SAFEGUARDING HERITAGE: BASMATI RICE DISPUTE (INDIA V. RICETEC INC. 1997)

A legal battle over intellectual property between two countries that shook the whole global market stands as a cornerstone in the evolution of intellectual property law in India. The Basmati Rice Dispute (India v. RiceTec Inc., 1997) became an influential case that pressed for the protection of traditional knowledge and geographical indications, setting a legal precedent. India’s rich biodiversity has served as a magnet, attracting foreign countries. Since time immemorial, rice has been a staple food in most Asian countries, with India being a major exporter of Basmati rice.

The US patent claim on Basmati, which infringed India’s traditional knowledge rights, disregarded the cultural, agricultural, and geographic origins of Basmati rice. RiceTec’s attempt to deceptively capture the global market for Basmati rice was strategically defeated by India. As a result, RiceTec withdrew 15 claims out of 20 claims they asserted in the patent application and the title was amended to “Rice Lines Bas867, RT 1117 and RT1121”, thereby safeguarding the distinct identity of Basmati rice. Even though RiceTec retained certain claims, it was not permitted to use the term “Basmati,” which marked India’s success in the legal battle.

The major outcome of the dispute was the introduction of Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, a legal reform that removed the lacunae in addressing the geographic origin of varieties. It also accelerated global awareness of biopiracy and need for the protection of traditional knowledge. This article seeks to analyse the Basmati rice dispute and its economic, cultural, and legal impact through the FILAC methodology, a structured legal analysis framework. This case holds greater global significance, as developing countries are still facing challenges in protecting their traditional knowledge and indigenous products.