EVOLUTION OF FASHION INDUSTRY IN INDIA-

Fashion in India dates back thousands of years and is steeped in magnificent traditions. India has a
diverse textile heritage, with each region and state having its own distinct native costume, traditional
attire, and accessories. In this globalized era, the apparel and accessory segment in India is rapidly
expanding in response to international developments. The fashion industry in India is expanding on a
daily basis, and it has seen significant growth in the last decade, primarily due to the growth of
domestic designers, some of whom have gained international recognition in recent years.1
Fashion is not only restricted to apparels but also extends largely to luxurious goods and products.
Each year the fashion hub produces a whole new collection of designs which needs to be protected
and regulated by a proper forum of law.
The growth of the Indian fashion industry is highlighted by the increase in the number of large
fashion events (from 1 in 2004 to 5 in 2013). As per a study conducted by the Associated Chambers
of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM), the domestic designer apparel industry in India,
which was of worth Rs. 720 crore and was reporting a compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of
about 40% in 2012, is likely to cross Rs. 11,000 crore marks by 2020.2 Although, the contribution of
the Indian designer wear industry in the global market is a minimal 0.32% but it is expected to reach
1.7% by 2020.

On one hand, the Indian fashion sector is prospering; on the other, it is beset by the threat of fashion
design theft. People in the industry, especially fashion designers, have been heard moaning about
their innovations being copied and mimicked. The fashion business has long been recognized for its
pervasiveness in duplicating original fashion designs, and the widespread availability of sophisticated
software technologies has made this practice quite simple. Fashion design, as a creation of one's
intellectual ingenuity and original creativity, has sparked increased concern and need for fashion
design Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) protection. Unlike countries such as France, where
purchasing a counterfeit product is punishable by law, India currently lacks such legislation. In India,
original product owners have the right to file a lawsuit in a court of law with appropriate jurisdiction,
seeking permanent injunctions to prevent counterfeiters from selling counterfeit goods. The original
product's owners may also go to court to claim compensation for their losses.

In light of this, the current research makes a basic effort to understand the present IPRs regime in
India that protects fashion designs in a systematic manner. However, before going into detail on this,
it's important to define the terms "fashion’’, "fashion design," and "fashion design piracy," as they've
been used throughout this work. In addition, the paper examines the broad grounds for IPR protection
in the fashion business.
1 Grail Research (2009), The Global Fashion Industry – Growth in Emerging Markets (Research Report),
2 “Indian Designer wear industry growing at CAGR’’ (2009)
Concept of Fashion and Fashion Design-

Fashion is an expression of life as well as an art form. It's a nonverbal communication system
that uses signs, symbols, and iconography to convey information about individuals and
organizations. It's a way of expressing oneself that also functions as a personality extension.
Age, social class, generation, occupation, and geography, as well as time, can have a
significant impact on fashion within a community. It is continually changing, and the pace of
change is often faster than in most other human endeavors. Fashion is a term used to describe a
popular way of wearing at a given moment or among a specific set of people.3
In a nutshell, fashion refers to anything that is currently popular in terms of a person's
appearance and attire.

Fashion design is the process of applying design and aesthetics to clothing. It is a type of art
that focuses on the design of unique clothing and other lifestyle 4. Fashion design, referred to as
the “principle creative element” of the fashion design5 is influenced by cultural and societal
perspectives and has evolved across time and space. There are three primary categories in
modern fashion design6 -
 haute couture-
The haute couture (made to measure) collection is dedicated to certain customers and is
custom sized to fit these customers exactly.
 ready-to-wear-
In contrast, ready-towear collections are not made for individual customers but are
made in small quantities to guarantee exclusivity yet be able to provide the same design
to more than a single individual.
 mass market-
The Mass Market designs cater to a wide range of customers using cheaper fabrics and
simpler production techniques

Finally, fashion design displays human intellect and creativity. And this creativity manifests
itself in the shape of physical fashion items.

