
India’s intangible cultural heritage comprises Kolhapuri chappals. Current intellectual property legislations, premised on individual creation with a limited period, are inadequate in preserving community, ageless traditional art.
Social authorship and ongoing continuation of such crafts require “sui generis” protection.
True protection of traditional knowledge and cultural expressions both domestically and abroad calls for legislative change.
Remedy and Policy for the Future.
Criminal and Civil Redress
Damages and injunctions are allowed under the GI rule, but success in fact requires:
Higher awareness and legal aid for registered GI owners and artisan associations.
NGOs and government institutions are organizing collective action and facilitating legal processes.
International and Multilateral Action: Fostering healthy bilateral agreements so that international acceptance of GI is promoted.
Enforceable standards in international arenas such as WIPO and TRIPS.
Ethical Obligations of Brands
Legally mandated minimums are not enough. The fashion industry must:
Accord artistic inspiration to communities of artisan-craftsmen.
Engage local artisan-craftsmen in co-branded projects and design endeavors.
Ensure fair compensation and open supply chains.
Conclusion
Prada’s Kolhapuri-motif sandals are the ultimate reminder of how old the issue of getting legal protection for ancient crafts is in our world today. Though India’s GI and design legislation safeguards many theories, several impediments bar global enforcement. In pursuit of redress against unfair competition and passing off, low-paid craftsmen seldom enjoy good evidence and courageous lawsuits.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY __ Kondala Phani Priya
