Dichotomy of Intellectual Property & Competition Laws : A Note on Persisting Challenges in Prevention of IP based Abusive Practices

Abstract

Although the law relating to protection of intellectual properties and competition laws appear to be divergent in their objectives, an indepth analysis of their interface is important to put the legislations in their proper place. The present article is focused on analyzing the persisting interface between the two and also outlays the differences in interpretation of such interface in the developing and developed countries. Additionally, this article is an attempt to reconcile the arguments putting the laws in repulsive directions and argues that conceptual foundations of the two are in-fact, ideologically different and distinct from each other. This article would also be helpful in ascertaining the level and points of complementarity between the two laws and proves that the projected objectives of both the laws are actually similar and converging. The article also presents an overview of the permissible scope of regulation of anti-competitive / IP based abusive practices through TRIPs framework. In the light of divergent interpretations to the dichotomy in developed and developing countries of the world, the article also explores opportunities of ‘universalization’ or harmonization of any incidental conflict between the two laws and presents available opportunities for such harmonization. The article concludes with the fact that dichotomy between the two laws is still a complex legal issue for the developing and emerging economies to handle. However, the interface is extremely important for such countries in light of the fact that such economies are heavily dependent on import of improvised versions of technology from developed countries which have a mature competition law regime to handle IP based abusive practices.