3.Merriam-Webster Online: Dictionary and Thesaurus

4. Article “What is fashion design?”, 2015
5. Kal Raustiala and Christopher Sprigman (2006), note 19, p. 1689. “The Piracy Paradox Revisited”,
StanfordLaw Review.
6.Fashion designing - the then and now”, (2010)
Fashion Design Piracy-

The unauthorized and illegal reproduction or distribution of materials protected by copyright, patent,
or trademark law is referred to as piracy7. It's when someone makes It's when someone makes
unauthorized copies of someone else's intellectual property.8To put it another way, piracy is the act of
duplicating anything without permission.
In the context of fashion industry, piracy includes: -
(1) piracy in fashion design;
(2) piracy in logo or label of fashion brand.
In the fashion industry, piracy is wide spread. It entails the theft of original fashion designs without
permission. Counterfeit and knockoff designs are rampant. Fashion designers' designs can be
protected under a variety of IP.

Fashion design piracy (FDP) involves unauthorized copying of original fashion designs generally
falling into one of the two following categories: -
(1) knockoffs, and
(2) counterfeits.

Relevance of IPR to the fashion industry-

Fashion design is an ideal subject matter for IPR protection because it is a product of human intellect
and creativity. However, agreement on the need for fashion design protection under the IPR
framework is proving difficult to come by. On this subject, many points of view have been expressed,
with some supporting the urgent need for IPR protection for fashion design and others denying the
existence of such a demand. One could wonder how all of this relates to the larger issue of intellectual
property rights.
The truth is that intellectual property and fashion are inextricably linked. The designs that are
acknowledged as fashions are the intellectual creations of an individual, and the law of our land aims
to safeguard those inventions by granting an exclusive right to those creators to use and exploit those
creations for monetary gain. The legal system attempts to stimulate creativity by encouraging more
people to come up with ideas that may ultimately fuel an economy's growth by adopting the same
principle.9

If the abovementioned rules fail to successfully preserve creativity, the country would suffer a
significant loss since no one will step forward to develop and no new ideas will be made. As a result,
one may see a strong link between fashion and intellectual property rights. The Trademark Act,
Copyright Act, Designs Act, and Geographical Indication of Goods Act are mostly just a handful of
good regulations that aim to preserve the intellectual property rights involved with fashion industry
inventions.

7. Black's Law Dictionary (Ninth Edition, 2009), p. 1266.

8. Free Online Legal Dictionary. And Merriam-Webster Online: Dictionary and Thesaurus
9.available at blog.ipleaders.in ipr-laws-applicable-to-fashion-industry
Opponents of fashion design IPR protection contend that IPR protection is unnecessary because the
fashion business is growing. Instead, they argue that the lack of IPR protection encourages fashion
designers to come up with fresh designs, which adds to the industry's growth.

Whereas, Supporters of IPR protection for fashion design recognize that the fashion sector is one of
the most important creative businesses in the world. They claim that while designs are complex and
expensive to create, they are comparatively easy and inexpensive to replicate. They claim that
without IPR protection, copyists will profit from creators' efforts, limiting further investments in fresh
innovations and creations. In other words, copying stifles innovation. They argue that IPR protection
for fashion designs would promote innovation by ensuring that earnings from a design went to the
designer rather than to those who simply copied the work.

Protection of Fashion Design under the Indian Intellectual Property Rights

Regime-

The IPR Regime in India provides protection to the fashion design under the different legislations,
viz., the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 and the Trade Marks Act, 1999.etc.
These legal instruments can be discussed under following heads: -

 Industrial design protection for fashion design,

 Copyright protection for fashion design,
 Patent protection in Fashion industry,
 Trademark protection for fashion design
 Protection under Geographical Indications

Fashion designers' designs can be protected under a variety of IP categories-

1. Copyright Act of 1957 allows the sketch design to be registered as an artistic work.

2. Under the Design’s Act, design can be properly protected in classes 02,03,05,10, and 11 of the
third schedule of design rules 2000.

3. Under the 1957 Copyright Act, colour combinations can be protected.

4. Under the trademark’s legislation, logo designs are protected.

5. Fabric or any material used in art or design can also be protected under designs act, 2000 and
patents act 1970.
 1. DESIGN PROTECTION FOR FASHION DESIGN-

The Designs Act affords protection to the “design” registered under the Act.

