Safeguarding Culture, The Role of Geographical Indication Tag India in Preventing Cultural Misappropriation

GI Tag and Cultural Protection Latest News

• Recently, an Italian luxury brand Prada unveiled footwear inspired by India’s Geographical Indication (GI)-tagged Kolhapuri chappals.

India’s Geographical Indications and the Threat of Cultural Appropriation

• In June 2025, Italian fashion house Prada showcased a footwear line inspired by India’s iconic GI-tagged Kolhapuri chappals at its Spring/Summer 2026 menswear show in Milan. 
• The move triggered sharp criticism in India, reigniting debates over cultural appropriation and the effectiveness of Geographical Indications (GI) in safeguarding traditional knowledge and craftsmanship.
• The incident is part of a broader pattern where Indian cultural and artisanal products are used, often without acknowledgement or benefit-sharing, by global corporations. 
• As the conversation around cultural appropriation intensifies, GI tags emerge as a legal and policy mechanism to both protect and promote India’s cultural heritage.

‹ ›

Understanding Geographical Indications (GI)

• A Geographical Indication is a form of intellectual property right that identifies goods as originating from a particular geographical region, where specific qualities, reputation, or characteristics of the product are essentially attributable to its place of origin.
• India currently has 658 registered GI-tagged products, spanning diverse categories such as textiles (e.g., Kancheepuram silk), agriculture (e.g., Basmati rice), handicrafts (e.g., Madhubani paintings), and food (e.g., Darjeeling tea).
• What sets GIs apart from trademarks is their collective ownership. Unlike a trademark owned by a single entity, a GI belongs to a community of producers, artisans, or cultivators, and it cannot be sold, assigned, or transferred.

Legal Framework in India and Globally

• India, as a signatory to the TRIPS Agreement under the WTO framework, enacted the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, which came into effect in 2003. This law provides:
  • Registration of GI goods
  • Legal protection against unauthorised usage
  • Penalties for infringement
  • Legal standing for authorised users to initiate action against misuse
• Internationally, GI protection stems from agreements like the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1883) and more clearly from the TRIPS Agreement (1995). 
• However, GI rights are territorial; there is no globally recognised GI tag. This means that even if Kolhapuri chappals are GI-protected in India, that protection doesn’t extend automatically to countries like Italy or the U.S.

India’s Experience with Cultural and Biological Appropriation

• India’s struggle against cultural misappropriation is not new. Some notable past instances include:
  • Basmati Rice Patent (1997): Ricetec Inc., a U.S.-based company, was granted a patent for novel lines and grains of Basmati rice. After legal intervention by Indian authorities, the patent was eventually nullified.
  • Turmeric Patent (1995): The University of Mississippi was granted a patent for turmeric’s wound-healing properties, a use deeply embedded in Indian Ayurveda. India successfully challenged and revoked the patent.
  • Neem Patent (2000): A neem-based antifungal patent granted to a U.S. agency and a multinational firm was revoked by the European Patent Office after evidence of traditional Indian knowledge was submitted.
• These cases exemplify the vulnerability of traditional Indian knowledge and the need for pre-emptive protection mechanisms.

Towards Stronger Cultural Safeguards

• While GI tags offer domestic legal protection, they fall short when it comes to transnational enforcement. There are some pathways to international GI protection, such as:
  • Seeking bilateral or multilateral recognition.
  • Registering GIs in foreign jurisdictions.
  • Using trade negotiations to include GI protections in Free Trade Agreements.
• Furthermore, experts advocate for the expansion of the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL), a government-run initiative that documents traditional medicinal knowledge. 
• The proposal is to widen its scope to include cultural artefacts, arts, crafts, and grassroots expressions, and to make it a searchable database. This could aid brands and foreign agencies in conducting due diligence before launching culturally inspired products.

Conclusion

• The Prada-Kolhapuri incident highlights the urgency for robust international frameworks and enhanced domestic capabilities to prevent cultural misappropriation. 
• While GI tags serve as effective tools for domestic enforcement, their scope must be broadened through diplomacy, global advocacy, and digital documentation of traditional knowledge.
• India must continue to build institutional capacity, strengthen cross-border GI enforcement mechanisms, and raise awareness globally about the significance and sanctity of its cultural and artisanal heritage.

Source: TH