Section 2 (d) of the Designs Act defines the term “design” as follows: -
“Design means only the features of shape, configuration, pattern, ornament or composition of lines
or colors applied to any article whether in two dimensional or three dimensional or in both forms, by
any industrial process or means, whether manual, mechanical or chemical, separate or combined,
which in the finished article appeal to and are judged solely by the eye; but does not include any
mode or principle of construction or anything which is in substance a mere mechanical device, and
does not include any Trade mark as defined in clause (v) of sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Trade
and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 or property mark as defined in Section 479 of the Indian Penal
Code or any artistic work as defined in clause (c) of Section 2 of the Copyright Act, 1957.”10

It means that not every design but only those designs which fit into the definition of “design”
as provided under Section 2 (d) of the Act can be registered under the Designs Act. Apart from
it, a design, to get registration and, consequently, to get protection under the Designs Act, must
satisfy the ensuing conditions as well:

1) It must be new or original.

2) It must not have been disclosed to the public anywhere in India or in any other
country by publication in tangible form or by use or in any other way prior to the date
of filing for registration.
3) It must be significantly distinguishable from known designs or combination of known
designs.
4) It must not comprise or contain scandalous or obscene matter.11

From the perspective of fashion industry, the Act does not protect the entire garment as a
whole; rather, it only protects the particular/individual aspects like shape, pattern, colour etc.
of the garment. Moreover, to be protected under the act, these particular aspects must not only
satisfy the definition of “design” as provided under the Act but must also be registered under
the Act.
If a person commits any act involving piracy of a registered design, he is liable to pay the
registered proprietor of the design a sum not exceeding twenty-five thousand rupees
recoverable as a contract debt for each act of piracy, or if the proprietor elects to bring a suit
for the recovery of damages for any such act involving piracy, and for any injunction against it,
to pay such dam. The owner of a registered design must file a lawsuit in any court that is not
lower than a District Judge's court.

10 See sec 2 (d) of Design Act

11 See the Designs Act, Section 4.

Under the Act, the proprietor of a registered design gets copyright in the design which means
the exclusive right to apply the design to any article in any class in which the design is
registered. It means the Act affords protection not in a particular article but against a class of
articles as enumerated in Schedule III of the Designs Rules, 2001.12
Goods manufactured by the fashion designers may fall under the following classes of
goods: -

1) Class 2: -

Articles of clothing and haberdashery - undergarments, lingerie, corsets, brassieres, nightwear;

headwear; footwear, socks and stockings; neckties, scarves, neckerchiefs and handkerchiefs;
gloves; haberdashery and clothing accessories including buttons, clasps for garments, for
headwear and for footwear, laces, pins, hand sewing, knitting and embroidery equipment and
clothing accessories such as belts, suspenders, braces etc.

2) Class 3: -
Travel goods, cases, parasols and personal belongings, not elsewhere specified - trunks,
suitcases, briefcases, handbags, key-holders, cases specially designed for their contents,
wallets and similar articles; umbrellas, parasols, sunshades and walking sticks; fans etc.

3) Class 5:
Textile piece-goods, artificial and natural sheet material – lace embroidery; ribbons, braids and
other decorative trimmings; textile fabrics etc.

4) Class 10:
Clocks and watches and other measuring instruments, checking and signaling instruments -
watches and wrist watches etc.

5) Class 11:
Articles of adornment – jewelry etc.

As per the provisions of the Designs Act, copyright in the registered design subsists for a
period of ten years from the date of registration 13 and may be extended further for a second
period of five years on the application regarding the same.14 During the existence of copyright
in registered design, the Designs Act protects registered design from piracy.15

12. The Design Rules were framed by the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section47 of
 the Designs Act. These Rules were amended in the year 2000.
13 The Designs Act, Section 11 (1).
14 The Designs Act, Section 11 (2).
15 Section 22 (1) of the Designs Act explains “piracy of registered design’’

2. COPYRIGHT PROTECTION FOR FASHION DESIGN-

Indian Copyright Act, 1957,16 is the second model under the Indian Intellectual Property Rights
legislation regime that provides some protection to fashion designs.
Section 15 of the Act is used by fashion designers to prevent their designs from being illegally
duplicated. Section 15 of the Copyright Act is relevant. It provides:

Sec 15. Special provision regarding copyright in designs registered or capable of being
registered under the Designs Act,2000.-

 Copyright shall not subsist under this Act in any design which is registered under
the Designs Act, 2000.

 Copyright in any design, which is capable of being registered under the Designs
Act, 2000, but which has not been so registered, shall cease as soon as any article to
which the design has been applied has been reproduced more than fifty times by an
industrial process by the owner of the copyright or, with his license, by any other
person.

A detailed examination of the preceding provision reveals that the Copyright Act and the Designs
Act overlap in terms of design protection. When read in conjunction with the Designs Act, the
Copyright Act, particularly Section 15, establishes a basic framework for design protection in India as
follows:
1) Designs capable of being registered under the Designs Act, 200017 and registered as
per the provisions of the Act get protection under the Designs Act only.
2) Designs capable of being registered under the Designs Act, 2000 but not so
registered get protection under the Copyright Act, 1957.
3) Designs not capable of being registered under the Designs Act, 2000, as they are
original artistic works, get protection under the Copyright Act. 1957.

Considering that fashion design is a type of design, the framework for design protection
mentioned above is likewise relevant and applicable to fashion design protection. It means
that a fashion design capable of being registered as a "design" under the Designs Act, 2000
and registered in accordance with the Act's requirements will only be protected by copyright
under the Designs Act and nowhere else. 18 In this scenario, copyright in registered fashion
design will subsist for a maximum period of fifteen years.19 Further, a fashion design which
is capable of being registered as “design” under the Designs Act, 2000 but not so registered
will get copyright protection under the Copyright Act, 1957
16 Since its enactment in 1957, the Copyright Act has been amended six times, i.e., in 1983, 1984, 1992, 1994, 1999 and 2012. The

Amendment Act of 2012 came into force on 21st June 2012. Full text of the 2012 Amendment Act is available at,
<http://copyright.gov.in/Documents/CRACT_AMNDMNT_2012.pdf>.
17A design is capable of being registered under the Designs Act, 2000 only if it fulfils the following two conditions:
It is a “design” as per Section 2 (d) of the Designs Act, 2000 and satisfies the conditions laid down under Section 4 of the Designs
Act,
18 See, Section 15(1) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and Section 11 (1) of the Designs Act, 2000.
19 See, Section 11 (1) & 11 (2) of the Designs Act, 2000

20 See, Section 15 (2) of the Copyright Act, 1957

copyright in fashion design will last until the fifty reproductions of the piece to which the design has
been applied by an industrial method. Finally, a fashion design that is an original artistic work and
hence unable to be registered as a "design" under the Designs Act, 2000 will be granted copyright
protection under the Copyright Act, 1957, in the form of copyright in original artistic work.
Copyright in an original artistic work automatically subsists as soon as the work comes into existence
and it remains during the lifetime of the author plus sixty years, when published during the lifetime of
the author.
From the above explanation, it is clear that the protection afforded to fashion design as a unique
artistic work is far greater than the protection afforded to it as a design capable of registration under
the Designs Act, 2000. In other words, a fashion design is better protected by the Copyright Act of
1957 as an "artistic work" than under the Designs Act of 2000 as a "design." As a result, fashion
designers in India frequently refer to their creative works, such as fashion designs, as artistic works,
which they want to safeguard. However, via a succession of judgements, Indian courts have created
jurisprudence to identify when a design is a “artistic work” and when it is not.

The decision rendered by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Rajesh
Masrani Vs. Tahiliani Design Pvt. Ltd.21 was the first and foremost step in forming that
jurisprudence.

M/s Tahiliani Design Pvt. Ltd., the plaintiff (respondent in the appeal), was a private limited
firm led by Mr. Tarun Tahiliani, which claimed to have a substantial presence in the fashion
industry in India and a global reputation with over 80 outlets in 20 countries. Under Section
2(c) I of the Copyright Act, 1957, the plaintiff claimed that the drawings generated in the
course of designing the clothing and accessories were artistic works. It was further claimed by
the plaintiff that the garments or accessories themselves were works of artistic craftsmanship
under Section 2(c) (iii) of the Act, while the patterns printed or embroidered on the fabric were
also artistic works in their own right.

The plaintiff alleged that the defendant (appellant in the appeal), Rajesh Masrani, had infringed
on his copyright by producing a colorable imitation or substantial reproduction of the plaintiff's
fabric prints, including the underlying drawings/sketches, or any other of the plaintiff's
copyrighted works, such as works of artistic craftsmanship or other literary or artistic works.
The plaintiff sued the defendant for infringement of the plaintiff's purported copyright in the
designs, demanding a permanent injunction, damages, and rendition of accounts. In favour of
plaintiff, an ex parte ad interim injunction order was issued. The learned Single Judge of the
Delhi High Court later confirmed the ex parte ad interim injunction and allowed the plaintiff's
application for restraining the defendant from reproducing, printing, publishing, distributing,
selling or offering for sale plaintiff's copyrighted prints in any form whatsoever, while
dismissing the defendant's application for vacation of the ex parte ad interim injunction.
Against the order, the appeal was filed by the defendant.

The Honorable Court held that the plaintiffs' work was entitled to protection under Section 2(c)
of the Copyright Act and was an original artistic work after analyzing the relevant provisions
of the Designs Act, 2000 and the Copyright Act, 1957, and after examining the plaintiffs' mode
of creation and execution of the artwork on a finished garment. The work could not be
registered under the Designs Act because it was a "arts creation" that was not covered by
Section 2(d) of the Act, and the provisions of Section 15(2) did not apply.

The Court further observed that no more than twenty copies of any single costume/ garment on
which plaintiff's art (i.e. print) was applied were manufactured. As a result, Section 15 (2) of
the Copyright Act of 1957, which prohibits the subsistence of copyright in a design capable of
being registered under the Designs Act but not so registered upon the reproduction of an article
to which the design was applied more than fifty times, was not applicable in the present case,
and copyright in the plaintiff's artistic work was justifiably vested in him under the Copyright
Act, 1957.

The plaintiff's claim that registration was required to seek protection under the Copyright Act
was also rejected by the court. The Court stated that registration of the work was not required
and was not a prerequisite to bringing a claim for damages for Copyright infringement. In light
of the circumstances, and after comparing the works of plaintiff and defendant, the Court
found that defendant infringed on plaintiff's copyright, and that it was a flagrant case of
copyright piracy. Although this judgement did not make a clear and elaborate difference
between "copyright in artistic work" and "copyright in design," its significance for the
fashion industry could not be overlooked. This case demonstrates how the Designs Act of
2000 and the Copyright Act of 1957 interact. Because of Section 15 (2) of the Copyright
Act, many designs used to lose their copyright protection. But this decision demonstrates that
in the cases of real fashion designers who make exclusive lines, where reproduction is limited,
copyright law acts as a powerful tool of protection.22
21 Appeal No.: FAO (OS) No.393/2008 (decided on 28/11/2008 by A.K. Sikri and Manmohan Singh, JJ.)
Also reported in: AIR2009 Delhi44;
2009BusLR280 (Del);
LC2009 (1)252; 2009(39)
PTC 21 (Del).
22 Zakir Thomas (2009), “IP Case Law Developments”, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights,

9: 247-257, p. 254
In the backdrop of the judgement discussed above, it can be concluded that a fashion designer seeking
to protect his/her creations under the Copyright Act, 1957, needs to prove: -
 that his/her creation is an “original artistic work” within the meaning of the Copyright Act,
1957 and is not a “design” within the meaning of the Designs Act, 2000; and

 that the article (e.g., garment), to which the design derived from the creation has been
applied, has not been reproduced more than fifty times by an industrial process by the owner
of the copyright or, with his license, by any other person.

Fashion designers appear to find the above proposal appealing because it extends copyright protection
to their creations. However, the breadth of this protection is limited and not worth it for a big number
of fashion designers because it only allows them to protect their couture lines, which are limited to
only a few pieces of an exclusive garment. Because they are created in huge quantities, garments that
are part of ready-to-wear and mass-market collections are not protected under the Copyright Act of
1957.

3. PATENT PROTECTION IN FASHION INDUSTRY-

Fashion patents provide a creative exclusive legal right to his or her innovation, whether it's a
product, design, or procedure in the fashion industry. In the realm of fashion, being unique, original,
and innovative is the most essential step to appeal to the masses. A patent is a new innovation that
contains new technologies for producing things such as shoes, fibers, and fabrics. Patents are critical
to the commercialization of inventions.
The works' creators are not eligible for patent protection under the Patents Act. Patents are granted
for unique inventions that benefit the general population. The fashion sector is unable to get patents
for its machinery; yet, technical advancements provide their machinery with a significant boost in the
economic market. The fashion business makes (clothes, footwear, shoe wear, and a variety of other
products) with the use of technology advancements in order to sell their products in the market.
Though the value of patents in the fashion industry has not always been understood by designers, they
are becoming more aware of the potential benefits. The growth in design patent applications
highlights this. Design patents are important for legally enforcing a product's distinct appearance,
which increases competition and, in turn, helps a company establish and build its brand.
 4) TRADEMARK PROTECTION FOR FASHION DESIGN-

Trademarks help to maintain a prestige premium for particular brands and can be quite
valuable to apparel and accessory firms. The utility of trademark law, however, in protecting
fashion designs, as distinct from fashion brands, is quite limited.
A trademark is only beneficial for fashion design if it is visibly integrated into the design to
the point that it becomes an aspect of the design. Fashion designers are increasingly using a
trademarked emblem on the outside of the garment throughout the manufacturing of apparel
and accessory designs. In these cases, the logo becomes an integral aspect of the design, and a
trademark gives significant protection against design piracy. Trademarks are also important
in the fashion sector since they protect a brand name, image, design, logos, and elements of
fashion attires that allow them to be distinguished from others.
The main aims of the trademark law in the fashion industry are on highly demand.

Its focuses on three main things: -

 To attract consumer’s attention;
 Interest of trademark owners, and;
 Market competitors.

In order to catch consumers' attention in a crowded market, trademark owners must create
unique items or goods or sell their products in a variety of ways. They must register their items
under trademark law in order to protect the brand, image, logo, and sign of the products or
goods.

It is pertinent here to mention the judgement rendered by the Delhi High Court in-

Micolube India Ltd. Vs. Rakesh Kumar trading as Saurabh Industries & Ors.23
Answering affirmatively to the question of whether a passing off action would
be available in the case of a registered design used as a trademark by the
plaintiff, the Hon'ble full bench held by a 2:1 majority that the plaintiff would
be entitled to bring a passing off action in the case of a design used as a
trademark by him if the action contained the necessary ingredients to injure.

The Court observed that:

‘’Having regard to the definition of a design under Section 2(d) of the Designs Act, it may
not be possible to register simultaneously the same mater as a design and a trade mark.
However, post registration under Section 11 of the Designs Act, there can be no limitation on
its use as a trademark by the registrant of the design. The reason being: the use of a registered
design as a trademark is not provided as a ground for its cancellation under Section 19 of the
Designs Act.24’’

Considering these observations, the Court decided that while a suit for infringement of a
registered design and a passing off action could be filed concurrently, a composite suit for
infringement of a registered design and a passing off action would not lie. 25 Furthermore, the
Court emphasized that a claim for passing off could be filed before to the expiration of the
statutory period set forth in Section 11 of the Designs Act.26
This judgement has expanded the ambit of trademark protection for design. Consequently, a
fashion design registered under the Designs Act not only gets protection under the Act but
can also be protected by instituting an action for passing off provided that design was being
used as trademark post-registration. To conclude, this judgement has unlocked a new vista for
design protection.

Recent Fashion Industry Trends – Challenging Issues

Ritika Private Limited v. Biba Apparels Private Limited

In the case of Ritika Apparels27, one party took the design of the other's creation, replicated it, and
sold it under their own brand. The party from whom the design was taken filed a copyright
infringement lawsuit in court. However, the defendants who lifted the same design invoked Section
15(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957, claiming that the act does not constitute infringement because the
original right owners, Ritika Apparels, have lost the copyright as a result of the industrial production
of more than fifty products.
Ritika Apparels had no way of safeguarding the same design because it was not registered under the
Designs Act. The only option was to produce products with the same design less than fifty times.
BIBA was able to avoid any liability by exploiting a gap in the IPR legislation. Due to the designer's
lack of knowledge of India's IPR regulations, the same case can be described as a watershed moment.
The same design would have been protected for a total of 10 + 5 years if it had been registered under
the Designs Act of 2000. However, it's possible that the designer sought to maintain a monopoly on
the same design for a longer length of time, so he or she invoked the copyright legislation, which was
later overturned. thus, leading to the BIBA becoming free of any liabilities.

As a consequence, it is obvious that in order to secure IP in the fashion industry, designers must be
aware of the laws and create an IP protection strategy prior to marketing and selling their designs in
order to be protected by IPR protection in India.

23 CaseNo.: CS (OS) No. 1446 of 2011 (decided on 15/05/2013, majority opinion was given by Rajiv Shakdher
and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ., whereas dissenting opinion was rendered by Manmohan Singh, J.). Also reported
 in: 199 (2013) DLT 740.
24 Ibid., paragraph 22.8.
25 Ibid., paragraph 34 (iii).
26 Ibid., paragraph 34 (ii).
27 In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, CS(OS) No.182/2011, Decided on 23rd March, 2016.

5) PROTECTION UNDER GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS-

Geographical indications are important in the fashion business because they safeguard unique
handicrafts and fashion items that come from a specific location and are of a certain quality. It helps
in the preservation of the country's artisans' and crafts people’s unique cultural styles and approaches.

Till now many kinds of GIs have been registered in respect of textiles in India like -
 Kasuti Embroidery from Karnataka,
 Kutch embroidery from Gujarat,
 Sujini embroidery works from Bihar,
 Pashmina Shawls from Jammu and Kashmir,
 Kullu Shawl from Himachal Pradesh etc.

Geographical Indications can be protected by registration. The Act provides for the registration of a
GI and confers certain rights on the registered proprietors and provides for the remedies against
infringement of such rights by third parties. The Act also provides for opposition to the registration as
well as rectification, correction and amendment of the register. There shall be two registers called
Part A and Part B. Part A contains the particulars of the registered proprietor of the particular GI
including the goods for which it is registered and other particulars prescribed under the rules. Part B
of the register will consist of the particulars of the user/s of the registered indication as may be
prescribed under the rule.

WAYS OF COMBATING THE PROBLEM OF FASHION DESIGN PIRACY-

Due to the challenges at stake, it's clear to see how, despite the existence of legislative safeguards, it's
usually the designers who are to blame. While it is true that the fashion sector has limited legal
protection, designers must be vigilant about their work and plan accordingly.
Following are the few ways of combating the problem, which are as follows –
 Amending the laws to make the purchaser, in addition to the counterfeiter, responsible. The
laws must be made in accordance with international norms.

 informing the public about the prevalence of counterfeit goods on the market, as well as the
negative consequences of utilizing them.

 Establishing a defined percentage of the infringer's earnings as compensation or penalty.

 Enforcing IPR rules more strictly, perhaps by placing criminal charges on counterfeiters in
addition to the compensation that is already in use today, so that design theft is mostly, if not
entirely, avoided.
 Educating designers on the need of properly preserving their intellectual property in order to
avoid future problems.
CONCLUSION-
The global fashion industry is expanding at a fast pace. It has grown to be a substantial
component of the global economy and, as a result, should be protected by intellectual property
rights in order to continue to flourish. Fresh and new designs are at the heart of the expanding
fashion business. Fashion design piracy, on the other hand, is stifling the industry's progress.
The similar issue is affecting the Indian fashion design sector. And, based on the analysis
presented in the preceding portion of this paper, it is reasonable to conclude that India's current
intellectual property regime is insufficient and ineffective in protecting the Indian fashion
design industry.  There is a need to improvise the current intellectual property regime in India
so as to make it more favorable to protect fashion design from piracy.
While it is true that completely eliminating counterfeiting and keeping others from duplicating
is nearly impossible, properly protecting the work decreases the risk of loss by decreasing the
damage. As a result, it is critical for IP creators to remain vigilant at all times and to seek
appropriate protection for their work. In addition, the government should evaluate the recent
trend of counterfeiting and establish a sui generis law specifically applicable to the fashion
industry in order to protect the country's intellectual property and, in general, to boost the
economy.